Raul Castro, Fidel’s heir to the leadership of Cuba’s Revolutionary Movement has stated that

“Socialism means social justice and equality, but equality of rights, of opportunities, not of income,” Raúl said on July 11 while addressing Cuba’s rubber-stamp parliament in its first session since he replaced Fidel. “Equality is not egalitarianism.”

Sounds as if Raul is more open-minded and, perhaps, able to visualize how to move Cuba to a system that provides equality without guaranteeing similar income to all citizens. Of course, Raul could open up capitalism and give “bonuses,” say in percentages of the income created, to those who create income-producing companies. That 75%, for example, kept by the government could be allocated to other citizens and to the Cuban government(at a fair split, of course…).

William LeoGrande, an expert on the Cuban government stated

“Cuba is never going to go as far as the Chinese have in dismantling the social safety net,” says William LeoGrande, a Cuba expert at American University in Washington. But he says that Raúl has already exhibited an expediency that Fidel never dared: acknowledging under-the-table wages, raising salaries and enticing productivity with payment, and, most important, he says, introducing market incentives in the farming sector that could be the starting gun for reforms in other sectors.

“To some extent, they are experimenting to see how additional market mechanisms work out economically and to see the political ramifications,” he says. “I think there are a lot more changes coming.”

I disagree

I think Raul is going to go further than the Chinese. Why? I think the Cuban people are less restricted by the historical events and customs that the Chinese. Of course, I am not an expert…

Cubans will see improements across the board, and I think Raul is already moving ahead–both for the world and for the Cuban people. You see, while the Chinese leaders are wealthy, they would not say what Raul has said

“Socialism means social justice and equality, but equality of rights, of opportunities, not of income. Equality is not egalitarianism.”

I mean, where is the social justice and the equality of rights and opportunities in China?

If Raul works this right, Cuba could be the “Hong Kong” of the Carribbean…

Yahoo is finally releasing the Zimbra client to the world via Zimbra Desktop–currently in Release Candidate 3. This RC3 classification means things are still being worked out, but I like what I see.

I set the program up with my Yahoo account (free version) and my Gmail account (free), and I find that all works well.

However, I find that Yahoo’s customers who pay for service on their SmallBusiness service/division, are unable to use Zimbra Desktop.

You see, Zimbra Desktop tells me that any Yahoo mail address must use the IMAP option within Zimbra Desktop. However, Yahoo Small Business customers have to rely on POP settings, and I am not sure why…

Does anyone have an answer for why Yahoo does not give paying customers IMAP service and is excluding paying customers from enjoying Zimbra Desktop?

I do think a fix will be coming shortly, but I just don’t get it. I understand Yahoo has to provide for the free e-mail service since it is a large number of users (think page views and ad clicks). However, paying customers might provide the same page views and ad clicks yet still pay Yahoo something every month. I feel like I am helping the barrel I am being bent over…

What say you?

I am looking at Digital Cameras of the SLR variety. I am looking at Canons (450D or XSi and the 40D), Nikon (D80), and others, but mainly the Canon and Nikons listed.

I am looking for e-mails from you re: which digital cameras you use/like.

Let me know…

I note that AT&T has at least two price structures up for DSL pricing.

The first is what I am currently paying:

Now see the AT&T pricing:

So, what is up with that? The AT&T version even has 768kbps upstream speeds–faster than that offered by “Bellsouth.”

I am calling to find out…

fusk, a user at engadget stated

Damn, now i’m Danish, and my goverment wants to be the leading country in this kinda technology, but this is just crazy, like to see our isp’s put up a fight vs 40Gbps.
Now my 20Mbit suddenly seems so slow.

Wondering about the cost, i pay 399Dkr = 73.9$ for a 20Mbit, so what would a 40Gbps be like?

Imagine that. Here in the United States of America,AT&T’s new lower DSL rates (I seem to find 2 pricing structures…perhaps a new post? Stay tuned…) are

$35.00 for Up to 6.0 Mbps Downstream and 768 kbps Upstream Speeds. Paying $75.00 for 20Mbits/20Mbits would be sweet! So, AT&T…up your offers?

What say you?

