War on the Horizon

Yes, I know we are already at war, but something big is pinging on the horizon and I think it may pop relatively soon. This comes mostly from two stories that haven't been either in the news or around the blogosphere much lately. They are the shakiness of the Syrian regime and Israel's planned pull out of Gaza.

First, to Syria. Syria actually has been in the news a bunch lately because they were forced out of Lebanon, although they still have intelligence operatives there, and because we've been playing Whack-A-Terrorist on the Syrian border for the past couple of months. Syria is actually a very poor country with very few natural resources. Poverty, the loss of a major trading partner in Baathist Iraq, and the loss of rich territory to exploit in Lebanon lead to a dissatisfied populace. Then throw on an army that isn't doing much and the importation of a bunch of Iraqi Baathist who now don't have too much to do. All this leads to lots of opportunities for someone in the military or an Iraqi Baathist to think that he can do a better job running the country and *poof* coup. The best way for a dictator to avoid that fate is to start a war and encourage rampant nationalism.

This is where the Israeli pullout of Gaza comes in. Israel is scheduled to dismantled a whole bunch of settlements in Gaza and a couple in the West Bank and turn the governing of these territories over to the Palestinians. Except that the settlers who live there are mostly very religious, to the point of militism. They have promised to fight the government tooth and nail rather than leave their homes. This could actually evolve into a serious climate of potential civil war. With the Israeli government distracted Hamas, now emerging as a major party in Palestinian politics, calls for armed resistance to drive out the settlers who won't leave. The Israeli government then balks at having its citizens attacked, in the wrong or not, and fights back. Syria then seizes the initiative and sends in the army from the north to relieve their Muslim brothers in need. Whether or not Jordan and Egypt get involved is questionable. The Egyptian government needs a distraction but they still remember the spanking they got in 1967. Jordan's king is fairly pro-West, but a huge offense on his border might force him to side against Israel, at least in name.

So, would Syria and the other Arabs do this while the US is in the region? Possibly. We're tied up pretty well in Iraq and if AQ flares something in Iraq, or Iran threatens to move its armies through Iraq to aid its ally Syria, we could be pinned down completely and unable to respond. Iran could need to distract its populace as well depending on how the scheduled elections are turning out.

Possible? Maybe not immediately, but all the potentials are there. All it takes is one critical flash point, like the death of Abbas or something else which would allow Hamas to seize the microphone.

And the result? Victory for Israel, but at a nasty cost. Israel's nose got bloodied in 1973 and I think this could be even worse. Desperation house to house fighting, suicide attacks coupled with legitimate army maneuvers. Complete occupation of the West Bank and even the possible destruction of Damascus may be involved. Unfortunately that leaves another war on the horizon. The Arabs pull back and lick their wounds while Israel holds a territorial neutral zone around it, much like the Warsaw Pact nations were between the Soviet Union and NATO.

Maybe it won't happen and I'm reading too much into things. But I think I see buzzards on the horizon.

Deep Throat Unmasked

So, after all these years, we finally know who Deep Throat is. I find it rather amusing that he actually ended up looking like the actor who played him in All the President’s Men. As an aside, the movie wasn’t that great, but I think I was looking for more details about what happened after the story broke ala Oliver Stone’s Nixon.

Anyway, this revelation comes in a very haphazard manner and with very interesting timing. Deep Throat, and the whole Watergate mythology that has grown up over the years, has immortalized the “inside anonymous source.” Recently with the whole Newsweek Koran flushing retraction, the sanctity of the anonymous source has taken quite a beating. In fact, the blogosphere in general has been forcing mainstream media to shy away from the insider with an axe to grind.

For the most part, I suspect the rest of the week will be a reveling by the mainstream media of the Watergate era. It’s a reminder of when they were kings and had complete control of the establishment. Their ego has taken a severe beating in the past few years with the combination of scandals that have been unearthed, from the Eason Jordan incident to the Dan Rather memo incident.

The great irony in this whole thing is that Deep Throat didn’t actually give Woodward and Bernstein anything. He confirmed facts the duo already had, gave them encouragement when they were unsure, and nudged them down helpful avenues. Yet he has been built up as this great mythological figure that everyone reporter feels he must have. Woodward and Bernstein actually uncovered the story with good old-fashioned hard-nosed investigative journalism. A talent that has been noticeably lost on reporters of today who are too obsessed with the quick story that brings down the house.

