Round 1

Just a few comments about yesterday's Presidential debate.

Why did McCain resort to calling Obama naive and dangerous? Just state your cause McCain. Let us make those determinations for ourselves.

McCain will never win the battle of stage presence. Obama projects his voice like an old-time orator with his eyes outward and his voice strong and steady. McCain always comes across as a bit shifty-eyed and uncomfortable.

Democrats like to argue that Obama comes across as "more Presidential" and I can't argue with that.

However, when it come to content...

It appeared that Obama resorted to simply agree with John McCain several times. Nothing really wrong with that but it also seemed that this tactic just confirmed McCain's superior experience.

Obama, like most Democrats, relies on the ignorance of his audience. He is always stating what he thinks people want to hear.

Listen to his message.

• He stated that Al Queda operates in 60 countries now and we need to devote our attention away from Iraq and focus on these other areas.
• He is going to drastically increase funding for the development of alternative energy.
• He is going to promote American good-will around the globe (with the possible exception of a certain 60 countries).
• He'll get us all free health-care.

The punchline is - he is going to accomplish the above and still lower the taxes of 95% of us. I have a bridge for sale to anyone who is buying this load.

Still, by a small margin. Obama edges McCain in debate number 1.

New Blog

In my continued devotion to the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, I have created a blog for it that includes all my articles from http://www.2001aspaceodyssey.org/. It's posted in my links section.

2001: The Blog

I've been focusing more attention there than here. 2001 averages 50 hits a day. Pure Drivel averages 1.

Pure Drivel - Year 4

Tomorrow begins my 4th year with this blog. Honestly, I don't think I would have thought 3 years ago that I would still be doing this. Nevertheless, I trudge on and have no intentions of stopping now. I always have lots of ideas in my head but I've always had trouble putting my ideas into coherent sentences. My post list is littered with entries that I started, never finished, and just left unposted. They will remain unposted.

My blog statistics indicate a shift in 2008. My blog received a lot of attention earlier this year because of my experience in the Ride and Drive event. I guess a lot of people were curious about what people thought of comparisons between Ford, Honda, and Toyota sedans. That entry was in early 2007 but it was early 2008 when a lot of people Googled and found it. My What is an American Car? article got a lot of attention from web searchers even though that was written in 2006.

I'll probably spend most of the next two months expressing my opinions concerning the election. I may have a thing or two to say about baseball, energy, the economy, or the auto industry. What comes after that may be related to who gets elected.

New Rules on Feminism

Palin: Wrong Woman Wrong Message

Gloria Steinem, the founder of the modern feminist movement has a few things to say about Vice-President nominee Sarah Palin.

" even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president"

"Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters"

In Ms Steinem's editorial, from an after-convention discussion of reporters on CNN, and from Al Sharpton, I learned a few new rules on feminism I wasn't aware of:

A woman who runs for President or Vice President must be viewed as heroic, ground-breaking, and tough to break into the males only club. As long as she is a Democrat.

If a Republican woman runs for Vice President, she must be endlessly scrutinized. Surely she must be involved in some scandal. Other women should question her poor choice of being a Republican. A Republican woman's place is in the home so she can take care of the kids.

Men and women, who have no foreign policy experience can run for President and be considered bold, fresh, and ready to "change" the status quo and our perceptions on foreign relations. As long as they are Democrats.

A Republican woman with no foreign policy experience can't seriously run for Vice President because she obviously is strictly being used to attract the female voters. She, in fact, should be condemned.

A female politician making a speech and talking tough about standing up to fight for what she believes in is lauded for having strength of character as long as she is a Democrat.

A female Republican politician making a speech and talking tough about standing up to fight for what she believes in is accused of secretly being a man.

It is completely understood that all politicians have their speeches written for them by a professional speech writer. Exception: Republican women must write their own speeches. Otherwise, they are just a mouthpiece for a man.

I guess I'm anti-feminist after all.

Eriks Simple World

Big Difference

Alright Erik, you asked for it. You called me out in your blog so I will return the favor.

In the simple world of Erik:

• All Conservatives are racists.
  


• All Republicans are psychopaths.
  


• If you are against Martin Luther King Day being a national holiday, you are a racist.
  


• Republicans are responsible for killing the planet and if you don't think so, you are stupid and don't believe in science.
  


