|
Saturday, October 01, 2005Bali BombingsLeafing through Ken Blanchard's Customer Mania! : It's Never Too Late to Build a Customer-Focused Company  , I ran across an assertion by one of YUM's top execs that while things weren't perfect, the numbers that were supposed to be going up were going up while the numbers that were supposed to be going down were going down.I think this way of thinking can be applied to the War on Terror. Some things are a mess, some are a total washout. But the number of people enjoying increased freedom and autonomy is up, as Iraq joins Afghanistan in staggering toward democracy. That's a number going up that we want going up. In Bali, in the same vein, we've got a number going down that we want going down. On 9/11, 3000 were killed. In Bali, the first time, it was 202 (it says here). In Madrid, it was around 250. Drmatic declines all. Then in London it was 50-100. And now, in Bali again, it's 25. The bombing in Bali shows that nutcases are still loose, still capable of destruction and, sadly, still able to ruin lives and break the hearts of families. But to look at the current numbers, they've got nothing on people who run red lights, never mind tsunamis and hurricaines. If Al Qaeda's move in Bali was intended to unleash terror, its effectiveness is uncertain. If it was intended to place in perspective the organization's capacity for testing or transforming society, though, a clear message has been sent about how little appeal this movement has. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world. If they're planning on the Muslim street rising to lead the world to Islam (especially of the Islamist variety), the Bali progression has to be disappointing. Reminding, once again, that while there's no telling what the future has in store or what tomorrow may bring, it's not unreasonable to think that the War on Terror is being slowly, painstakingly won. 
posted by gbarto at 3:57 PM Thursday, September 29, 2005Hang Reid!Okay, that may be a bit over the top. Let's ask this instead: Is this a scandal? A Reid relationship with the Second Baptist Church surfaced in 1997, when the senator donated $250 to the church where Davis was and still is pastor. The money came from John Huang, who was convicted of making illegal contributions to the 1996 re-election campaign of President Clinton.Maybe Reid hangs around African churches more than most, but this looks an awful lot like using a cutesy cover story to explain turning questionable donations into walking-around money. If Rick Santorum converted a problematic donation (say, from Wildmon's "kill the gays" pals) into a donation to a church, would he be congratulated for putting ugly money to good use? Or turning out the base with bloody money? (via The Great One)
posted by gbarto at 7:03 PM Wednesday, September 28, 2005Thoughts on Tom Delay's indictment:* I'm not too sure about the legal content of the indictment. * I'm not too sure about Tom Delay either. * This isn't a Trent Lott situation. Lott was a transparent idiot. Delay is a potential lawbreaker. That said, do we dump him? Yes, he's stepped down. But do we let him go gently into that dark night? Or do we rally for his restoration (even if we don't mean it). This is a touchy situation. If, as they claim, a good prosecutor can get an indictment of a ham sandwich, then we should shrink from taking pols out of commission on grounds of an indictment alone. Otherwise, the indictment ceases to become an instrument of the law and becomes a weapon for politics by other means. If we go batty over indictments, we run the risk of the further erosion of democracy and, worse, the loss of responsive (however irresponsible) pols as legal infighting, like lobbying, becomes more important than accountability to the citizenry for the keeping of one's office. Tom Delay's problem is that while we should stand by him on principle, there is less reason to stand by him as one of our fellows. His remarks about fat in the budget revealed someone far too committed to taking care of his buddies in Congress and the rep of his conference, when he should have been leading the charge to insist that we eschew the boondoggle Louisana aid will become until having decided what boondoggles to cut in its place. Let us prioritize how we waste our money, he might have suggested. Or rather, his old buddy, Dick Armey, might have suggested. If Delay were Dick Armey, one could imagine asking the right to fall all over itself, and even on its sword, to protect him. But he ain't. This is a moment, then, when the right should be joining ranks to protect Delay long enough that when we cut him loose, it doesn't represent the successful completion of a media-driven prosecution, but rather the putting out to pasture of a once faithful steed who just ain't what he was. Our problem here is that with Frist (the idiot) facing questions, and Delay in trouble, we can't just put out word that DAs with aspiration can hitch their wagon on the legal disembowelment of the Republican leadership while the Dems chant their usual money for the poor, not corporations dirge. Speaking of Frist, there's another reason why conservatives, however unhappy with Delay, have to be cautious. The last time we finished one of these, we didn't get Senate Majority Leader McConnell. We got the good doctor turned evil HMO mogul. If Delay goes, who should we be pushing for his replacement. And can we get our ducks in a row before we wind up with another feel-good Frist-type?
posted by gbarto at 7:34 PM Tuesday, September 27, 2005Vodkapundit looks at the latest polling data, etc, from Patrick Ruffini's survey and cuts the GOP front-runners down to size. There's only one problem: Who are they running against?I don't know of comparable straw-poll sites for Dems, though presumably they exist. But who do they have besides Hillary? Obama? Maybe they'll run Byrd. Steven alludes to the DNC's seven dwarves in '88, but is the contest the seven dwarves versus the seven potato bugs? About six years ago, too, the GOP had no real candidates. They settled on a guy named Bush - at least he'd have name recognition. Good or bad, he's certainly turned out to be one of the most watched and analyzed political figures in a long time. What worries me about the current GOP field is that I have very few opinions about any of the major leaders. As a blogger and regular newsreader, I should have some impressions about the people mentioned. I had my thoughts on Forbes, Keyes and Quayle, for example, a few years back. What reassures me about the current Dem field, then, is that I do have strong opinions on most of the party's leading blowhards, even if I have no idea who the Dems might run. If it's all about turning out the base, W can count on me as long as my vote weakens Robert Byrd, Teddy Kennedy and pals.
posted by gbarto at 12:36 AM Sunday, September 25, 2005Fun with Pouring VesselsWhen your previous think-piece ropes in Kate Moss, supermodels and drugs, there's nowhere to go but down. So let's do a little link here. Check out Will Collier on a most unusual pewter flagon. When you're done with that, take a break from the news and read Code of the Woosters to find out how cow creamers, too, have their stories to tell.
posted by gbarto at 10:41 PM |
Archives
|
Day By Day© by Chris Muir.Old TurkeyBlog here.