It’s also amusing to note that if Nixon had simply promoted Mr. Felt to FBI Director, as most of the FBI insiders thought he should be, we would probably never have heard of Deep Throat. As a result, Woodward and Bernstein might have been much slower about breaking their story, or completely done in by a couple of mistakes they made along the way. Either way, Nixon might have been allowed to stay in office to complete his full term that would have meant that Ford wasn’t carrying the Nixon pardon baggage. Relieved of this burden, Ford might have had enough in him to defeat Carter in the 1976 election. Without the baggage, Reagan might have decided to work with Ford rather than oppose him. Ford would probably have snapped Reagan up to lock in California’s electoral votes and would have pushed him over the top against Carter. Most people forget that Carter only narrowly beat Ford by a couple of states. From then on we take a number of different avenues. Of course, this also assumes that Nixon would have chosen Ford to replace the disgraced Spiro Agnew. If he wasn’t worried about his own image as much, Nixon might have opted for someone other than the squeaky-clean Ford. So many avenues, so little time.

Slow Periods

So what's going on in the world right now? Not too much of real interest. Yes we're still at war and meanwhile the French told Chirac and the rest of the EU to go shove it, but really its been very quiet. Even in the X household, its been pretty quiet. Mrs. X got a new car last weekend and we spent this weekend dressing up the house and visiting with Mrs. X's mom, but that's about it. Excitement seems to be at a premium right about now.

Meanwhile, the book continues to move forward, albeit somewhat slowly. Working in the Peloponnesian War was getting a bit bogged down, so I took a short break and have gone back to examine the Joseph angle. I think I can definitely work through enough evidence that the Pharaoh who started the oppression was Sesostris III, making the Pharaoh of the Exodus Amenemhet IV, but I've hit a small snag with the start of things. Amenemhet I (founder of the 12th dynasty) began his reign a few years after Joseph came to court according to the current breakdown in chronology. So, either some of the numbers assigned to the various Pharaohs are wrong, or Joseph actually started before the 12th dynasty really got going. Then there is the whole reconciling thing with the 4th dynasty, but I'm not going to worry about that for the moment.

Still confidence is high and progress is being made. I have a total of eight chapters in various states of editing, although only one is anywhere near close to being ready. Plod along, get new information and work hard is all I can do.

Revenge of Lucas

So Mrs. X and I saw Episode III last night. It was good. It certainly was the best of the prequel trilogy. I’d have to see it again before if I could decide whether or not it was better than Return of the Jedi. So right now, it’s hovering between 3 and 4 on my rating of the 6.

Good things:
* The good things about the movie included a much better repartee between Anakin and Obi-
wan.
* There was a lot more of the dry humor that flavored the original trilogy.
* The lightsaber duels were quite impressive.
* Ian McDiarmid and Ewan McGregor put the full force of their acting abilities into their roles
and steal most scenes they are in.
* Yoda was a much more three-dimensional character, both in terms of the effects and his
dialogue.

Bad things:
* The overall dialogue still stinks. In a movie driven for nearly an hour by political intrigue, the
simplistic dialogue renders many actors wooden.
* The chemistry between Anakin and Padme was very forced. A shame since both have shown
to be very good actors in other movies, but neither seem to be able to struggle out of the bad
dialogue and lack of direction that Lucas gives them.
* Padme is severely underused as a character and then given a very weak death, out of line with
the way she was developed in the first two movies.
* Sloppy answers to existing questions. Lucas answered most of the questions people felt
needed to be answered, but several of them were very rushed and to the point. Further
development of these should have been explored.

I’d still recommend it to see, although not necessarily in the theater Mrs. X and I went to. It was old and the sound wasn’t that great, but we expected that since it only cost us $4 to see it. The worst though was the audience. A few rows back of us was a kid maybe 4 years old who was very fussy and shouldn’t have been in there at all. There were other people, including the couple sitting next to us, who kept running commentary throughout the movie and that was highly distracting. Lower price also seems to invite lower class.

Blood in the Snow?

Things are getting interesting with our neighbors to the North. The Prime Minister just lost a non-binding “no confidence” vote 153-150. While the Liberals are free to ignore this, it does weaken their position in the eyes of the public even more. Mr. Martin has to explain to the public why he is not scheduling elections when he has clearly lost the confidence of the House of Commons. The head of the Conservatives does have the option of petitioning the Governor-General to dissolve the government and appoint an acting Prime Minister, but unless he can secure a binding resolution, its unlikely the Governor-General will make that step.

