Fish Kebabs

One of our guests last night has some dietary restrictions, namely lactose intolerance and no meat. Fish, however, was OK, so I made fish kebabs.

Upon announcing this plan to a variety of people, the universal reaction was, "How are you going to keep the fish on the sticks?" Easy. Cube the meat into at least 1" chunks, make sure the fish is speared against the grain of the meat, and keep the fish cool while spearing it. I lost mushrooms from my kebabs, but no fish.

I marinated the fish (tuna) in a soy-orange-pineapple mix, with ginger, garlic, and sesame as my primary spices. Also on the kebabs were pineapple, red peppers, purple onions, mushrooms, and grape tomatoes. Accompanying the kebabs were saffron rice and crème brûlée (pre-approved by our guest; I'd have found a non-dairy dessert otherwise). Our guests brought hummus and pita chips, and a shrimp roux with an astonishing amount of bread. The Wife, afraid we wouldn't have enough to eat, asked me to steam up some broccoli and asparagus, and she made up another of her sweet spinach and berry salads.

It was way too much food. It felt a little bit bad throwing away so much food after dinner was done, but there was nothing for it. Most of the food was simply not going to be any good later. Next time, I think we need to have stricter rules about how much food people can bring.

Not So Very Bothersome

The New York Times reports that the Pentagon and the CIA are sending "noncompulsory" requests to credit card companies asking that the transactions and records of civil and military employees be turned over for examination. These "national security letters" have a thirty-year pedigree, but their strength was enhanced by the USA PATRIOT Act.

This is not so bothersome to me because 1) the inquiries seem to be limited to individuals whose activities produce some sort of objective reason to believe that there might be terrorism or espionage going on, and 2) people who work for the military necessarily give up some privacy rights for national security purposes; that goes along with holding a security clearance or being in the service.

It would be nice, particularly for the civilian workers, if some kind of judicial review were obtained, such as what happens when a search warrant is issued. The law should allow for warrants to issue without advance knowledge to the person whose records are being searched. But given the combination of the diminished privacy interests at stake, an apparenlty limited scope of inquiry, and the need for swift, secret gathering of information, it looks okay to me.

Disloyalty and Criticism

I guess I'm in a cynical mood after last night's dinner guests expressed similar contempt for our national leadership as I read in some ironic invective from the Reality-Based Community. A surge of 20,000 "new" troops is the answer? They're just going to replace the British troops withdrawing from Basra, leaving overall troop levels pretty much the same as they are now.

Our dinner guest was Canadian and expressed gratitude at the existence of the monarchy in the British Commonwealth. He explained, it allows people to be critical of the democratically-elected government while still displaying loyalty to the country -- because the ministes who make policy are different from the head of state who personifies the country. In the U.S., we unify high-level decision making authority with the symbolic power of the Presidency. (At the same time, of course, Commonwealth subjects can and do take great pleasure in thumbing their noses at the Queen, but that's a different issue.) Even more ironically, the Royal Family is looking at the risk that one of their own will be deployed to Iraq soon.

Here, though, our political dialogue has become less meaningful. I criticize the President for both getting us into this mess (admitting that, at the time, I thought it was a good idea, too) and for not being able to figure out a way to get us out of it (admitting that I don't have any better ideas myself). To some people, that's akin to treason or disrespect for the troops. I don't think it is, though; looking objectively at reality, even if it is not pleasing, is always better than popping on the rose-colored glasses and hoping for the best.

Ought To Be Famous

In 1962, Captain Joseph Kittinger II (USAF) rode a weather balloon to over 100,000 feet. Then he jumped out. Air being substantially thinner at that altitude, his terminal velocity approached Mach 1. Using a two-stage parachute system -- the first to slow down his flat spin, and the second the slow down his speed -- he landed safely in the desert of New Mexico.

When I came across this story this morning, I thought it was a hoax. But it's all over the place, if you look for it. The USAF historical websites and multiple hosting sites show the same video, which Kittinger filmed on his descent. This astonishing gut-check ought to be more well-known in the history of aviation and technology than it is. No way would I have been brave enough to have done that. This guy, now in his late seventies, ought to be a lot more famous than he is.

Like Rain. On Your Wedding Day.

Another botched job by right-wing religious nutball lawyers calling themselves "Liberty Counsel". After successfully suing to open up grade schoolers' "backpack mail" to advertisements for a Christian Bible study camp, Albemare County, Virginia religionists now must deal with that same forum being used to proselytize pagan educational seminars -- particularly those exploring the pagan roots of Christmas.

Just goes to show you that maybe, just maybe, the Founders knew what they were talking about with that whole Establishment Clause thing.