• Any reference to an article or a link that has something to do with Erik's point of view establishes Erik's argument as "fact" and "proof" that he is right.
  


• Any article that Erik does not agree with is published by a right-wing nut member of a biased conservative media.
  


• All Conservatives and Republicans are in lock step with each other so that the actions or statements by one apply to all.
  

In his black and white, simple views of the world, he attacks my character and wonders why I don't post comments on his blog as often as I used to. Unlike Erik, I see the world as complex. Every issue has many variables and I simply won't break them down to an A vs B point of view. When I do respond to his point A comment, he shoves me over to the full point B because he can't handle the idea that an issue may have more than two sides. If I don't agree with him, I'm a "Bush worshipper" or something like that.

Let's look at some examples:

McCain Security Ousts Reporter

This was a slam-dunk for Erik. Since an ousted reporter happened to be black, that was the reason he was kicked out. Plain and simple since it perfectly fits in with Erik's view that all conservatives are openly racist. McCain must be really stupid too, to commit such an obvious racist act.

O'Reilly to San Francisco

Erik says that a man who killed the Arkansas head of the Democratic Party did so because people like Bill O'Reilly said it's okay. We conservatives all think alike. I wonder who I should kill today? Ann Coulter said I can.

On a similar note, here's another gem from Erik:

"This sick individual who shot and killed two people and wounded others in Tennessee is pathetic but he is in the same mindset as a lot of conservatives"

Yes Erik, there is a big difference between us and it has nothing to do with our politics. I'm not questioning your intelligence but I do accuse you of being mentally lazy. Issues and problems should not be broken down as simply as you want them to.

McCain's Courage

I just found a reason to like John McCain.

Barack Obama continues his strategy of saying the things his particular audience wants to hear. John McCain went to Michigan and told the people he's not going to bailout the auto makers. McCain dismissed calls to help Detroit make the cars they should have been making in the first place, or should be able to make now on their own damn dime given all the profits they banked during the SUV and pickup boom.
McCain, in doing this, pretty much blew off his chance of winning Michigan. At least he was courageous enough to make a stand. Good for you McCain!

John McCain: No Federal Loan Guarantees for Detroit

Bailouts are not the Answer

In the late 1970's, Chrysler Corporation was in trouble. They failed to adapt to higher gas prices and newer anti-pollution standards. Chrysler Chairman Lee Iacocca went to Washington and managed to convince Congress that they could turn things around if the Government would give them a low interest loan. It took some time but Iacocca made good on his promise. Chrysler developed a new kind of vehicle called a minivan and the rest is history, Chrysler was the leading minivan company for nearly two decades. This and an overall improvement in their entire product line allowed Chrysler to pay back the loan - something most people (myself included) doubted they would be able to do. Chrysler, during the 1990's, had a bright future by being smart and creative.

These are not those times.

General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler are all in serious trouble. They are losing billions of dollars each quarter. As in the 1970's, they didn't have the foresight concerning their slant towards large vehicles - large cars in the '70's and trucks and SUV's now, would come to an end. GMC Yukons, Chevy Silverados, Ford Expeditions, and Dodge Rams and the like were big moneymakers for these companies. So much that even Nissan, Honda, and Toyota began building behemoth vehicles to grab a share of the pot of gold. They are suffering for this action too, now. Not as much though since these companies have their Prius', Civics, Sentras, and such to fall back on.

What do the so-called domestic companies have?

Chevrolet has never had a highly rated small car. Chevettes, Cavaliers, Aveos, and Cobalts are typically at the bottom of most lists. They weren't any better in mid-size either until the current Malibu came out. Dodge had a decent small car in the Neon. They had good compact cars in the Stratus and Cirrus in the mid 1990's. However, Chrysler, under the control of Daimler at the time, utterly failed to update these vehicles and they eventually diminished. Only Ford isn't completely hopeless. They have had a competitive fuel-efficient vehicle in the Focus. The Fusion and Escape Hybrid indicate that they have a clue, but it hasn't been enough.

"The big 2.8" (Daimler still owns 20% of Chrysler) are losing billions of dollars and want the federal government to get them back on their feet. Translation; They want us taxpayers to fork over the bill for their inadequacies meaning we're supposed to pay the price for not buying Fords, Buicks, and Dodges. They argue, of course, that if they go under, thousands of jobs will be lost, not just by their own employees, but in all the dealerships, mechanics, and smaller companies that contribute to the makeup of their vehicles.

