Patrick’s Rants

Bob Cringely (who is listed as a link) has an interesting take on the upcoming election and the pre-election polling. Bottom line, he believes that the polls are inaccurate due to the large number of young voters who can’t be polled because they only have cell phones and the push to register - and encourage voting by - young voters. Bob is calling this the Diddy factor.
Bob usually has interesting articles that are sometimes ahead of their time and sometimes just a little off the wall, but tend towards what I would term an unorthodox research style. In other words not only does he think outside the box but sometimes the box is hard to see from where he is.
Fortunately for us the outcome is soon enough to vet out his prediction that the polls are inaccurate.
Note: The article starts out seemingly off topic, but gets to the point partway down the page.

A previous post regarding Operation Arnold, a project to amend the Constitution to allow non US born citizens to run for President of the United States, caused me to want to blow the dust off my copy of Demolition Man, a 1993 film set in the futuristic 2032.
In the movie Sandra Bullock refers to the Schwartzenegger Presidential Library. Arnold was able to be elected President due to passage of the 61st amendment. Interestingly enough, in one scene where parol hearings are being reviewed the name Scott Peterson is displayed on the screen. For a movie that takes place in San Angeles (the combined cities of Los Angeles San Francisco) to refer to Arnold’s Presidential Library and an unknown name at the time like Scott Peterson is just eerie considering the current trial of Scott Peterson and Operation Arnold.
More trivia can be found at the movie database

Private Social Security accounts have been subject of some debate. George W Bush wants ‘younger’ workers to be able to contribute to private accounts. That’s all well and good but it raises questions about the current Social Security recipients. The Social Security system was designed to be pay as you go… meaning that while some people are drawing out of the system others are contributing. This is the biggest problem facing the system today… fewer people working, more retiring and living longer are putting a strain on the system. The Social Security trust fund is ’seperate’ from the general budget by law. Unfortunately SS funds may only be invested in government debt instruments, meaning that the Federal government has borrowed the money from the SS trust fund for use in the general budget. Of course the higher drain on the system due to more retirees means that the federal government will have to redeem the notes held by the Social Security Administration. This puts a tremendous strain on a budget already strained by war, increased spending and tax cuts.
While I wrote a paper once upon a time supporting the concept of private accounts, another angle needs some attention and consideration. Private accounts can be discussed at another time. The maximum monthly SS benefits for someone retiring at 70 is $2,111. That’s $25,332.00 yearly.
So here’s the idea: allow people to opt out. Not opt out of paying in, out of receiving. Let’s assume that an individual at or near retirement age has managed a decent retirement account- whether it be in a company sponsored pension plan or some kind of personal account. Give this person a break for not drawing on SS benefits. Give them a break for managing their personal or company plan and having a sufficient amount to pay for their own retirement. Make the break voluntary and reversible. Make the break scaled so that one can get a partial break for an account that isn’t quite enough to cover a full retirement. The break would have to be somewhat equivilant to what someone would make now… perhaps no tax on up to $100,000.00 when it is all personally funded and it is a married couple. This would give a fantastic break to those currently drawing a personal retirement, ease the stress building on the Social Security system like the magma slowly rising in Mt. St. Helens, and helps not only the so-called wealthy, but also those whose only retirement is SS benefits and most importantly, it can be done today not at some nebulous point 30 - 50 years in the future that hurts those receiving benefits today.
Now, I haven’t run the numbers. Partly because it takes time to do that, but also partly because no matter what numbers I might come up with, the ‘right’ numbers will be complex to figure. They have to allow for the amount the government doesn’t have to pay out balanced against the reduced tax revenues.
It’s time to start looking for real and sensible answers to tax reform and the precarious state of the SS system.