For those of you who haven’t been fully following this story, the Liberals are in some hot water concerning an investigation into a kickback scheme involving federal judges. The Liberals then slapped on a publication ban to try and control the outflow of information. But, news got out through a couple of American bloggers and then quickly spread through the Canadian mainstream. Full back-story details are best read at Captain’s Quarters, which provided the original leak in the first place.

Ordinarily this wouldn’t even really ping that high except for one very prominent factor. The current government is primarily a coalition between the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois. Bloc Quebecois has gotten really pissed off by the whole issue and been talking about secession again. If Ottawa continues to bumble, Quebec could throw enough Bloc Quebecois members into the mix that they are able to put a secession initiative before the people of Quebec as they did in the 90’s. If Quebec passes the resolution, all of Canada could break apart. The fact that the West doesn’t like Ontario very much is not a well-kept secret. Spurred by Quebec’s departure, the West could pull its support as well. It’s also somewhat debatable as to how loyal the Maritimes would be to Ontario without a common border.

All of this is raw speculation based on the worst-case scenario, but it is a possibility. From this we then speculate as to whether Ontario would sit by and just take the dissolution of Canada, or if they would move to reunite the country by force.

So where would the US stand in the whole mix? Obviously chaos up North would spell trouble for us, but greed might trump that fear. Its no secret that the Republicans aren’t fond of the way Ontario runs things. Certain factions within the party would love a chance to offer protection for Western Canada with the hope of assimilating that portion into the US. Logging and oil companies would be made very happy by this move. Fueled by the possible intake of more “red state” voters, Democrats might then push to offer the same protections to the Maritimes, which are closer to New England in ideology to balance everything out. So a giant monster consumes the edges, leaving the center.

Again, this is a rather long shot in terms of possibility, but there is always a chance when there is this much tension in the system.

Science likes to pass itself off as being very flexible and will constantly amend its theories whenever new discoveries are made. In some cases this is true, but in other cases, science is as stiff necked about certain theories as a church is about dogma.

A prime example is the nature of the dinosaur debate. This debate is still evolving but the paleontologists held very rigid in their theories for many years. I had books growing up in the 80’s that were indistinguishable from books in the 50’s. Dinosaurs were cold-blooded, slow-witted creatures. Tyrannosaurus Rex stood completely upright on his hind legs. The primary sauropod was the brontosaurus. Brachiosaurus had to stand in water to support its weight. Etcetera, etcetera.

It wasn’t until the late 80’s when Robert Bakker published his book, The Dinosaur Heresies, challenging these theories. Many of these theories were picked up by Michael Creighton and incorporated into Jurassic Park. With the success of that series, the public started paying enough attention that people began to change their minds and science was actually forced to consider new theories and has made them into the new gospel.

I mention this example because I’ve been reading some articles that argue that the Big Bang theory is wrong, but science is resisting change. Apparently some of the key tenants of Big Bang have been disproved relatively recently. Doppler Shift is incorrect around certain key galaxies. The overall age of bodies such as the moon and Mars have been vastly overestimated. According to the Big Bang model, the galaxy is supposed to be electrically neutral and it has recently found to be not.

In its place is a theory of electric plasma strings that disperse matter throughout the universe. I don’t know the full nature of the theory except that it takes certain key elements first proposed by Immanuel Velikovsky in the 1950’s. I don’t quite buy all of his theories (he believes the planet Venus was ejected from Jupiter and caused the disasters of biblical era by closely passing Earth before settling into a stable orbit) but it does make for interesting reading. It also teaches one to challenge the orthodoxy of science. Question and agitate

Operation Zebra

Powerline wrote an article yesterday about the troubles of a history professor at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIU-C). Apparently he is in trouble for giving his class an optional reading assignment of an article about the Zebra Murders. I was rather unfamiliar with this string of murders so I followed the link and read the article the teacher had given to his class.

In 1972 in San Francisco a group of young black men, who were all members of the Nation of Islam, formed a group called the Death Angels. This group believed that the white race had been formed by a mad black experimenter 3,000 years ago to be slaves to the black race and that they would earn points in heaven for killing white people. A bit like the Islamic fundamentalists we’re fighting now. The case got its nickname from the band on the radio used by the police during their operation against the killers.

The Death Angels targeted mostly elderly men and women. Most of their victims were savagely beaten prior to being killed. One of their first victims was an elderly woman who was beaten and sexually abused before they cut off her head with a machete. There was no real pattern to the crimes, just that the victims were white and in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Police stepped up patrols and arrests in traditional black neighborhoods fanning racial tensions between residents and police. Several prominent black leaders of the day were to be found in San Francisco arguing that the police presence was only because the victims were white and that it was another example of oppression against blacks in the area. These may be true, but the leaders also expressed no remorse for the slaying of innocent people, alienating many white leaders.