Comic Strip

To celebrate the 800th post for the blog, I've made some changes. Now appearing at the bottom of the page, updated daily, is Day By Day, a political comic strip with a sort-of right-wing take on things. I've found it mildly amusing and offer it for your consideration. If you find you don't like it, well, it's at the bottom of the blog and so you can easily avoid it. But if you do like it, well, that's a good reason for you to check in regularly!

Saddam's Cat

Now Los Angeles Is Truly A World Class City

Major League Soccer has been doing well, financially, but is apparently not yet profitable. So I have to wonder at this -- if the reports are right, the most famous football player in the world will be making something like a million dollars a week to play here -- for five years. Can the Los Angeles Galaxy possibly afford this?

Real Madrid thinks his skills are fading, which is obviously why they did not renew his contract, freeing him up to move to the United States. On the other hand, the dude is five years younger than me and in ungodly good shape. But come on, does his skill level really matter in a city obsessed with celebrity and good looks? After all, it's David Beckham's world. Including Los Angeles. The rest of us just live in it.

Unbloggable Stuff

Mediations are draining affairs. You often think they're going to be short, if the parties have only money to talk about, and then they last all day while the parties negotiate every damn thing. I've written a skit to describe the equivalent of a business negotiation, not unlike the one I had tonight. Thing is, it has an... adult subject matter, and I'm trying to keep this more or less a family show here. So I'm thinking that my creativity is just plain unbloggable and I'll probably not post it here.

Speaking of Presidential Hopefuls...

Sure he doesn't want you to look at the picture in this week's People magazine. He's really embarassed by the fact that every newspaper, political website, and television station in the country is showing it. After all, most politicians value their privacy and just want to enjoy the beach in peace, right?

I'm reminded of the last Presidential primaries. Back in 2004, The Wife liked John Edwards for President because he was "the cute one." Sure, Edwards was cuter than, say, John Kerry or Howard Dean (whose campaign ended not because of how he looked but rather how he sounded).

Fact is, it doesn't take too much to be a good-looking politician; most of our politicos are of "average" attractiveness at best. Barack Obama is above-average in the looks department, no question, and a lot younger than many of his colleagues in the Senate. That might just be a handicap -- a youthful-looking, attractive politician can be thought of as a lightweight and not taken seriously like a less attractive adversary who nevertheless seems "statesmanlike."

So quit drooling all over the guy and let Senator Obama do his job, folks. Which apparently consists, at least in part, of bodysurfing in Hawaii near paparazzi. I'm sure the home crowds in De Kalb County are quite satisfied with that.

An Amusing Observation

Quoth Dick Morris about the four most prominent Republican Presidential hopefuls: "the only one of these guys who hasn't had multiple wives is the Mormon." If Morris is right, the hard-right social conservatives may not have anywhere else to go but to a "moderate" Republican in 2008; no one seems to give Sam Brownback or Duncan Hunter much of a chance.

But the appeal to those voters ought to be patently obvious to, of all people, Dick Morris. Any of Guiliani, McCain, Romney, or Gingrich can rather easily say, "Look, it's me or the witch, folks. Your choice."

Lunch Rush

I'm blogging with what's left of my lunch hour, so I need to be quick.

Three students showed up for last night's class. The school may well cancel the class if they can't get at least five. At least I got to listen to an interesting book on CD, and in the desert of eastern Los Angeles County, there are few lights, so the night sky was spectacular. I was right about not making it home until eleven at night -- grueling.

This morning (Pacific time), US gunships struck at al-Qaeda hideouts in Somalia, further dislodging the Islamist junta in favor of the Ethiopian-backed "transitional government" in that failed state. Wasn't it not too long ago that we considered Ethiopia to be a hostile government? Now we're helping it become a regional power in east Africa. Huh.

Maybe more later tonight; for now, I'm getting back to work. I've got court appearances, mediations, and depositions scheduled for two solid weeks in the future, so I'm a busy boy.

Going To Be A Long Day

I won't be home until eleven tonight, at least. Victorville is an hour each way, and today I need to go an hour early so I can undergo a security screening. By the end of it, I'm sure I'm going to feel like Batman drving the backup batmobile:


But hey, the reason I do this is it's fun, right?

Ending the Culture of Corruption

Demonstrating the Democrats' commitment to ending the GOP's "culture of corruption," House Democrats (more specifically, the Congressional Black Caucus, who are all Democrats) gave Congressman William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson a standing ovation today.

You'll recall that Congressman Jefferson was the guy who "found" $90,000 in non-sequentially numbered $100 bills neatly bundled together in aluminum foil packets in his own freezer -- after an FBI informant passed a $100,000 bribe to Jefferson while wearing a wire.