Mary Cheney, Dick Cheney’s openly gay daughter, is the subject of controversy. Dick, Lynne, the straight daughter whose name escapes me, and all the spin meisters are condeming John Kerry for bringing up her name in the last debate. Mary’s voice is absent. I guess I have to question whether Mary, who is supposed to be so upset, really is. Or is this just, as some have suggested, a red herring to detract from the real issues. I don’t care if Cheney’s daughter is gay, and I’m sure most people don’t either. But if Dick didn’t want people to talk about her lifestyle- he should have never brought it up. Whether Mary is upset or not - as there are no comments or quotes attributed to her - is unknown. Mary is not, and has not been in the public eye as far as I can tell. She doesn’t speak at conventions, make public appearances, campaign for her dad, etc, although she is said to volunteer for the campaign. I’m not sure if this is because Mary is ashamed of her father or if the Cheneys (who speak lovingly of their daughter) are embarrased by her lifestyle, or if even if she just disdains the public scrutinty - much as Dick prefers to remain a supporting role rather than the front man.
I personally don’t see the comments as an issue. Many openly gay people, especially public figures, might tell you that they find even in this age of ‘tolerance’ (which is a word I hate) they are not always respected and supported.
Perhaps Mary just prefers to remain behind the scenes. I respect that. But if she is truly upset and hurt by the fact that people talk about her sexuality, the least she can do is release a statement.

In the last debate, the question of a ‘back door draft’ was raised again. John Kerry alleges that enlistments are extended as ’stop loss’ policies designed to keep troop levels steady prevent troops from leaving the armed services when their enlistment period is over and that the possibility of a draft under W is likely.
George W Bush said then, and continues to say, that there will be no draft. The all volunteer army will remain all volunteer. There was even a symbolic vote to reinstate the draft - it failed.
On my 18th birthday I did two things; registered to vote and for Selective Service. If you are not familiar with the term Selective Service you are:

1. female
2. not a US citizen
3. under 18
4. any or all of the above

Men, 18 to 25 are required to register for selective service. Selective Service is essentially a method to track your life and whereabouts in case a draft is implimented and to prosecute men for not updating their address when they move.
If you really want to convince me that the all volunteer army is the only army we need, disband the Selective Service. This agency has outlived its usefulness and only serves to cloud those several years of a young man’s life, especially when we go to war. If the cause is ‘just’ and ‘right’ we should have no need for a draft as volunteers will be lined up to serve.
I personally watched in fear as we went to war with Iraq during Desert Storm and breathed a sigh of relief on my 25th birthday. I have not been convinced that the draft will not return, and just saying it doesn’t make it so - WMD anyone?

After seeing another entertainment news story regarding the ‘controversy’ this movie has raised, my wife and I decided we needed to go see it. Drop off the kids at their uncle’s house for a few hours, get over to the theater. The theater was somewhat empty being Sunday evening. This movie has been described as not for children. It is rated R, only due to scenes being cut out that originally had it rated NC-17.
The characters are marionettes, the plot is outrageous, political correctness is nowhere to be found, and the film’s producers are quoted as saying that being sued over the movie would be great. There were people on TV saying that this is no kids’ movie. Kid movie? From the creators of South Park?
The theater laughed, applauded and cheered at the scenes played out on screen. Such exotic locations as Paris, Cairo, North Korea, and Panama - all with descriptive titles indicating their distance and relation to America - are the settings for terrorist activities. Team America, as the ultimate terrorist fighting force, hunts down and kills terrorists the world over. They must overcome such obstacles as bad intelligence, activist actors, and even Michael Moore in their quest to make the world safe. On the way the audience is treated to graphic scenes of ‘puppett sex’ gratuitous vomit, bloody fights, and harsh language. Matt Stone, Trey Parker, and the lead characters are not afraid of a little ‘wood’ being shown on screen.
Irreverent, politically incorrect and US centric. If you can handle that and like South Park go see the movie - I can’t wait for the DVD which I am sure will include the cut scenes. Team America is not - not - for children.