Eventually, police captured one member of the gang in 1974. He quickly broke and confessed, implicating many of the other members of the gang. The Nation of Islam paid for their defense but all the members captured were sent to jail. Most were eligible for parole in 2002 although I am unaware if any were actually released.

I am rather confused as to what objections other faculty members have as to students learning about this crime spree. Understanding problems of the past is key towards working to prevent them from happening in the future.

HP Conspiracies

Sorry about the long delay. This past was a bit hectic here at work and I never quite got around to chatting about the new pope or anything else of interest. So, we'll have a gay old time today discussing fun stuff.

Towards the end of last week I ventured back to Mugglenet after a hiatus. No real news had popped out about either the GoF movie or the HBP book. While I was surfing around, I found a new editorial column had gone up called The Underground Lake. Its actually a well thought out column that looks at various points and explanations of future events in the Harry Potter series. Probably his most interesting post was a recap of what's referred to as Vold War I, the first war against Voldemort that lasted from 1970 to Voldemort's fall in 1981. Most interesting in that was his recap and speculation as to what happened between Voldemort's assault on Godric's Hollow and Harry's arrival at Privett Drive.

His recap is as follows (I'll go ahead and include his theories with the known facts): Voldemort, operating on half of the prophesy decides that Harry Potter is the real threat and not Neville Longbottom. However, to be safe, he dispatches the Lestranges to watch the Longbottom residence while he concentrates his assault on the Potters. Peter Pettigrew brings word to Voldemort that he is the secret keeper for the Potters. Voldemort then goes to Godric's Hollow, taking Peter with him in case it might be a trap. Peter waits outside while Voldemort bursts in. He kills James quickly, having been caught off guard. Lily runs to protect Harry. When she won't remove herself, Voldemort kills her. He then tries to kill Harry, but thanks to his mother's charm, the spell rebounds and expels the spirit of Voldemort from his body. Peter quickly learns that something has gone wrong and goes inside. He sees the body of Voldemort and Harry, still alive and probably crying from his scar. Peter panics. He grabs Voldemort's wand and flees the house, probably destroying it first to cover up the evidence that he was ever there.

Peter knows Sirius will come by in the next day or so to check up on Lily and James. He then flees to Lucius Malfoy and discloses what happened. Malfoy realizes that with the disappearance of Voldemort, the principle power of the Death Eaters will be broken. They could try to put someone else in power, but none of them is as strong as Voldemort. Malfoy then cooks up a plan. He tells Peter to make himself known and let Sirius track him down. Malfoy will speed things up by sending out a rumor that Voldemort was destroyed while trying to kill Harry. He notifies the Junior Minister of Magical Catastrophes, Cornelius Fudge, that Sirius Black will be chasing down Peter Pettigrew and that Peter will engineer his own "death". Fudge will arrest Black and accuse him of being Voldemort's strongest supporter. Fudge will then be vaulted into the highest levels of political circles and in position to compete with Barty Crouch for Minister of Magic. Fudge isn't a Death Eater but he certainly is complicit with Malfoy, certainly enough to advance himself politically. We can see a parallel with Percy Weasley and the blindness his ambition is causing.

So Fudge is waiting when Sirius tracks Peter down. Peter blows the street leaving his finger (and presumably his wand, having stashed Voldemort's away in a safe place) behind. Fudge immediately arrests Sirius and may have even hit him with a powerful cheering charm to make him laugh maniacally. Sirius is then quickly handed over to Barty Crouch who tosses him into Azkaban without trial. Malfoy uses his political connections with Fudge and other ministers to shield himself during the Ministry crackdown on the Death Eaters.

Meanwhile, news reaches the Lestranges of Voldemort's downfall. Unaware of the full nature of their assignment, they torture Frank and Alice Longbottom, thinking they may have information on what happened. When they get nothing out of them, they torture them to insanity. The gang is caught shortly afterward and dispatched to Azkaban until Barty Crouch Jr. escapes with aid from his parents.

An interesting theory and one that could very well be true. Only Fudge's complicity with Malfoy is unknown. But given his closeness to Malfoy throughout the period of peace between Vold War I and II and his stonewalling at the beginning of Vold War II, it would be somewhat surprising to learn that Fudge is as naive as we are initially led to believe.

If you're curious about other theories posed, be sure to check out some of his other articles. They're quite interesting.