This is worth a standing ovation? They might push through policies that you might like more (or less) than the GOP, but come on, did you really think that the Democrats would behave any better than the Republicans they've displaced?

Fundamentalist, Evangelical Atheists

I don't know if this sort of thing is a good idea or not. I'm thinking not.

CSM Says It's A Four-Way

Romney, Guiliani, McCain, and... Gingrich? I didn't think Gingrich was running.

The Monitor also thinks that Tom Vilsack has a chance to beat out Hillary Clinton. I don't think so.

I'm not sure that this is a good read of the field right now. To me, it looks like three horses on each side.

What Do Voters Dislike?

While musing about Barack Obama's admissions of past drug use, ambivablog suggests that "American voters don't mind human imperfection. They mind hypocrisy and disrespect for their intelligence." See, Obama admits trying cocaine when he was younger. Bush the Younger refused to answer questions about his past drug use, and Bill Clinton claimed he didn't inhale (like we want a President who wasn't smart enough to figure out how to smoke pot). Both were decidedly unsatisfying and uninspiring responses to those issues.

I have to agree that candor is refreshing compared to coy evasions. Nor am I any more or less inclined to vote for Obama than I would have been had he not made the admission. So I think that to a significant degree, amba is right -- but there are limits. Drug use inthedistant past, we'll probably accept that. But how about "killed a guy"? I think that might be a bigger problem.

What about "doesn't [pretend to] worship God"? Is that a deal-killer?

Richard Dawkins Is Wrong

Sure, it might have been interesting to study Saddam's psychology. But that was not the point at all. Saddam needed to die. He needed to die because he had done some atrocious things and death was the only just punishment that could be imposed upon him. He needed to die to put to rest, forever, the possibility that he might somehow regain power in Iraq.

The manner of Saddam's execution was brutal by U.S. standards, and the Iraqi executioners were, shall we say, less than professional. Still, hanging is a relatively quick death, and it came after a trial with the indicia of due process, which is a great deal more than most of Saddam's victims got. Saddam even got to get a last political swipe in -- his last words were to mock Muqtada al-Sadr for being little better than a small-time thug, which compared to Saddam, is exactly what al-Sadr is.

The prospect of keeping a man alive only to be studied, like some kind of lab specimen, seems itself to be dehumanizing and cruel. It's entirely possible that Saddam, who was quite an intelligent, crafty fellow, would have made a game out of warping the data.

Look At The Sky

I don't notice a lot of people looking at the sky. That's a shame. I think the sky is often quite beautiful. When I get up in the morning, these days it's usually around sunrise (except on days when I'm recovering from a bout of insomnia). On some days I can see a rosy Belt of Venus on top of the Tehachipi mountains. This morning, when I fed the critters, the sky was an astonishing deep blue (as it turned out, the sunrise was obscured by a sandstorm around Llano.

At night, the sky is well worth watching, especially in winter when Orion rules the starry sky. My favorite sight through the telescope is the Great Nebula, which you can almost see with the naked eye on a clear night with no moon out. It's the middle of the three stars in Orion's sword, the one that looks fuzzier than the others. When the moon is out, it's fascinating to examine.

Sunsets are something that more people appreciate -- in part because they happen at ground level. A really good sunset is like a symphony in the sky. It needs a certain amount of haze or other material in the atmosphere, which is normally not a good thing except for at sunset. Then, the entire sky turns into a slowly-graduated slice of the spectrum. A good sunset also needs some clouds, preferably some high-altitude cirrus clouds, wispy and delicate. They catch and reflect the light, looking like so many strands of copper and rose-colored ribbon thrown all over the onrushing dome of the night.

Shadows cast by stationary objects can move so fast around sunrise or sunset that you can, with even a small amount of patience, actually watch them move.

I've also always enjoyed clouds, particularly big cumulus clouds that move and roll and boil and fall all over themselves with the wind. Those we don't get so much here in the desert, but they do come from time to time. Back in Florida, they generate lightning on a regular basis, and a big Florida thunderstorm, with lightning arcing from cloud to cloud as well as down to the ground, is just spellbinding.

Here in the High Desert, there are almost always aircraft moving about at reasonably low altitudes. I've seen several F-117's, bizarre-looking angular aircraft painted flat black. They are quiet on approach but very loud after they pass over, making a satisfying screech of jet blast through the desert air. Every once in a while, a B-2 takes off or flies about, and they are indeed impressive to see, both for their mass and the stark contrasts of the near-invisible face profile and the bat-like, triangular silhouette when the plane banks. About two months ago, a V-22 Osprey was flying about, another strange-looking aircraft indeed.

