San Jose Public Pensions

Here's a lovely Monday starter for you: "An audit has found some retired city employees in San Jose are receiving higher pension payments than they are entitled to, an error that would cost the city over a million dollars." For more, see HERE.

How the heck did this happen in the first place?

Mike Pence: Understanding Republicans

Mike Pence delivered a speech on September 20, 2010 that perfectly summarizes the intelligent Republican's brain. I don't agree with everything in the speech, but if you are a Democrat or liberal, you should read the entire speech. It will give you excellent insight into why Republicans think the way they do (Hint: it's not because they are brainwashed by corporations). Below is my favorite excerpt:

Power is an instrument of fatal consequence. It is confined no more readily than quicksilver, and escapes good intentions as easily as air flows through mesh. Therefore, those who are entrusted with it must educate themselves in self-restraint. A republic is about limitation, and for good reason, because we are mortal and our actions are imperfect.

The tragedy of presidential decision is that even with the best choice, some, perhaps many, will be left behind, and some, perhaps many, may die. Because of this, a true statesman lives continuously with what Churchill called “stress of soul.” He may give to Paul, but only because he robs Peter. And that is why you must always be wary of a president who seems to float upon his own greatness. For all greatness is tempered by mortality, every soul is equal, and distinctions among men cannot be owned; they are on loan from God, who takes them back and evens accounts at the end.

The entire speech is here. I agree with much of what Mr. Pence says, but his failure to criticize George W. Bush for overreach casts doubt on Mr. Pence's sincerity. In reality, whether one is a Democrat or a Republican, the issue of self-restraint usually arises when the "other guy" is in power.

Also, Mr. Pence's thoughts on the military strike me as immoral. He says that once we go to war, we ought to do whatever it takes to win. But what if the target country poses no threat to the U.S. or was invaded based on a false premise? Do we still crush the country? If so, how does he justify the certain civilian deaths that come with any war in the "shock and awe" age?

Random Thoughts on Oracle and Salesforce

Way back in 2008, Larry Ellison talked about a software sales slowdown: "Customers are signing up for fewer multiyear projects," he said, referring to software license renewals. (See SJ Mercury, 12/19/08, E1.) Oracle "draws roughly half its revenue from software license renewals. These [renewals] provide a strong and stable source of cash because the high cost of switching to a new vendor helps keep customers in Oracle's fold" (Id. at 4E). Since 2008, Oracle seems to be doing well and much better than its competitors.

At the same time, Salesforce.com's Marc Benioff continues to nip at Ellison's heels. I've attended shareholder meetings at Oracle and Salesforce.com, and if you ever want to rile up either CEO, mention the other CEO to him. When I mentioned Oracle to Benioff, I received a very long speech about Oracle's allegedly "old-fashioned" way of doing business. Later, when I mentioned Benioff's comments to Ellison, Ellison cut me off and immediately started bashing Salesforce.com. I still remember one particularly memorable riposte: "Here's some advice to Salesforce--make money." [Salesforce.com has, shall we say, a more uneven earnings history than Oracle.]

Forget about Apple vs. Microsoft--the latest Silicon Valley soap opera is between Salesforce.com and Oracle. If someone manages to make peace between Ellison and Benioff, we should send him or her to make peace in the Middle East--it'll be a cakewalk after navigating these men's intelligence and ambition. I'd volunteer to mediate, but I'm afraid I'm not big enough to restrain the very tall Benioff if the mediation devolved into a fistfight. Benioff and Ellison should resolve to sit down together and hash out their differences in 2010--now that's a new year's resolution I'd like to see come true.

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of any company or entity.

Reminder for Myself

Nothing to see here--my friends and I got together recently and I'm just publishing these numbers as a personal reminder:

Adam: 1267
Alex: 1200
Jamie: 1350
Jon: 1050
Matt: 1150

[Also, 20, minus 8 ones.]

Bruce Schneier: Levelheaded Wisdom

Bruce Schneier has done it again--he's delivered a concise, perfect-pitch summary of national security. See HERE for full article. My favorite part is below:

By not overreacting, by not responding to movie-plot threats, and by not becoming defensive, we demonstrate the resilience of our society, in our laws, our culture, our freedoms. There is a difference between indomitability and arrogant "bring 'em on" rhetoric. There's a difference between accepting the inherent risk that comes with a free and open society, and hyping the threats.