I was looking at flickr picture the other day, and someone pointed me to a picture of a person selling dog meat. The photographer noted

Western culture considers that eating a dog is cruel, barbaric and disgusting (not illegal, though), but ironically we have no problem eating all other sorts of animals, as long as they are not called pets.

But for the vast majority of people on earth, cultural values are very different. Dog meat is considered a delicacy in some asian cultures, and indeed cooked dog meat is very tasty and protein rich. You should try it some day! (if you are not vegetarian)

“Food dogs” are not pets and they have no names. They are bred and raised in farms, just like pigs, cows, lambs, chickens and other farm animals. They are put down “humanely” just like any other farm animal, usually by slitting the throat and beeding the animal until it passes out.

A commenter noted

I have always been disturbed by how humans easily and, oh, of course, “humanely” kill farm animals, which nowadays are just looked upon as “food”, not an animal, but I have to say that I am even more shocked to know that dogs (and cats) are involved…

Humans are the real animals here… And I don’t want to hear about “it’s because they’re poor”, they are poor in spirit and fall short of any compassion. Nature gives us more than enough for us to feed ourselves, but it truly takes a real Man to realize this and to accept that every living animal deserves respect from him.

What sort of sick comfort is in eating on the dead meat of another animal??!!

This poor woman does not bring me a bit of compassion… Might as well be a cannibal.

I get a lot of comfort eating a steak. However I, unlike you, I think it is fine that you do not enjoy what I do not or that you do not want to enjoy what I enjoy. Why can’t you give me the same respect? Oh, right, “You are right…” Go see my many other posts on “right” and “wrong” before you say you are “right.” Here is a link to one of those. There is even one from 29 August 2005 (scroll down until you see the date…)! Please go read it…

According to Wikipedia

Anthropomorphism is the attribution of uniquely human characteristics to non-human creatures and beings, natural and supernatural phenomena, material states and objects or abstract concepts. Subjects for anthropomorphism commonly include animals depicted as creatures with human motivation able to reason and converse, forces of nature such as winds or the sun, components in games, unseen or unknown sources of chance, etc. Almost anything can be subject to anthropomorphism.

Humans are animals, just as dogs, cats, lions, tigers, and bears. “Oh My!”

To think we are something “better” is what is delusional.

We are no better than the dog, the cat, or the lions, tigers, or bears. “Oh My!”

You have been influenced, greatly, by anthropomorphism. Most people are. However, to say that WE, humans, are not animals is wrong–on so many levels. Humans are animals–it is a scientific fact.

I can see that most people do not think that plants feel pain–Vegans say that causing another animal death or pain is bad. Since Vegans eat plants (in effect killing the plant), I am guessing it is the “causing pain” that is their real problem. However, does anyone think plants don’t feel pain? Or is it that you can’t imagine plants having pain because we don’t see a nervous system or any method of “feeling pain?” Perhaps you did not grow up holding a plant asparagus as a child in bed when you went to sleep. Likely you held a deer, a dog, or, “Oh My!,” a bear.

However, I think the commenter, and Vegans, should use your brain prior to making comments like you have already made–unless, of course, the lack of meat has influenced your ability to think. In that post (linked above), I noted

This is based on science, observation, and testing… Read on.

1. Do trees communicate for mutual defense
2. Plants Can Recognize, Communicate With Relatives, Studies Find
3. Plants can’t speak, but they do communicate

I hope you see the idea I am trying to convey. If vegans argue that killing animals is wrong because they feel, etc., how to vegans explain their desire to eat plants?

Plants have been shown to “communicate” or react to stresses. Perhaps Vegans consider that a response and not communication or pain. Either way, there is a reaction to stress–and pain is a stress.

I noted, previously, that a Swiss group has stated, about plants, that

killing them arbitrarily was morally wrong…

But, the same group has stated

all action that involves plants in the aim to conserve the human species is morally justified.

I guess they have to eat. Since killing animals is wrong (in their opinion) and killing plants “arbitrarily” is wrong, the only way to survive is to eat plants that are killed intentionally… Yes, that confuses me too… I am guessing they are saying that if you have a reason to kill the plant, killing a plant is acceptable. Seems to me if killing a plant for food is acceptable, then killing an animal for food should be acceptable too…

Either way, the Vegan is “outraged” that anyone could be so “wrong.”