It's time to cut the cord and force these companies to fend for themselves, despite the consequences. If they work smartly, these companies have a good chance to survive and grab back what they had lost. Otherwise, they will fail because they deserve it. I believe Charles Darwin's theory of "Natural Selection" applies here. If the government bails them out, why should these companies change their ways when they know they have the taxpayers as a safety net?

Unfortunately, both Presidential candidates are trying to get votes from Michigan by promising aid to the auto companies. They are both wrong and this is really very un-American. America is the land of opportunity, remember? That means one company's failures are another company's opportunities. Maybe it's time for some other company that's is driven and is better able to plan to fill the void. If the 2.8 fail, that's a lot of talented people out of work. Opportunity knocks.

I feel the same way about the bailouts for Fannie May and Freddy Mac. Let these companies die if they made such bad mistakes.

That also applies to people who made bad choices concerning their mortgages. Let them foreclose. Let the housing market stabilize because of free-market balance, not because of artificial, tax-payer paid bailouts.

This is all about responsibility. If we don't exercise it, future generations will pay.

So, Why All The Misery?

Okay, so gasoline is pushing $5 a gallon. Prices seem to be leveling off for now but there's no indication that they'll go down any time soon. Let's look at how this is affecting us.

We are driving less.
We consolidate our shopping - no more going to the supermarket to get a loaf of bread. Also, more of us use carpools, take buses, ride on rails, or even simply decide we had no reason to drive in the first place.

We are dumping our over sized vehicles
Suddenly, small, fuel efficient vehicles are in vogue again. Monster pickup trucks, candied-up SUV's, and V8 sports sedans have suddenly lost their allure. For those who want or need a pickup truck or SUV, these are good times too since dealerships are overstocked and are offering tremendous deals (I've seen 1/3 off of sticker on some).

We are polluting the air less
All these smaller vehicles and less driving add up to less air pollution. For those who consider carbon dioxide as a pollutant, we're even spewing less of that.

We are looking at alternative fuels
Natural gas, bio fuels, hydrogen, and pure electrically powered vehicles are being developed. Everything is still in a pre-larval stage but we have reached that point where the "gas is cheap" argument has finally gone away.

So I ask the question. Isn't this what we wanted? Isn't this all good? Shouldn't we be dancing in the streets since we are finally getting what we've been demanding for 40 years?

So, why all the misery?

Our Ever Expanding Government

So let me get this straight regarding the recent Supreme Court Ruling.

Person A is a citizen of Pakafgahnistovania. He is hard working, law-abiding, and pays his taxes.

Person B is also a citizen of Pakafgahnistovania. He is a slimeball malcontent. He decides that the fault for his discontentment lies in the policies of the United States. Person B goes out to attempt to kill Americans to satisfy his twisted need for his version of justice.

The U.S. Constitution protects and gives rights and privileges to Person B. Person A is at the mercy of his home country.

Concerning Fuel Prices and Recessions

Michelle and I took a short but beautiful vacation last month. We drove up the state to Yosemite and Healdsburg in Sonoma County. In between waterfall gazing and wine tasting, we were in the car. The trip put over 1,200 miles on my car which means, we consumed approximately 55 gallons of gasoline. At a then average of $4.10 per gallon, the trip cost us approximately $225 in fuel alone.

Now I'm telling this because as we all know, the recent sharp increases in the price of gasoline affect us all. Nobody is happy about it. The economic impact it has on us is real and we are reminded of it every time we go by a gas station. We cringe as we sneak a peak at how high the price has gone up since we last looked. We look down at the fuel gauge and hope that the needle is still on the F half.

Then we hear about house foreclosures, food shortages, and massive layoffs in the auto industry. Indeed, the economic news has been virtually 100% negative in the past few months. It's no surprise then, that polls show that most Americans believe we are in a recession.

But here's the rub; A recession is explicitly defined as two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth. Well, as it turns out, the GDP (that's gross domestic product) of 4'th quarter 2007 and 1'st quarter 2008 were positive, that's right, positive. Yes, they were the lowest in six years but when you think about recession, you have to realize it's about negative economic growth for two consecutive quarters. We don't have negative growth for even one!

Why is the news so negative?

Well, it just happens to be an election year. Our friends of the main stream media are up to their usual tricks. They repeatedly pound in our heads that the economy is sagging. On top of that, they tell us that the Presidential election is focused on the economy. No wonder since that's all that seems to be reported now a days.