Oh, the genius. In a perfect world, Mr. Schneier would be in charge of the TSA.

John Lennon Interview

I just discovered an incredible interview with John Lennon and Yoko Ono. More HERE.

TA: How do you think we can destroy the capitalist system here in Britain, John?

JL: I think only by making the workers aware of the really unhappy position they are in, breaking the dream they are surrounded by. They think they are in a wonderful, free-speaking country. They've got cars and tellies and they don't want to think there's anything more to life. They are prepared to let the bosses run them, to see their children f*cked up in school. They're dreaming someone else's dream, it's not even their own. They should realise that the blacks and the Irish are being harassed and repressed and that they will be next.

As soon as they start being aware of all that, we can really begin to do something. The workers can start to take over. Like Marx said: 'To each according to his need'. I think that would work well here. But we'd also have to infiltrate the army too, because they are well trained to kill us all.

We've got to start all this from where we ourselves are oppressed. I think it's false, shallow, to be giving to others when your own need is great. The idea is not to comfort people, not to make them feel better but to make them feel worse, to constantly put before them the degradations and humiliations they go through to get what they call a living wage.

The level of radicalism is unbelievable, isn't it? It actually makes me sad to think about modern day protests. There just doesn't seem to be a modern-day equivalent to John Lennon or Martin Luther King. Meanwhile, society seems more interested in reality television stars than substance, and the most vocal "believers" tend to be hardcore religious people. I keep thinking of Yeats' and his widening gyre...

Umar Abdulmutallab: Predictable Terrorist?

People are shocked--just shocked--that alleged terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab received excellent schooling and came from a well-off family. As I explained back in 2008, the most dangerous terrorists will be educated and more likely to be middle-class or rich than poor. See HERE for the post titled "Terrorism: The Unusual Suspects." 

The most worrisome part? The alleged terrorist's own father alerted authorities to his son's possible extremism, and the son still managed to evade security checkpoints. 

Don't you feel safe knowing the TSA is profiling people based on their passports (which causes my harmless grandmother to get advanced screening every time she travels), but the TSA can't seem to follow up on a direct tip? 

In the spirit of Mastercard, I leave you with the following "commercial": 

America's military-industrial complex: $626 billion 

Having a parent feel loyal enough to alert authorities to his own son: $0 [Note: imagine if the U.S. had accidentally killed one of the parent's family members--would the father still do the same thing?]

Having a random passenger on a plane brave enough to physically handle a potential terrorist: $0 

Percentage of military's budget that saved Americans from Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab: 0% 

Believing that killing poor people in the Middle East will make us safer: unknown cost 

Keeping America safe while maintaining Constitutional principles: priceless.

Current Wealth Distribution Threatens Democratic Process

Why is the unequal distribution of wealth problematic? Because it can destroy democracies.

Right now, the top 1% in America pay about 40% of the tax revenue. Far from being shining philanthropists, the reason for this particular distribution is because the top 1% make so much more money than the bottom 99%. Such a massive concentration of wealth allows rich people to single-handedly finance PACs; to use their influence to raise money quickly for their preferred candidates; and to buy all-important television airtime for their preferred candidate. As a result, modern-day candidacies require fewer people and more mass media. A candidate no longer needs all corners of his/her jurisdiction to ascend to political office--a few well-off friends can introduce a potential candidate to an entire jurisdiction by buying television ad spots.

Holiday Break

I will not be blogging for a few days. Even dedicated bloggers ought to be able to enjoy the holidays, free from imagined and real obligations.

Merry X-Mas/Happy Holidays! For fun, I recommend reading the last chapter of any Malcolm Gladwell book, especially Outliers. He tends to put his best stuff in the last chapter.

Which States Make It Easier for Banks to Collect on Mortgages?

Ever wonder about recourse and non-recourse states? Well, neither did I, until I came across this post:

http://www.mortgagereliefformula.com/recourse/

It appears that the following states make it easier for creditors/banks to go after homeowners personally to recover the difference between the amount owed and amount received in a sale:

Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.