As one of the educated stated in another post on psycologyhelp.com

My question for those so outraged is, “Do you like the feeling of outrage?”. “Of course not,” might be a typical response. Then why not explore the possibility of changing your response? “That’s outrageous!”, I hear you respond, outraged at a new target, this author. For the moment, I ask that you please just accept that outrage is an unhappy feeling.

Emotionally healthy adults, with respect to anger, are comfortable with anger and hatred, their own and others.

Outrage at particular people or groups always stems from a thought pattern of “they should not be ….”. (And in almost all cases those “villainous” people or groups being judged think they are doing the right thing!) Outrage is a judging pattern that fails to accept reality as it is. In truth, those outrageous folks are that way. They just do not live up to my expectations.

Anger Tip. There are few “always” in therapy. Here is one of them: anger (including irritation, rage, hatred, etc.) is always based upon unfulfilled expectations. If I can let go of my expectations, I will not feel angry.

My advice

Stop expecting everyone to think like you think. If you expect everyone to think like you do you are bound for disappointment, and you will, as often as not, be on the “wrong” side. Unless of course you are the only person who is “right…”

Accept everyone’s differences. I won’t make you have a baby if you don’t want one, and I won’t make you eat meat (even thought your evolutionary past has given you teeth to do just that). I don’t even ask that you appreciate your ancestors who ate meat and use fur to protect themselves so that you could be born and speak your peace. Just don’t try to argue from the top of your soapbox that I shouldn’t have my right to eat meat or stand on my soapbox.

Accept that you can not control everyone and that you should be concerned about your emotional stability. Rather than let yourself be controlled (emotionally and verbally) by those you consider “animals,” you should remain calm and accept that people are different than you.

Seems easy enough and fair enough to me…

I was reading an article regarding Omar Khadr, the youngest “terrorist” being held at Guantanamo, Cuba, due to, according to U.S.A. government reports, killing a soldier during a confrontation in the Middle East.

Complaints about a “lack of sleep,” “a crying teenager,” and movement between cells every three hours are made in the article. Are those three items somehow so bad? The problem I have is that the crime is alleged, and Omar is not convicted of a crime. However, if convicted, I don’t know if I would have any problem with moving any criminal every three hours, depriving them of sleep, or be overly concerned that they were crying–jail is punishment in today’s climate, even if I would like there to be more “treatment.”

What bothers me the most is the statement

Human rights groups have demanded Khadr be released from Guantanamo, saying his age at the time of capture precludes any war crime proceeding.

Ah, No.

Are they actually saying that anyone under the age of (what?) 18 is not (in any way) responsible for the actions taken prior to reaching adulthood (however that is to be determined..)? I would like to see if age precludes war crime proceedings under international law. Even if it does and if Omar did kill a soldier, he should be tried of something–even if not a war crime.

I do not know of children who are not taught what is “right” and “wrong”–even if I disagree with what they are taught. I assume that all children are taught to honor their fellow (e.g., Muslims, Catholics, etc..). If young people are killing only people who are not “like them,” I’d like to know how their rational works to eliminate everyone else from their assumptions about “people” and “right.”

Everyone needs to be held responsible for their actions. Whether the punishment is the same for “criminals” of different ages is, thankfully, not up to me. However, holding the “guilty” responsible is something we should not be trying to avoid…

Of course, it could be those Human Rights groups are those that break the law to get their message across…

What say you?

I read some comments regarding the cover of the New Yorker on the latimes.com site–those comments are located here.

One asked for everyone to let the editors know what they thought of the cover.

I did.

My reply was:

Good Morning:

I saw the cover of your magazine (and blogged about it at http://wordpress.pocosin.com). I wanted to post my comments to an article at the latimes.com site. On that site I saw a comment that stated

“this is the WORST and most RACIST PROPAGANDA cover I have ever seen. what’s next? jews with horns and big noses?
tell this amazing editor how you feel directly: ”

I thought to myself, why not?