When was the last recession?

Look it up and you'll find the last recession (or two consecutive quarters of negative GDP) was in 2000 to mid-2001 during the Clinton administration and the beginning of the Bush administration. Remember all the negative news about the economy then? No, I don't either.

Now It's Tainted

Yesterday, the NBA officially stated the obvious. That is that Fischer fouled Barry at the very end of game 4 and Barry deserved the chance to tie the game with two free throws. Thanks refs for tainting the whole Laker drive to a championship! If the Lakers win the series, I could never look a Spur fan in the eyes and say "we beat you".

Now I know what it would have been like to have been a Patriot fan in early 2002.

A Small World for Small Minds

At both Disneyland and Disney World, the timeless attaction It's a Small World will be updated. The boats are going to be changed to be more comfortable. That's good. The attactions will be re-painted as the vivid colors of the ride have faded somewhat. That's good. General repairs will be done as machinery that moves various parts of the ride has worn down or stopped working. That's good. Various parts of the attractions will now be themed to fit with recent Disney movies.

What?

For those of us who have visited Disney parks many times, It's a Small World has always been the charming, somewhat hokey, but classic ride that carried a simple, yet beautiful message of world-wide harmony. It featured all the children of the world in their national costumes and decorum singing together. This ride has been adored for decades by generations, young and old.

Why Change it?

Is putting an animitronic Alladdin in the Arabian section, or Mulan in China, going to attact more riders? No, but Disney thinks it might sell more dolls (action figures for the boys) and DVD's. I could go on about what I think about the lack of integrity this whole idea represents, but I, instead, will provide a link to what professional animators say about this compromise of vision.

The World of Animation Speaks

Think about it

I was sent this email recently.

Where will we all be working in the next ten years? How about 20 years?

John Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN) for 6 am. While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG).

He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE), and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA).

After cooking his breakfast with his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA), he sat down with his calculator (MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA), he got into his car (MADE IN GERMANY), filled it with gas (from Saudi Arabia) and continued his search for a good paying job.

At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day - checking his computer (MADE IN TAIWAN), John decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL), poured himself a beer (MADE IN HOLLAND) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA).

And then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in AMERICA!

To any of you who are going out to protest your employer today for treating you unfairly or because you don't believe in Corporate America, remember that once upon a time, the U.S. had steel workers, welders, automobile assemblers, clothing manufacturers.

Look at the clothes in your closet. Did you think about who put them together? Did you think about the Americans you put out of work when you bought the cheaper toaster? As for that Toyota in your garage, do you ever think about all the unemployed auto workers in Detroit?

Obviously, you didn't. So why are you protesting now that your own job is in danger?

I am reminded of a poem.

First they came for the Communists
and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn't a Catholic.

Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.

Bush Gets it. Do You?

Movie Quotes Part 1

(Answers are now provided)

Some quotes from some favorite movies of mine. Do you know them? Most of the ones here are pretty easy especially if you know the movies I like. (No cheating allowed. i.e. don't go to http://www.imdb.com/)

1. "I have vision while the rest of the world wears bifocals." Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

2. "I am in a world of shit." Full Metal Jacket

3. "Not an easy thing to meet your maker." Blade Runner

4. "Call the FBI, the CIA and the Pentagon. Find out who won that game!" The Pink Panther Strikes Again

5. "[Tequila], it's like beer." Three Amigos

6. "Even in the future, nothing works." Spaceballs

7. "Its origin and purpose, still a total mystery." 2001: A Space Odyssey

8. "I refuse to kill another human being in cold blood. However, in deference to your cultural traditions, I would be willing to have sex with him." Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death

9. "I know. It's all wrong. By rights we shouldn't even be here." The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

10. "Marines! We are leaving!" Aliens

Three Responses

From the Los Angeles Times April 9, 2008



"When you have finite resources, you've got to define your goal rightly and modestly." - Barack Obama



"The U.S. must reject, as we did in 2007, the calls for a reckless and irresponsible withdrawal of our forces at the moment we are succeeding." - John McCain



"It's time to begin in orderly process of withdrawing our troops and rebuilding our military and focusing on other problems." - Hillary Clinton


The three quotes above are from our three main Presidential candidates' responses to the report by General David Petraeus concerning the Iraq situation.