Autistic Intelligence and Asperger's Syndrome

Two of my female cousins (twins) have autism, so I've always been curious about autism and Asperger's Syndrome. I browsed through some information about Asperger's Syndrome and autism for fun. Here are some random observations:

1. "Autistic intelligence" has been defined as the ability to see the world from a very unique perspective, often by focusing on details other people overlook.

2. Apparently, many people with Asperger's Syndrome also have high incidences of manic-depression.

3. According to some experts, the best jobs for people with high-functioning Asperger's Syndrome are library science, accounting, engineering, and computer science.

4. Autistic children are 2.5 times more likely to have engineers in their family.

Interesting stuff, but no one seems to know why autism or Asperger's Syndrome affects some kids but not others.

Military Spending Sucking Money from Domestic Programs without Making Soldiers or Americans Safer

The U.S. Senate recently passed a $626 billion defense bill that does not include Obama's $100 million request to close GTMO. The Senate measure also includes $2.5 billion to fund 10 C-17 cargo planes assembled in Long Beach, Calif., which were not requested, and money for nine more F-18 Navy fighters than Obama requested.

Since America is running massive deficits, neither you nor I will be paying the $626 billion to expand the military-industrial complex. The bill will be paid by your children and their children--if we're lucky. Also, every single dollar that goes into military equipment programs is either printed (thereby weakening the American dollar) or diverted from domestic federal programs like education, transportation, civilian jobs, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.

Where is Eisenhower when you need him? What happened to all the honest, fiscally-conservative Republicans? One Ron Paul isn't enough to save this country from itself. At least we have Senator Feingold, who said, "I strongly oppose this fiscally irresponsible and misguided bill. While the bill includes many good provisions, it will also fund a massive troop surge in Afghanistan that will overburden our troops and will likely hurt, not help, our efforts to eliminate the global threat posed by al-Qaida and its affiliates. And it is stuffed with earmarks and wasteful spending, such as $2.5 billion for 10 C-17s that the Defense Department does not want and $130 million for a Presidential helicopter program that has been canceled."

Below are two excellent links explaining federal budget expenditures in 2008:

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258 [This link is titled, "Policy Basics: Where Do Our Federal Tax Dollars Go?".]

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=125 [This link is titled: "Federal Spending, 2001-2008: Defense Is a Rapidly Growing Share of the Budget, While Domestic Appropriations Have Shrunk"]

Bloggers and their Rights

The following website discusses bloggers and their rights:

http://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers

Definitely worth checking out!

Is QB Rating System Discriminatory?

NFL football fans: one study claims that black QBs are underpaid and under-represented in the NFL because the QB rating doesn't include rushing/scrambling yards.

In other words, statistics indicate that black QBs tend to scramble more (remember Randall Cunningham?) than non-black QBs, but this additional yardage doesn't show up in their QB rating, perhaps giving the edge to pocket QBs.

Aid to Africa: Success or Failure?

HERE is an excellent post on aid to Africa. It might seem as if money sent to Africa is going into a black hole, but in reality, the money is saving millions of lives. The problem is that when nations increase fertility, they must also increase jobs. African nations are not doing well when it comes to creating jobs, but their economic incompetence doesn't mean international aid isn't accomplishing its purpose.

Intuit Shareholder Meeting (2009)

I attended Intuit's (INTU) annual shareholder meeting in Mountain View, California on December 15, 2009. Upon entering Intuit’s building, shareholders were offered complimentary copies of either Quicken Premier or an Investments and Rental Property tracking software. Intuit also offered shareholders Peet’s coffee, Odwalla juices, mineral/bottled water, and various pastries.

I won’t hide my fondness for Intuit. I’ve been using Intuit’s products for years, and I think the company is a godsend for small businesses. CEO Brad Smith--who looks similar to Matt Damon--handled most of the meeting, which included a thirty-minute presentation. Below are the highlights of his presentation:

Although Americans have experienced high unemployment, small business formation has not trended upward, possibly because small businesses lack access to bank capital.