History Under Revision

Have you ever wondered just how much of the history you read actually happened? Mrs. X has a book that I’ve been meaning to read called Lies My Teacher Told Me. It covers various points of history that have been glossed over/revised/truncated by our history books. This has popped in my mind because some of the conservative blogs to which I frequent like citing instances where people claim they were either for or against the war from the beginning when the public record actually shows them being on the other side of the fence.

Revision can come as simple as via the sin of omission. For example, did you know that the Vatican did not recognize the state of Israel until 1994, but was the only government in the world to officially recognize the government of the Confederate States of America? Obviously Rome doesn’t like to be reminded of the sins of her past, just like the rest of us (Trail of Tears or Wounded Knee anyone?). But without knowing the whole story, things get lost and crucial historical facts are obscured.

Another major aspect of historical revision comes through developing hypotheses about the past and sticking with that despite evidence to the contrary. Example: textbooks tell of the great campaign of the Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III where he captured the great city of Kadesh on the plain of Meggido. Except that if you read Thutmose’s description of the geography of the campaign and compare it to that of Meggido, you realize that there is no way that the battle could have ever been fought there. The mistake came from a hypothesis formed about the translation of the text of the campaign in the early twentieth century and then archeologists sticking with that hypothesis despite a great deal of evidence to the contrary. I’ve been reading a number of theories that speculate that Thutmose actually conducted the battle around Jerusalem and may have even been King Shishak who raided the Temple during Rehoboam’s reign. But this theory would screw up the Egyptian timeline and isn’t readily discussed in historical circles.

The whole point is to never truly assume that you know anything about history just based off a textbook you read in school. One must read multiple sources, the closer to the time period, the better. Histories and chronologies written after the fact are biased based on the agenda (deliberate or not) of the author. Vigilance and study are the only ways of knowing the true history of ourselves and then we must apply it forward so that we can truly learn from the mistakes of the past.

Brain Teaser

Here's a fun little teaser to wrap your brain around:

Three men are staying overnight for a conference. They check into a hotel and are told that the room is $30 a night. The men pool and give the front desk $10 each. After they check in, the guy working the front desk realizes that the hotel is running a special for the conference and the room is only $25 a night. He gives $5 to the bellhop and tells him to take it to the room with the three men. The bellhop realizes that he won’t be able to divide the $5 between three men and pockets $2. He knocks on the door and tells the men the hotel was running a discount and he gives them $1 each.

In summary, the three men paid $9 each for the room and the bellhop stole $2 for a total of $29. Where did the extra dollar go from the original $30 spent by the men?

Heute Europa, Morgen Das Weld

For your ultimate world conquering pleasure, this wonderfully nationalistic song from Cabaret. You may adapt is necessary to suit your particular needs:

The sun on the meadow is summery warm.
The stag in the forest runs free.
But gather together to greet the storm.
Tomorrow belongs to me.

The branch of the linden is leafy and green
The Rhine gives its gold to the sea.
But somewhere a glory awaits unseen.
Tomorrow belongs to me.

The babe in his cradle is closing his eyes
The blossom embraces the bee.
But soon, says a whisper:
"Arise, arise,”
Tomorrow belongs to me.

O Fatherland, Fatherland
Show us the sign
Your children have waited to see
The morning will come when the world is mine
Tomorrow belongs
Tomorrow belongs
Tomorrow belongs to me.

Probably the worst is just how annoyingly catchy this song is. I've found myself humming it at random times ever since I first heard it a few days ago. Thus, I must find an equally annoying song to get stuck in my head to drive this one out.

Checkmate

So in the fourth game I played in the last two weeks with a friend at work, I finally won a game of chess. My first three games were all lost on account of complete idiocy by me. In fact, the second game I played, I was up in material and in a good attack position when I made two or three bad moves in a row that allowed my opponent to take my advantage and advance one of his pawns unopposed to the back rank and regain his queen. But I won today so hooray me.

Concerning Lost, we finally had the promised death of one of the fourteen primary cast members in the form of Boone. But, in true TV style, it was coupled with the birth of Claire’s baby. Boone himself is no great loss as his plots were somewhat redundant and only echoed that of Locke or someone else. In other words, he was expendable and the writers showed him the door.

The remaining previews indicate that we’ll be going through another stretch of reruns (Mrs. X says that they’re supposed to be a clip show coming up) and then the grand finale where we may see a rebellion against Locke. He may be the only one who understands the island, but his lack of communication about it has rendered him a marked man in the eyes of certain tribe members. Jack is out for his blood as will Shannon (so by proxy, might Saayid).