Last night I got a special treat. While out cooking, I looked up to enjoy the stars and see if any planes were moving around. I saw a star moving very fast -- obviously not a high-altitude plane; it was moving much too fast to be that. It grew very bright for about two seconds, and then grew dim again, moving across its arc at an astonishingly fast pace. It could only have been the International Space Station; the brightening and dimming I noticed being the sun reflecting off the solar panels.

I'd like to find time to get up to the Sierras and take the telescope with me. This time of year, that's a very cold proposition, but maybe during the summer. But even when going about day-to-day business, I always try to find time to look at the sky. It brings peace and is frequently a source of awe. It's a shame so many people are so wrapped up in their day-to-day activities that they forget to see the beauty of nature readily available by simply looking up.

Leak!

Earlier today, the New York Daily News was given a 140-page internal strategy assessment of the Guiliani candidacy. The Daily News will not identify who leaked this notebook beyond saying it is a person connected to one of Guiliani's potential rivals. Whether that's a Republican or a Democrat is unclear; however, Guiliani's very early polling numbers seem to be establishing him as the guy to beat, so I'm thinking it's intramural jockeying for position rather than a pre-emptive strike a la Gray Davis' 2002 primary attack on Richard Riordan coming from a Democrat. Whether this is traceable to someone, and whether that someone turns out to be John McCain or Mitt Romney, may never be known.

Both the Daily News and the New York Times suggest that this is a significant setback to the campaign. I'm not so sure about that. It's embarrassing, to be sure, but it seems that there's little in the document that would surprise anyone who had thoughtfully considered the issues surrounding a Guiliani campaign. There are ambitious fundraising goals, which is pretty much mandatory if you're going to take a serious shot at the White House; there are considerations about potential vulnerabilities and anticipations of what form attacks on those vulnerable areas might take; and there is the issue of how the document got out to the public at all, which is egg on Guiliani's face because he has marketed himself as having some expertise on security issues.

There are some ideas about how to raise money and some mention of labels for big fund-raisers which sound somewhat crass. But again, none of this is any different than anything any other politician has done, is doing, or will have to do in order to credibly run for President.

Finally, there is vacillation about Guiliani running or maintaining his current position, splitting his professional time between his security and leadership consulting firm, his law practice, and his association with an investment brokerage. Personally, I like that. It underlines that Rudy would indeed be making something of a personal sacrifice (perhaps one that he would see as a net gain, but still giving up something) if he were to become President. Someone answering the call to public service should do so reluctantly -- this burnishes rather than detracts from the image of a "citizen-politician" rather than a member of the political class, which Rudy as well as his adversaries for the Presidency would all like to bear.

So the issue is more the existence of the leak than anything else. But a pre-Presidential campaign is not quite the same thing as maintaining national security. Certainly, this document should not have been leaked in an ideal world. According to Guiliani's spokeswoman (reported in the Times), there may not have been a lot that could have been done to prevent it.

It might seem that a problem with this document is that it existed to be leaked in the first place, but a successful Presidential campaign is a venture of daunting scope and planning documents simply have to exist. Campaigns run "opposition research" on their own candidates all the time, and the musings about some of Guiliani's potential vulnerabilities is nothing different than that. I don't know whether the form of this document was such that it was unusually dense or insightful as compared with the kinds of research and strategizing that other politicians do, but at worst, this was a case of an eager and inexperienced assistant to the campaign effort (and not the candidate himself) putting down more in writing than was strictly prudent.

A lot of the information in the leaked notebook is out of date, too -- for instance, it refers to several potential fundraisers who have declared their support for McCain rather than Guiliani.

No, the only real issue is a little bit of chipping away at the illusion that Guiliani deferred a decision to run until very recently. After all, Guiliani said all the right coy things about deferring a decision to run for President until after the 2006 elections but some of the notations on the document indicate that people very close to Guiliani were using it before the election. Which is no great surprise to anyone, I should think -- virtually all of the favored contenders (Romney, McCain, Clinton, and Obama) have not yet declared their intentions to run yet.

Even with this revelation that he and the people closest to him have really thought about the candidacy, Guiliani is still in the "exploratory" phase, which is to say he's testing the waters to see if he can raise enough money. Of the "big" names for 2008, only John Edwards has declared his candidacy. But the aforementioned contenders -- Romney, McCain, Clinton, and Obama -- would all be fools of tremendous magnitude to not have gathered the same information and begun to engage in the same kind of strategizing that the Guiliani document represents. They've just been fortunate enough to not have had a dirty trick like this played on them at such an early date.

So I'm not so inclined to be particularly upset about the leak. Of course, you don't want to let the other guy into your kitchen, ever. So this is not a good thing for Guiliani fans. But it's coming very early in the process. If this is the biggest problem the Guiliani campaign faces between now and November 4, 2008, it'll be President Rudy taking the oath in 2009 for sure.