Intuit has acquired Mint.com and PayCycle, an online payroll service.

80% of Intuit’s sales come from word-of-mouth, i.e. personal recommendations.

1/3 of U.S. tax returns are filed using some Intuit software.

Intuit's major competition is the pen-and-paper (people don't use computers to do their taxes).

1/12 Americans are paid with Intuit’s payroll services.

Intuit is trying to improve first use and first year user retention. [Intuit users tend to remain loyal customers, but the difficulty is getting them to break old habits and learn new how to navigate a new piece of software.]

Intuit is focusing on emerging markets, such as India, and healthcare. The CEO mentioned that the average patient gets three medical bills before returning a payment, but Intuit’s software reduced turnaround time significantly. Cigna and other select healthcare providers use Intuit’s software, so it is not yet available to all patients or medical offices.

The Q&A session began with a shareholder questioning Intuit’s stock price. The shareholder compared Intuit’s stock price to Adobe’s (ADBE) over the past ten years. During that time period, Adobe shares have increased over 100% in value (10% annually), while Intuit shares have returned about 15%, or just 1.5% a year. The shareholder implied that R&D expenditures–which he cited at between 16 and 17% of revenue–were too high.

CEO Smith responded that Intuit’s R&D expenditures were in line with competitors’ R&D expenditures, and the reason Intuit’s stock price hasn’t performed better is because of a disconnect between the company’s expectations of growth and Wall Street’s expectations of growth. While Wall Street believes Intuit will likely grow only in the single digits, Intuit believes it will achieve double-digit growth, which should justify a higher multiple. Since Intuit already has a high share of the American market relative to competitors who offer similar products, there doesn't seem to be much room for domestic growth, and significant growth in international markets will take time.

I suggested that Intuit create an Audit-Defense software that would provide consumers with peace of mind in case of an audit. Right now, there are many consumers who have envelopes and/or folders filled with business expense receipts, as well as separate envelopes for canceled checks. Many consumers would appreciate a product that allowed them to ensure their receipts matched expense data entered in Quicken and/or TurboTax. Intuit could easily create a software program that reconciled consumers’ physical receipts and canceled checks with their expense entries on Quicken and/or TurboTax. This proposed product should include a mini-scanner to allow users to scan and upload jpegs of their business-related receipts so all of their data would be in one convenient place in case of an IRS audit. CEO Smith responded that Intuit was already working on something similar to my idea called QuickReceipts.

I also asked how Intuit planned on making money from its Mint.com acquisition. I sometimes read Mint.com's blog, but I don’t usually click on any ads on the website, and I don’t pay any money to use Mint.com. CEO Smith said that Intuit planned on making money through referral fees from Mint.com’s “ways to save” engine, which is similar to the way Google makes money from its AdWords program.

I mentioned that Intuit's biggest threat probably wouldn’t be another competitor, but its own potential mis-steps. Perhaps Intuit should make a more tangible assurance of its security capabilities. Why not advertise that if anyone actually gains access to a user's personal data, Intuit will pay the affected user $100,000? Why not put its money where its mouth is, and win over the remaining online skeptics? For example, LifeLock has a $1 million guarantee against identity theft. If Intuit had a similar policy, wouldn't more consumers trust the company and feel more comfortable rejecting the old pen-and-paper method? Intuit would probably argue that it would be foolish to issue a worldwide challenge to hackers, and there is no such thing as an "unhackable" database. Intuit's cautious approach is probably the right one, but without a guarantee, how will it convince the pen-and-paper holdouts to use its software?

I respect and admire Intuit, but I can also understand why Wall Street is hesitant to bid up its shares. Intuit runs its company like engineers who happen to have MBAs–conservative and focused on consistent growth without unnecessary risk. Wall Street must imagine Intuit to be a leaner Microsoft (MSFT), if Microsoft owned only its Office software suite–a highly profitable company with low maintenance products, but nothing revolutionary or indicative of a major paradigm shift like an iPod or a Google. If Intuit wants Wall Street’s respect, it needs to spend its ample cash and roll out riskier initiatives.