I see two responses that are carefully worded. I see two responses that indicate the tone of fear and surrender. There are two candidates willing to leave a nation to the wolves (Iran) in order to serve their own self-interests. These two responses are representative of candidates who will say what they believe is what the majority of people want to hear.

The other response outlines a more difficult path, one that sticks to the principles of our nation even if it goes against the grain. This is leadership.

A Man With Vision

One by one he would conjure up the world's major electronic papers, he knew the codes of the more important ones by heart, and had no need to consult the list on the back of his pad. Switching in the display unit's short term memory, he would hold the front page while he quickly searched the headlines and noted the items that interested him.

...yet in a few milliseconds he could see the headlines of any newspaper he pleased. (That very word "newspaper," of course, was an anachronistic hangover into the age of electronics.) The text was updated automatically on every hour; even if one read only the English versions, one could spend an entire lifetime doing nothing but absorbing the ever-changing flow of information from the news satellites.
excerpt from 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

Arthur Charles Clarke died last week. It was only December when I acknowledged his 90th birthday. As I blog on my personal computer, I realize that activities like this were envisioned 40 years ago. Note the quote above, it reads like someone using his iPhone and accessing cnn.com or something similar.

If there was ever a person I wanted to meet, it was Arthur Clarke. Of course if I had ever met him, I'm sure I would have been a bumbling fool without any idea of what to say to him so maybe, it's best that I didn't. Years ago, in reading his autobiographical book, The View from Serendip, I felt I had met a kindred spirit. He said things and did things that I imagined I wanted to do and say.

He was certainly the right man for his time. He grew up at the dawn of the modern technological age. Airplanes and automobiles were just entering the scene. Computers and spaceflight were in the minds of dreamers. Imagine how different the world was between 1917 and now. Never before in human history did an entire generation witness such change.

A Pioneer
Clarke served in the second world war. Apparently the RAF recognized Clarke's extraordinary intellect and he was assigned to help develop a budding technology called radar and use it to aid aircraft in landing in poor conditions. Clarke became one of the first air traffic controllers. His novel Glide Path is about this work.

After World War II, Clarke turned his interest back to an earlier love; outer space. In 1945, he published a small paper on how a satellite placed at an altitude of approximately 22,000 miles would remain stationary with respect to the Earth below. Arranging a ring of such satellites would allow instantaneous global communication by sending a signal to one satellite and having it relay around the globe to its desired destination. 17 years later, this speculation became reality with the U.S. launch of Telstar.

Most of Clarke's speculations and extrapolations would come from his short stories and novels. In addition to the Internet-like technology I mention above, his works speculate such ideas as:

Atomic Engines - spaceships powered by controlled nuclear explosions (2001: A Space Odyssey)
Mass Drivers - using the inherent energy in matter/plasma to propel spaceships (2010: Odyssey Two)
Space Elevators - An efficient means of getting payloads into space (The Fountains of Paradise)

I should note that none of Clarke's short stories or novels, with the exception of 2001: A Space Odyssey, used the convenient science fiction ploy of "hyperspace". Clarke strongly believed in stories that were based on science and true speculative science, not fantastical science that breaks laws of the universe.

An Explorer
While Clarke never made it into outer space, he was able to do the next best thing. He became an avid scuba diver in the 1950's. He and his then partner Mike Wilson (no relation) explored the Great Barrier Reef off of Australia as well as other places, primarily in the Indian Ocean. It was here where Clarke came upon the island of Ceylon (formerly Serendip and now Sri Lanka). Clarke lived the rest of his life on that island just south of India. It provided him with a great base in which to conduct his scuba diving expeditions. Clarke wrote some works concerning scuba diving (The Deep Range for one), but still concentrated the bulk of his writing on space.

A Screenwriter
Producer/Director/Screenwriter Stanley Kubrick decided to create a film concerning outer space. Someone told him to look up Arthur Clarke to which Kubrick only knew of as a "hermit who lives in India". Kubrick met Clarke while Clarke was visiting his homeland of England. They apparently took a quick liking to each other. For most of the year 1964, Clarke and Kubrick shuttered themselves in the Chelsea Hotel in New York to work on Journey Beyond the Stars. When they departed, a large part of the screenplay and novel for 2001: A Space Odyssey had been written. Kubrick would go on to tweak the screenplay further while Clarke added some polish to the novel so each got credit for one specific work.