I like the satire.

Why people think satire should only be applied to “others” is beyond me. Many of those crying “foul” are the same groups/people who supported the Danish newspapers who printed (and reprinted) the cartoon of Muhammed (with a bomb). Now subject to satire, the same “supporters” are now “up in arms” that such activity is allowed, much less printed in The New Yorker.

I am not sure which gives me more mirth–the satire (that didn’t take much to come up with–my only complaint) or the reaction to the satire…

What say you?

Everyone is likely aware of Megan Meier–the girl who committed suicide after realizing that the boy she was interested in “dumped” her publicly on MySpace. The “boy” turned out to be either the daughter of a neighbor, the neighbor’s wife, or both of them. The wife is being charged with a crime and has pled “not guilty.”

Now a 16-year old boy from Indiana is being harassed on-line by someone who took a picture of him in English class and used the picture to open a fake MySpace page using the photo, claiming to be the 16-year old, and posting that he was gay–note, I don’t think there is anything wrong with being gay, but the media loves to say that is a “bad” thing. On a side note, if the media and everyone stopped thinking that and teaching their kids that “gay” was bad, the suicides based on these allegations or truths would decline…

What is really sad is …

The kid(s) that took the photograph of the 16-year old boy and used it to attempt to ridicule him on-line look(s) bad to me. Nothing done reflects at all on the 16-year old boy whose picture appeared on MySpace (the profile has been removed…).

Rather, the immature kids who felt threatened (somewhow) by the 16-year old are looking even more “stupid” than they did before. My guess is he/she/they talk up the event as if it was some “accomplishment”–how taking a picture and creating a fake MySpace page is any accomplishment is beyond me…

The person or persons who look bad are the person or persons responsible for the “hoax.” Everyone knows it was easy to accomplish and took no skill or real thought–likely those responsible feel threatened, somehow, by the 16-year old’s intelligence and “differences.” Now they look … well, we all know now don’t we?

How to stop this type of behavior

I think schools should have a Psychology class starting in 5th grade. The class should focus on self-esteem, behavior, and bullying–especially what causes bullying. This class is not meant to “protect” those “nerds” (who seem to earn much more and have more fun later in life) but is to help those “popular” kids who feel as if their popularity is threatened by these different kids who may (or may not) have more intelligence or who are “different.”

While those who are “bullied” are often seen as non-popular, you have to ask yourself if the kids who do the bullying are so “popular” and so “all together,” why do they need to bully in the first place? If your answer is “because we can” or “because the truth needs to be told,” you, hopefully, will one day see the lack of logic/truth in that statement. If not, you will be an ignorant kid for the rest of your life–and yes, there are plenty of them around…

What say you?

I wrote a http://wordpress.pocosin.com/?p=399 describing how a French Court had held Google liable–Google had to stop displaying advertisements for Louis Vuitton’s rivals when Web users typed Vuitton’s name into the search engine.

Give me a break…

United States Law is a little different. Specifically, Yahoo notes that

NEW YORK - EBay Inc. scored an important victory in court Monday, as a federal judge said companies such as jeweler Tiffany & Co. are responsible for policing their trademarks online, not auction platforms like eBay.

Seems to me that in France, store clerks likely recommend other alternatives to Luis Vuitoon products for a variety of reasons (too expensive, not right color in stock, etc.). I can’t imagine a French Court holding French Citizens liable for providing good service (perhaps they will do so and make the critiques seen in the movies “real”).

However, in the United States of America, trademwark owners are responsible for protecting their trademarks–and we aren’t talking fakes or imitations here. Rather, we are talking options, freedom, and legal sales of products (even the non-Luis Vuitton variety).

Guess whose products I will NOT be buying any time soon…

What say you?

Politico states The New Yorker has a cover showing Obama giving a knuckle to a his wife, both dressed in attire typically shown as “muslim” and as “terrorist-oriented” by the media.

Obama says the display is

tasteless and offensive

What do you say?

What is going on?

The New Yorker needs page hits and to get in the news. This is a way to get visitors to your site. Expect all media to do this more often. If you don’t, you might be expecting too much of advertising-driven media.