In conclusion, Intuit may believe it is growing adequately each year, and therefore has no need to make radical moves, but New York money managers probably view Intuit as a stodgy company that refuses to take risks. Indeed, one has to wonder why Intuit couldn’t invent something similar to Mint.com instead of having to buy it. Isn’t it a little strange when a software company’s most touted new product (Mint.com) was made by another software company?

Intuit needs to make up its mind: either be like Microsoft and pay a decent dividend and focus on consistent growth, or act like a growth company and use its cash to invest in new ventures or riskier acquisitions. Taking the middle ground–safe and steady–won’t gain Wall Street’s respect, even if Intuit is clearly an amazing company with good management.

Disclosure: I own an insignificant number of Intuit shares. I am also a user of its software.

Victor Davis Hanson Explained in Just 8 Steps

I just finished reading a Victor Davis Hanson speech (from a Hillsdale College transcript). I used to read some of his WSJ articles, and although I respected his intelligence, I was never really impressed with his work. I finally figured out why--most of his articles follow the similar themes, so once you've read one of them, you've read them all. Below are his eight major themes: 

1. Western culture is superior because of x, y, and z. 

2. Western culture has created the highest standard of living for its citizens worldwide. For example, a poor person in a Western country is typically better off than a poor person in a country that does not follow Western culture. 

3. The West's enemies have not followed Western culture. As a result, their citizens are generally worse off when compared to Western citizens. 

4. The West values human life more than non-Western countries. 

5. Some of the West's enemies are beneficiaries of "unearned capital," such as oil and natural gas reserves. The West needs these natural resources, so its enemies are able to import some of the West's technological advances, but without the West's system of checks-and-balances. 

6. The West will have problems battling outside enemies because its system of checks-and-balances, its high valuation on individual human life, and its openness--all of which are responsible for the West's success--will also hold it back when confronted with a serious enemy. [Note: Hanson assumes all wars require the loss of individual Western human life. With drones and WMDs, the West may one day be able to wage war without suffering many losses.] 

7. Western culture allows anti-war activists and other relatively comfortable residents to restrict the West's ability to defend itself. The West's enemies have no such problems because their systems are not open and do not have a system of checks-and-balances. Meanwhile, the West's enemies will--using their unearned capital--continue taking some of the best products of Western culture without incorporating the very Western system that is responsible for the creation of these sought-after products. 

8. The West's enemies, if allowed to attain high-level technology, such as nuclear weapons, will use these weapons against the West. It is naive and foolish to think otherwise, because these non-Western countries are run by religious fanatics who do not operate under a system of checks-and-balances. 

My problem with Mr. Hanson is that paragraphs 1 through 7, even if true, do not necessarily lead to 8. It may be true that countries that follow Western culture will have economic advantages over countries that do not follow Western culture. At the same time, the previous statement does not necessarily mean that non-Western countries will, if given Western items, destroy the West. In short, nothing in paragraphs 1 through 7 logically leads to paragraph 8. At the end of the day, Mr. Hanson is really saying that certain countries are different than we are (and inferior) and therefore they will attack us. I don't follow that kind of "logic." 

Mr. Hanson also seems to have devised a belief system that allows the West to feel morally comfortable attacking the rest of the world. Paragraphs 1-7 are stealthily insidious in a way you may not have noticed--they assume that a child born in a non-Western country is worth less than a child who happens to be born in a Western country. In short, Mr. Hanson seems to believe that the accident of birth determines the worth of a human being. I have traveled to several "non-Western" countries, and the parents I have seen in Iran, Costa Rica, and Singapore love and value their children just as much as parents in Europe and North America. I must respectfully disagree with Mr. Hanson's implicit allegation that a child who is not lucky enough to be born in a Western country is worth less than other children. 

Moreover, Mr. Hanson forgets that most people do not consider Western culture and civilization to be superior or even enlightened until after the 1700's. To the extent that Western culture is inherently superior to all other cultures, one might ask why such superiority has only manifested itself within the last 300 or so years. To believe in Mr. Hanson's pro-Western approach, one must ignore previous Egyptian, Khmer, Mayan, and Peruvian civilizations and accomplishments. 