In watching 2001 and reading the novel, it is fairly obvious where Kubrick went with it. The film's prominent mysticism is not in the novel. Yet the film obviously has Clarke's influence. Clarke, even then, was well known for his scientifically-grounded fiction. 2001 is to this day, is the most scientifically accurate space film ever made.

A Philosophizing Atheist
Clarke was always, paradoxically, the atheist who often wrote about God. He discarded any and all religious beliefs at an early age and strongly believed that science was ultimately the answer to everything. God, religion, and religious themes permeate his entire opus, however. My favorite short story of his is The Star. It's about a Jesuit priest who is losing his faith due to the discovery that an entire intelligent race had been wiped out by a supernova. The priest is on the edge of despair when he suddenly realizes that this killer supernova had served as the star of Bethlehem. I often think about this story, its incredibly irony, and what I'd think if this really had happened this way.

Childhood's End is my favorite novel. It is about a supreme entity, The Overmind, and the cast out creatures complete with horns and barbed tails who visit Earth to bring about the end of the human race. These creatures, known as The Overlords even inform the human race that they are not destined and not permitted to explore the universe. It is literally a story that portrays the opposite of Clarke's philosophy. Those who think that obviously didn't read the fine print. At the front of the novel, there is a disclaimer saying "The opinions expressed in this book are not those of the author."

An Aged Cynic
I remember interviews of Clarke where he believed he would walk on the Moon within his lifetime and possibly even go to Mars. In reflecting on those thoughts later, he lamented that humans were too fond of warfare and their own self-interests. It is really sad that on his 90th birthday this past December, his dreams were a bit more mundane. He wished for evidence of extraterrestrial life, for an end to the use of oil as fuel, and peace in perpetually war-torn Sri Lanka. At least he was fairly upbeat as it were. I remember recent interviews he gave where he came off as bitter and frustrated with humanity.

Clarke certainly got frustrated with the world's religions. It showed in all his recent writings, including his many collaborative efforts. Note that Clarke in his later years, suffered from Post-Polio Syndrome and couldn't move about very well. He wasn't able to do much writing himself so all his recent works were in collaboration with other authors. Clarke became convinced that religion is the cause of much, if not most of the evil in humanity. Personally, I disagree with him here as I think that religion is just used as a shield to justify an evil that is already in the heart of the evildoers, but I digress. Clarke went as far to say that he didn't want any iota of religion at his funeral.

For a man who was right on so many things, I hope he was wrong about there not being an afterlife. I'd hate to think he was really gone.

I'll re-post the link to his 90th birthday speech here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLXQ7rNgWwg

The Worst in Methodologies

11 Worst Cars - Consumer Reports

This is a little strange but somebody at CNN decided to research the 11 lowest scoring cars at Consumer Reports and write them up as the "11 Worst Cars".

Anybody who has read auto evaluations from Consumer Reports should know that they have a narrow view of what a car ought to be. Consumer Reports loves mid-sized sedans that have proven themselves reliable, affordable, and get good fuel mileage. If you have a family of 4 or 5 and drive them around on family picnics in addition to driving to work, then, by all means, take Consumer Reports to heart. Obviously, many do.

Consumer Reports, for the most part, hates sports cars, SUV's, and trucks. They like luxury sedans but often wonder why anybody should buy one when a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord can do the job. Speaking of the Camry and Accord, Consumer Reports for years has considered them the benchmarks, not just against other mid-size family vehicles, but everything else as well.

Knowing this, it's clear as to why the following vehicles fared as the worst.

Jeep Wrangler Unlimited: Never mind that this is a revered vehicle amongst off-road enthusiasts. Never mind that it goes places that others cannot. In fact, the article states "Consumer Reports performs off-road testing at its Connecticut proving grounds, but off-road ability doesn't factor into the final scores." Keep this in mind.

Hummer H3: Another off-road vehicle that, like the Jeep, is unique. Like the Jeep, it's not for cruising across the country on the Interstate. It's a special-purpose vehicle and certainly won't be mistaken for an Accord or Camry.

Jeep Liberty Sport: Now I'm biased here because I own a Liberty Limited (an upscale version of the Sport). Liberty's can out-tow any other small to mid-size SUV. That's valuable to some folk. Obviously not Consumer Reports, though. I wonder how well an Accord climbs over boulders.