West Wing was pretty predictable and even more boring than I thought it would be. Santos gives the big speech that gathers everyone to him while the remaining three candidates look on in stunned disbelief. Then to top it all off, Leo is picked to be Vice-President less than a year removed from a massive heart attack (smacks of Dick Cheney). Meanwhile, CJ may be heading for prison for exposing military secrets to the press.

If Vinick (Alan Alda) wins, the entire show will have to be revamped with a new cast. If Santos wins, then you get to keep Josh, Leo, Donna, and maybe even Will. Donna will either be kept on as Josh’s love interest or be hired into the staff (my pick would be press secretary). Will’s a little harder since he and Josh don’t really see eye to eye and he was Russell’s man for quite a long time. But around half the cast will be allowed to stick around.

For this reason and several others, I fully believe that Santos will win the election. Everyone keeps saying that Santos can’t win so we get a more Bartlett like feel from him. We’ve also had far more character development with Santos than we’ve had with Vinick. Of course, there’s always the writers’ natural bias of knowing how to write likable Democrat and nasty Republican. Either way, I’m very curious as to how long Wells will continue to deny that Santos is going to win, even though all the evidence points toward a Democratic victory.

End Times Hysteria

A couple of months ago, Mrs. X and I were flipping through and we caught a History's Mysteries program that had originally aired in 1999 dealing with end times prophesies. It was rather amusing just because it was so pointed towards the hysteria of the world coming to an end in 2000.

However, it did mention something of which I was unfamiliar. It was the so-called "Prophesies of St. Malachy (Malachi)." According to legend, Malachy was an Irish bishop who lived in the middle of the 12th century. He went to Rome to have a meeting with the pope and while there, fell into a deep trance. When he woke, he had a vision of more than 100 popes to come in the future. He wrote down his descriptions, which were mostly 4 word phrases, and gave the scroll to the pope. The scroll was lost for nearly 400 years when it turned up again in a search of the Vatican archives.

Much debate has been centered on the authenticity of such "prophesies" but they have been eerily applicable to each pope for the most part. With the death of John Paul II, who was referred to as De labore Solis, or Labor of the Sun we move on to the second to last pope on the list - Gloria olivae or Glory of the Olive. After this, the only one mentioned is one called Peter the Roman, who is supposed to be pope during the tribulation.

Now, this may all be a great deal of hogwash. But, I believe we will be seeing a huge surge in doomsday cultists in the next 7 years. Consider this, the average reign of a pope is around 6 or 7 years. That takes us up to 2012, the same year that several Native American tribe's calendars end at. If we get additional developments out of the Middle East that seem to spin in ways similar to the unfulfilled prophesies of Ezekiel and Isaiah, then I would definitely watch the news for stories of people sitting on hills waiting for the world to end. Of course, it didn't happen in 1994 or 2000 so I wouldn't go about planning my life around the end of the world.

Alternative History: Nixon wins in 1960

Alternative history is so interesting. Unfortunately, most of the names involved, can’t write for crap, or they’ll never explore certain little things just because they aren’t big enough.

Something that a group of us were discussing at work today is what if Richard Nixon had been elected in 1960 rather than Kennedy. Our thinking was that there would not have been any Cuban Missile Crisis. Nixon would have still tried to kill Castro, but since Khrushchev and Nixon were familiar with each other, Nixon may not have antagonized him with missiles in Turkey and Khrushchev may not have chosen to play chicken with a hard liner like Nixon. Nixon and Khrushchev may have tried to get a dialogue going much as Nixon did with Brezhnev and Mao in the 70’s. I doubt Nixon would have gotten as far as he did in the 70’s because of the mood of the country and he probably would not have opened up with China.

Civil rights would not have progressed as far. Nixon would not have pushed the south as hard as Johnson did. This may have resulted in race riots earlier in the decade as the National Guard and army may not have been mobilized to aid blacks in the south as quickly.

Regarding Vietnam, an incident would have been cooked up similar to the Gulf of Tonkin prior to 1965 that would have allowed Nixon to escalate the war beyond its state in 1960. But, unlike Johnson, I believe Nixon would have gone ahead with his full attack strategies that he had in the early 70’s. As such, there would probably have been a full assault on the north by the early sixties and the US might have been occupying Hanoi by the mid-sixties. There would still be a massive guerrilla movement against the US occupation that might have driven us out eventually. I’m not sure.