In what seems to be a regular pattern for Renzi (he has missed four occassions to answer questions and ‘face-off’ with Paul Babbitt according to news reports, five according to the press release on Babbitt’s web site) an empty chair was all that was available at the Northern Arizona Interfaith Council’s Interfaith Accountability Forum in Camp Verde on October 17th. This despite the Council’s claims that they had worked for months around everyone’s schedule, Babbitt and Renzi specifically.
Based upon what I have seen and heard, Renzi only shows up to the ’soft’ events. Events where he isn’t expected to be asked any hard questions and the crowd is full of supporters. Instead of a debate showing earlier this month, he was at a tailgate party for NAU homecoming. Instead of this forum, he was (allegedly) on the Navajo Reservation. Instead of being at a candidates forum in August, put on by the Mexican American Council (I’m sure that I have the name of this organizing group wrong- someone please send me a correction) an empty chair again. This particular forum included candidates for local offices from Sheriff to County Board of Supervisors to President of the United States. While neither Presidential candidate was present, the Democratic party sent a spokesperson to present Kerry’s case. Paul Babbitt’s wife substituted for Paul.

I wasn’t sure which heading to put this under so it got two.
I’m sure most people remember George W Bush committing $1 billion towards research for hydrogen fueled vehicles. I remember thinking at the time that hydrogen fueled vehicles didn’t make a lot of sense. There are two kinds of hydrogen vehicles. The first would burn the hydrogen in some form of internal combustion, the second uses hydrogen ‘fuel cells’ (batteries). The major drawback to hydrogen is the fact that it is ‘1′ on the periodic table of elements. While that may not mean much if you aren’t a science major, it does mean that hydrogen is the smallest molecule known. That creates complications of storage (how do you hold something that is molecularly smaller than the ‘holes’ between other molecules?). It doesn’t work with existing vehicles, my old Jeep for instance cannot be simply ‘converted’ to use hydrogen. And finally the major research is going into the fuel-cell or storage method of hydrogen fuel. The power has to come from somewhere. In some parts of the world there is some form of cheap energy that can be used to create the hydrogen for fuel cells and a decent amount of research is taking place where it makes sense. But for me- and most people- this means buying a new car, and it’s still years away.
Interestingly enough, there are alternative fuel vehicles on the road today. Just take a look at these sites: 85% ethanol fuel information and journey to forever for ethanol based fuels information. Biodiesel information. We can, today, reduce dependency on foreign oil production by taking advantage of the cars already in production. Estimates are that 1 in 4 cars built in Detroit will be capable of running an 85% ethanol fuel mix, and there are many today that already are. So why is the President spending money on what is arguably a long term, expensive solution to today’s oil crisis when encouraging fueling stations to add a pump or two of e85 could drastically cut our dependency on foreign oil overnight? It can’t be that GW has ties to the oil industry and that long term solutions prop up short term dependencies on oil companies, that would just be wrong.
Oh, in case you missed it in the links, buying e85 fuel saves 20 - 30 cents per gallon and if you want to save even more you can make it yourself.

In what I would call a scathing review of the Bush administration, a newspaper know as the Lone Star Icon Clast has endorsed John Kerry for President in its editorial pages. As a follow up they write about the huge and unexpected volume of email and letters they have received. They claim so many letters that they would only fit online. Of course week two of the fallout appears to continue.
I have to say that even my own site has seen the right wing outrage that seems to be based on neither fact or reality. My “rant on Renzi” evoked a somewhat personal attack on me.
Yes, there must be a vast consipiracy from the liberal media to discredit George W Bush. The media that made more out of a clothing stain than about dead troops, the media that dismisses GW’s drunken and drugged disconnect from reality, Rush Limbaugh’s addiction to pain pills, while vilifying Clinton for ‘not inhaling’, that fired Bill Maher for patriotically standing up and expressing himself under the First Amendment to the Constitution, that dismissed as a joke W’s statement to the privileged and elite saying to them, ‘I call you my base’, that pursues Martha Stewart more doggedly than Kenneth Lay.
So point me to the liberal radio networks and talk show hosts that are secretly undermining the foundations of this country. Point me to the liberal bias in the media. Sure you can find sites such as this one on the internet, but what of the networks? What of the nationally syndicated columnists and talk show hosts?

Anyone else creeped out by this commercial?
I mean, the breakfast sandwich sounds pretty good, but a breakfast sandwich isn’t gonna get some weirdo whose plastic face reminds me of an old Nixon mask a pass on being in my bed when I wake up. I’m not sure what the subliminal message is supposed to be, but they talk a lot about meat and cheese and it being good to ‘wake up with the king’. Time to go back to the ad agency on this one.