Chevrolet Aveo5: The article doesn't bother to point out what's so bad about this car. I can only assume that it's not worth considering because its so much smaller than a Camry. It certainly costs less and gets better fuel mileage so what's the problem?

Dodge Nitro: It's actually hard to argue against this one but I have to laugh where it states the Nitro has no high points. In R/T form, it's quite powerful. Can't they at least point out its one of the fastest SUV's out there?

Toyota FJ Cruiser: Back to the off-road crowd. See Jeep and Hummer.

Toyota Yaris: Obviously, like the Aveo5, it's too small.

Suzuki Forenza: A valid entry here. It's a family sedan that doesn't come close to the Accord or Camry.

Jeep Patriot: Obviously Consumer Reports hates Jeeps. If the Patriot is so bad, why isn't the Dodge Caliber on the list? The Caliber is basically the same vehicle but it's not meant to go off-road. Apparently since Camrys and Accords don't go off-road, nothing should.

Chevrolet Trailblazer: Another valid entry here just because its on an aging platform.

Mercury Grand Marquis: This is a beloved, although aged platform. They are relatively cheap, powerful, comfortable, and are easy to find parts for and can run almost forever. All Consumer Reports likes is the large trunk.

With my disdain for Consumer Reports, I'm not really faulting them here. As I mentioned above, they have their particular criteria for judging the value of an automobile and anything that falls short of that criteria, regardless of what other strong points it has will fall short in their eyes.

I fault CNN for taking a quick and easy route of just taking results from another source and creating a headline stating their own conclusion based on those results. Shame on you CNN.

The Obama Email

Yesterday, I received the following email from a colleague.

I think this is something we all should read!!!

Look this up on Snopes if you doubt it.

Who is Barack Obama? Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice.

If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about it and share it.

We checked this out on "snopes.com". It is factual. Check for yourself. probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHEIST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii.

When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school.

Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school."

Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that he is not a radical.

Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.

Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta.

Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran.

Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegiance nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.

Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.

The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!!

While this makes interesting reading. I can't endorse such a tactic to sway my vote. First of all, the statements about Obama disrespecting the flag are suspect. Yes, I've seen the photos out there but I am not so quick to jump to a conclusion.

What I really object to, though, is the dangerous notion that one can make determinations about someone because of the beliefs or actions of a family member. In other words, if a certain individual is a terrible person, therefore his son or daughter must be a terrible person as well. It is wrong to judge Obama by the actions of his parents just as it would be wrong to judge anybody by anything other than an individual's own actions and words.

I am not going to vote for Obama but that is because I don't agree with his politics, not because I disapprove of his parents.

Blu-Ray Wins

Toshiba quits HD-DVD business

Like many, I have yet to invest a single penny into anything regarding high definition television. The biggest reason of course is due to financial limitations. Another reason, though, was that no distributable media format had established itself. That obstacle appears to have been hurdled.

I posted an article, The DVD Situation over two years ago mentioning the format battle primarily between Toshiba and Sony with their respective HD-DVD and Blu-Ray DVD formats. HD-DVD had the initial support but over the past year, it seems that Blu-Ray was taken over. That now appears confirmed. Too bad for those who invested in HD-DVD players and disks. You should have known you were taking a risk (just like those who invested in BetaMax 25 years ago.) Of course, your equipment still works and I'm sure HD-DVD disks will still be produced for a while. It does appear that Blu-Ray has the brighter and longer future, though. This will dismay some as there are those of you out there who don't like certain business practices of Sony. One of these business practices was incorporating rootkits - a form of spyware into its media.

With all this said, we have to also realize that things will never be as stable as they once were. Our standard-definition TV's are based on a standard developed in the 1940's. Yet, high definition television standards that were set less than 10 years ago are already being set up to be replaced. In the past, people often held on to their TV's for many years, decades even. Not any more. The industry apparently wants everybody to buy a new TV every 8 years or so. Think about it. To stay reasonably up to date, we need to purchase new computers every 3 years so this is nothing new.

What's more is that people (myself included) still have piles of VHS tapes that we never bothered to convert to or replace with DVD. Now the original (1996) DVD standard is dying, our tapes are going to be two generations of formats behind.

Just like in Men in Black where Tommy Lee Jones laments that a new music format will force him to buy the White Album again, I wonder how many times I am going to feel the need to re-buy 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Blade Runner, etc.