My guess is that Nixon would have been successfully reelected in 1964 but the combination of civil rights problems and flare up fighting in Vietnam would have started to erode his support in the second term. With his older brother incapacitated by his maladies and the treatments (which were almost as bad) John Kennedy would have been replaced with Bobby in Democratic politics. I think Bobby Kennedy would then have come into office as president in 1968. As to how his term would have been, I really don’t know.

I do think that in the new timeline we never would have heard of Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter outside of Michigan and Georgia respectively. Reagan would have come in the Nixon tradition, around 1972 or 1976. After Reagan we have the jostling between Bob Dole and George Bush on the Republican side and various Democratic governors and senators.

Difficult to say if the country would be any better or worse from this deviation, but it does make for interesting speculation.

Smelly Fish

From the “its so silly, its true” segment. Kofi Annan gave a speech the other day about increasing anti-terrorism measures. Sounds good, except that he apparently specifically mentioned increasing punishment for suicide bombers. Those of us outside the UN asked ourselves what Mr. Annan had in mind? Jail terms sound nice, but one blogger noted that you would have to make the bars real close together or the pieces of the bomber might be able to work their way through.

Also pinging on the UN radar, the organization admitted that it paid for the legal fees of UN Oil-for-Food program aide Benon Sevan. Mr. Sevan is one of the major players in the alleged dirty dealing concerning taking oil from Iraq and either pocketing the money or allowing Saddam Hussein to buy all sorts of goodies for himself rather than spend the money on food and medicine for the Iraqi people. Congress and an internal branch of the UN are investigating the incidents.

Also picking up a slightly rotten stench is the discussion of the supposed Republican Talking Points Memo. For those of you not familiar with this: ABC and the Washington Post ran a story on Monday, I think, where a memo from one Republican senator (alleged to be Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania) circulated to all 55 members of the GOP senate telling them that the Terry Schiavo case was political gold and would score the GOP points with pro-life voters back in their home states. The said memo was unsigned and apparently printed on simple paper with no letterhead, much as if someone had just typed it up in Word. All members of the GOP have denied both authorship and even seeing such a memo. ABC has published the text of the memo but apparently has not produced the actual memo for examination, possibly fearing Rathergate type implications.

But it’s already too late. The conservative and MSM watchdog bloggers have already pounced on the story, looking for evidence on either side as to the authenticity of the memo. Powerline linked to a couple of sites that have pointed out both several flaws in the memo with the facts of the bill, but that apparently the entire text was copied, verbatim from a post at the Traditional Values Coalition website. No Rather-type stonewalling has come from either ABC or the Washington Post yet but both organizations are currently still insisting that the document is authentic.

Stay Tuned.

The Devil Went Down to Indiana to Play Basketball

Well, it was not the best first and second round for me. Mrs. X had a much better weekend. She's currently sitting in first place in her office pool, although she needs some help from the underdog opponents to fully cement her in place (read Texas Tech or West Virginia in the Final 4).

I myself am still alive. I've lost 1 Final Four pick already (Wake Forest) but my remaining 3 are still alive as are both of my championship teams. Whether I beat Mrs. X or she beats me in our little head to head pool are pretty much dependent on two things: who goes to the Final Four from the Austin bracket (Duke or Kentucky) and who wins the Championship among our two picks (Illinois or North Carolina). If none of these things come to pass then Mrs. X will beat me on the simple merit of having had a better first and second round. But such is life.

On another note, much discussion has been raised about the Terry Schiavo incident. Whether she lives or dies does not really concern me. What does get me riled is that Congress decided to step in and make this a federal issue. That this even got to the courts is annoying, but as it did, this is a state issue. It should be kept within the bounds of the laws and regulations of the state of Florida. That my tax dollars are being used to score political points irritates the living heck out of me.

Lastly, the devil has been sighted on the back of a turtle that survived a pet shop fire. Opinions are mixed as to whether or not he is still in the area.

Happy Friday

You put the beer in the coconut and drink it all up.
You put the beer in the coconut and throw the can away.
HOMER!

Technically this song was sung on a Saturday, but its from the same episode as the title of my blog so I feel I can use it whenever I want.

March Madness is upon us. The Friday games have not started yet. Out of the first 16 games, I correctly picked 12 and lost 4. Those 4 losses include 2 sweet sixteen picks. But I have not lost anyone higher than that. For the record my elite eight picks are: Illinois vs. Oklahoma St., Louisville vs. Wake Forest, North Carolina vs. Connecticut, and Duke vs. Oklahoma.