As for the non-West's "unearned capital," Mr. Hanson forgets the debt that Western civilization owes to the rest of the world. For example, the West and Westerners did not invent algebra or other conditions precedent to our modern-day technological advances. I can't help but wonder: why do so many smart Republican writers usually end up making pro-war arguments? Why aren't there more anti-war Republicans like Ron Paul in Congress?

© Matthew Mehdi Rafat (2009)

Controversy Ahead: Interview with White Pride Proponent

The link to the following interview contains an open discussion about race and could potentially offend people that are sensitive when it comes to such issues. If you fall into that category, I would recommend not reading any further. HERE is an interview with “White Pride” fighter Melvin Costa on the Sherdog forum:

First and foremost I want the people out there not to mix up love for my own with hate for others. I don't hate any other race. I love my own. That's what I'm about pretty much; the advancement of my people, my culture, my heritage.

Is Mr. Costa a racist? Apparently, Mr. Costa has been banned from participating in MMA fights because of his swastika tattoo and/or ideological beliefs. Mr. Costa says he was in prison for many years, and the swastika tattoo stands for the "purity of my people's blood," not hate.  Mr. Costa also quotes now-President Obama, who said, "I'm for consonance in all my people, putting in civic duties for my people, and advancing my people." He compares his views to President Obama's statements.

I don't know whether Mr. Costa is a malevolent racist--he never says in the interview that he believes "whites" are superior to anyone else or that he wants laws enforcing racial segregation. He appears to agree with voluntary racial segregation, but does believing in voluntary segregation make him a racist? Keep in mind that most parts of America right now are de facto segregated by race.

Also, how should we characterize people who believe Western culture is superior to other cultures? Would we call pro-Westerners ignorant or racist? Probably not--there are many PhDs and Wall Street Journal writers who are proud of Western culture and who believe it is the best culture. In fact, most pro-Western proponents probably believe Western culture transcends race, even though it was made exclusively by people they consider "white."  (The definition of "white" has changed over time in America, a fact I sometimes wonder whether white supremacists fully appreciate.)

In any case, some people might say the difference between a Melvin Costa and a Victor Davis Hanson is eight years of college, but that's a horribly unfair comparison. Mr. Hanson, of course, does not favor racial segregation and does not make comments based on racial pride. Perhaps if Mr. Costa removed his tattoos and talked about his love of Western culture instead of his love of "white" persons, he would become eligible to fight in major MMA events. Removing the tattoos certainly seems like the first step in re-gaining his MMA eligibility.  Beyond that, Mr. Costa could shift the debate into the free speech arena, where he could argue that a company like Dana White's Ultimate Fighting Championship has no business deciding whom to hire or deploy based on someone's non-violent personal views, and that no company ought to pick and choose participants based on tattoos.

I'll leave you with another reader's comment: "I've never understood the concept of being proud of complete genetic randomness."  Indeed.

[Note: this post has been updated since its original publication.]

Interesting Article on Foreign Basketball Player

I really enjoyed SI's article on Arsalan Kazemi. See HERE.

Father Jon Sobrino: Hero

Once in a while, I am reminded of my deep respect for the Jesuits. They combine logic with compassion in ways that no one else seems to be able to emulate. HERE is an article written by Father Jon Sobrino, about the world's neglect of the poor.

[M]ost of humanity...die fast in war and more slowly in the poverty caused by war. We need only look at Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine; at health disasters like malaria and AIDS; at ecological problems like flooding and erosion; at natural catastrophes such as earthquakes, where the majority of the dead are those who cannot afford strong housing. The poor live on the sides of the mountains, next to rivers, or along railroad tracks. Anything can happen, and does. The majority of the earth’s people die innocently and cruelly, often after a life of great suffering. And they die defenseless. Who is risking anything to bring them down from the cross?

May God bless Father Jon Sobrino, who narrowly escaped being murdered by an El Salvadorian government death squad in 1989.

Jon Oliver and Jon Stewart on Switzerland

Hilarious and thought-provoking: the hallmarks of The Daily Show. More HERE.

Colbert on the Fed

See HERE for two videos from The Colbert Show.

TSA and National Origin Profiling

According to a document inadvertently leaked by the TSA, "Individuals with a passport from Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, or Algeria should be given additional screening." 