Mrs. X is running just about parallel to me right now in points. She correctly picked UAB, but I correctly picked Pacific. We both got Cincinnati vs. Iowa wrong. I think she is one point up on me at the moment, but I'm not sure. I can't check until tonight.

My parents are rolling into town next weekend for Easter so we'll be spending most of this weekend cleaning the big things around the house. It'll be the first time they see it so we want to make a good impression. Saturday is supposed to be rainy around here so we'll be doing most it then I imagine.

Have a good weekend everyone.

Peril in the Skies

The blogosphere has been buzzing about a recent incident involving an Airbus A310 Air Transat. It seems that shortly after takeoff from Cuba on a flight to Quebec, the rudder broke off. For those of you not familiar with plane components, that’s the part of the tail that sticks up in the air. The pilot managed to stabilize the plane after dropping a ways from 35,000 feet. He radioed to Ft. Lauderdale to make a landing, but did not declare an emergency landing. Since it was not an emergency, Ft. Lauderdale told the pilot they could not allow him clearance because they did not have any customs agents there and suggested Miami. Had the pilot declared emergency, he would have been given clearance and landed. Instead, the pilot turned around and managed to fly back into Cuba.

The blogosphere is spinning this more against Airbus, especially since this almost exact thing happened in November 2001 to an American Airlines plane taking off in New York that then crashed into Queens. But something that’s not pinging on anyone’s radar yet is an incident that happened a few months ago.

Several months ago, an Air Transat plane took off from Miami in route to either Spain or France, I’m not sure. Because of air traffic, the plane was rerouted 50 miles south. Shortly after take off, one of the engines developed a leak in the fuel line. The crew, noting that the engine was choking and bleeding fuel, first tried to pump more gas into the thing. When that didn’t work, they cut the engine. However, because of their efforts to keep the first engine going, they no longer had enough fuel to make it to their final destination. The pilot then made the decision not to turn around but to keep going across the Atlantic. If the plane returned to Miami, the airline would be liable to the passengers and it might bring that down on the pilot and fire him. So he decided to risk everyone’s lives instead. As predicted, the plane ran out of gas. But, because of the plane had been forced to go 50 miles further south than their intended flight plan, they ran out of gas right around the Canary Islands. The pilot was able to glide the plane in to the runway without any injuries to anyone on board.

A heroic tale, but it shows some poor decision making by the Transat crew, just as in this recent incident. So while investigation of the Airbus A310 model is certainly warranted, Air Transat should also be examined as a potentially dangerous flier.

Nerdness Abounds

Mrs. X has the privilege of laughing herself silly at my expense over the course of the next few days. Last night was the debut of the new Episode III trailer. Now, I managed to avoid having to watch the OC but a portion of it is on the tape, but that's okay.

The nature of this trailer and the teaser trailer are very similar to that of the Episode I trailers. The teaser was all about minor aspects of Anakin while the main trailer was about the broad storyline in general. As a matter of fact, the way the Episode III trailer was done, it looked like the movie is going to focus more on Palpatine revealing himself as Darth Sidious and proclaiming himself Emperor. Anakin's transformation will be well represented as well as his quest to destroy the Jedi. But the broad scope looks very entertaining.

I've only seen the trailer once so far so I haven't gotten the full analysis. The Force.Net will probably have a detailed break down so I'll take a quick nip over there for some pleasure reading before too long.

Time to Tell You How to Vote

More disturbing whisperings on Capital Hill. George Will just put out a column detailing the new "Count Every Vote Act." The bill is sponsored by Sens. Boxer (D-CA) and Clinton (D-NY) and Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH). It has a few provisions that I take a little bit of umbridge with. Notably:

* All states will have same day vote registration and voting (similar to Wisconsin)
* The right to regulate elections would be managed by the Federal Government rather than the
individual states
* States would be required to have no-excuse absentee voting and to conform to new federal
standards regarding mandatory recounts, provisional ballots, poll workers, early voting, voter
waiting times and many other matters.
* Convicted felons currently out of prison would be allowed to vote

As someone who believes strongly in the rules of Federalism, these acts give a great deal of pause. My firmest belief is that the individual states should decide matters of public policy in how it relates to them from elections to gay marriage to gun control. What works for the people of Maine does not necessarily work for the people in Arizona.

Someone more steeped in law, like Mrs. X, would probably also be able to point out how allowing convicted felons to vote would violate the 14th amendment. I imagine this act is being pushed as a way to "ensure that every vote is counted" but it opens the door for fraud and further consolidation of government bureaucracy. I think I can effectively stand as a no vote in this matter.