 It's not racial or religious profiling per se, but it appears government policy has the effect of subjecting many Muslims to a higher level of scrutiny than other passengers. Except for Cuba and North Korea, all the other countries on the list have Muslim-majority populations.

Another Popehat Quote

From Popehat.com's Patrick: 

This is the problem with the Western left: they can see a noose with perfect clarity when the hangman is a conservative. But when the noose is placed by their fellow leftists, they’ll call it a necktie every time. 

Patrick sounds like he's channeling Neil Postman, who believed Huxley's Brave New World was more likely than Orwell's 1984. 

In Defense of Meg Whitman's Voting Record

Judging Meg Whitman's fitness for governor based on her voting record is like choosing an NBA coach based on how he voted for his favorite NBA All-Stars--it's irrelevant, because the job doesn't involve voting. In Meg's case, the relevant record would be her performance running a large, diverse California organization that must contend with state laws and regulations. (Anyone hear of a little company called eBay? Its finances are better than California's, and it hasn't regularly run deficits/losses.)

A governor doesn't vote anyway (s/he may veto bills, but s/he does not vote as part of the governor's job duties). Also, Meg's personal voting record wouldn't be public even if she had voted.

Below, Patrick and I battle it out regarding Meg's voting record:

Patrick: I do not believe corporate governance has any bearing on ability to run this state or any other. Cal has a very arcane budget process. We need professional politicians who know how it works and can make deals. We need to repeal term limits and eliminate the use of initiatives for budget decisions. While eBay is a great company, running eBay is not preparation for running the state. As I see it, there are currently no acceptable choices for governor at this time.

My response: California's political process is actually really simple--a minority can hold up a budget until their demands are met, which forces the majority to work with them and make concessions. Instead of cutting spending, however, previous/career politicians have been punting state expenses into the future or coming up with accounting tricks to mask the expenses. It's reasonable to believe that if we get another "experienced" politician, we'll get more of the same. We need someone who is honest and tough, not a career politician who will give us more of the same. We also need to cut government spending, which has been out of control for quite some time.

Patrick: a majority of the budget is controlled by spending rules passed via initiative. These initiatives have tied very particular amounts and sources of tax dollars to particular programs. They cannot be changed and the funds cannot be moved around. The discretionary portion of the budget where deals can be made is actually very small compared to the whole. The budget is a mess because we have allowed lay-persons to vote on it. Voting in an amateur corporate figure head will not fix this problem. We need to repeal the whole initiative process and allow the budget to be fixed by politicians who know what they are doing.

Me: California's Supreme Court Chief Justice agrees with you. You both believe the problem is the initiative process--which has nothing to do with any candidate's personal voting record. Maybe you should vote against Meg if she refuses to support repealing the initiative process. That would make more sense.

Patrick: [starts to move away from his original complaint about Meg's voting record] Her anti labor and anti environment positions are as equally objectionable as her lack of political experience.

Me: Well, that's different. There is nothing illogical about voting against someone b/c you disagree with her (alleged) anti-labor and anti-environment views. As for the lack of political experience, you might want to reconsider that argument if you voted for Obama or Bush II--neither of whom had political executive experience before becoming President.

Patrick: Lack of political experience as an executive is one thing, and I agree Obama had none (he did have legislative experience at both the state and federal level). A complete lack of political experience is another thing. I just don't think being a CEO qualifies you to be governor. [Me: a good analogy would be, "Driving an automatic transmission doesn't mean she also knows how to drive a stick shift."] If she spends some time as a big city mayor or in the state debate first she would then be qualified.

Me: Okay, you are saying you prefer a candidate who has some experience in politics. That's not illogical. But thank goodness you've stopped citing Meg's personal voting record--which is irrelevant--to support your choice. Peace.

Google Case Law Search

Did anyone know about this? You can search case law for free on google! See HERE.

Obama's Nobel Prize Speech

Obama's Nobel Prize speech was underwhelming, except for this part:

So let us reach for the world that ought to be--that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he's outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protester awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.

See HERE for transcript of the entire speech. Gotta love CNN's transcripts.