I say handle it differently

Obama could have laughed at it and simply said something like

The New Yorker’s attempt at satire may be a sad viewpoint of how the world views the unrest and uncertainty in the Middle East. Perhaps the artist is not aware of either African-American urban “hip-hop” culture or the culture of the Middle East. It is a cute way to get visitors to their site and to promote their name in the current media frenzy over these issues–Issues that deserve a serous attempt to resolve.

I hope both candidates deal with people who are trying to get everyone’s “panties in a bunch” with upfront and candid answers rather than condemnation since condemnation is exactly what they are wanting and what will help them get more page views…

What say you?

MacWorld has an article/posting on thier site, but I see the comments are very negative and seem to be demanding an apology from Apple for the problems they faced when buying the device.

Specifically, the complaints can be summarized as follows:

1. Apple should have made sure there were no problems;
2. Apple should not have tried to roll out so many services or changes to so many services on a single date;

and/or

3. Apple needs to apologize because I went through Hell and I was mad.

Engouh…

Apple and AT&T did not have a smooth release with iPhone 1.0, and that was when it was released in a single country (U.S.A.). Now Apple releases the iPhone 2.0 in over 20 countries and everyone expects things to run smoothly?

I just don’t understand why they think the process and association between two major firms will go smoothly..

One commentor replied

7. Jul 14, 2008 7:16 AM in response to: Counsel
Re: Apple: 10 million apps, 1 million iPhone 3Gs
“An apology is fine, but did you actually expect sales in over 20 countries to go smoothly? Problems exist with any major release–especially when it involves syncing with a single-point server.” - Counsel

Yes, Counsel, I did expect things to go smoothly. As a retired CIO of a major organization, I know what is involved in a major product launch. The Apple EXECUTIVES, including Jobs, consciously made the decision to globally launch the iPhone 3G, plus 2.0 software, plus Mobile Me, plus Apps Stores, plus iTunes 7.7, plus activation in Apple Stores (which was not necessary, IMHO), plus having Sales people everywhere using new software on their handhelds for the first time. As highly intelligent and experienced managers, Apple executives should have know that such a simultaneous effort was fraught with risks. Once Jobs and company committed to this highly risky launch strategy, they should have tested and retested the hell out of it beforehand, and trained the Apple Store staffs more extensively. (This is ignoring the stupidity of the initial decision to take some much on all at once.).

A public apology is owed and a revision of the purchase process in Apple Stores initiated. Apple Stores are NOT AT&T franchises and Apple employees are NOT cellphone sales people. When I go into an Apple Store, I want it to feel like an Apple Store and not some schlock cellphone outlet.

As I replied to him, perhaps he ran his ship better than Apple and AT&T run theirs. I would like to know what ship he ran though… However, every release, major or not, may have “bumps” that may not be visible to those using the release.

Here is what Apple and AT&T did on ONE day:

1. Convert .mac to MobileME;,/li>
2. update iTunes to a new version;
3. Update iPhone software to version 2.0;
4. Release iPhone 2.0 in over 20 countries world-wide–logistics, not sales;
5. Sold subsidized & unsibsidized iPhones at both Apple and AT&T stores;
6. Added the AppStore to iTunes and iPhone software; and
7. other “behind-the-scene changes” that we, the public, are not aware of at this time.

Last time Apple and AT&T did

1. update iTunes to a new version;
2. Release iPhone 1.0 in 1 country (U.S.A.);
3. Sold only unsubsidized “locked to AT&T” at both Apple and AT&T stores;
4. other “behind-the-scene changes” that we, the public, are not aware of at this time.

If the first release with 4 items was not as smoothly executed in 1 country, why would I expect the second release, in over 20 countries, to go smoothly when more was being done?

Could it have been done better? Sure. If they had delayed the release until August 15th (or so) and had the time to appropriately test and guarantee bandwidth and service, sure. My guess is that contractual obligations made Apple release on or by a specific date (Just a guess).

Should Apple and AT&T apologize? Sure, it wouldn’t hurt. It won’t solve anything either, but it might make the “masses” feel better.

What say you?

I have an “old” iPhone, but I have downloaded a few apps from the appstore. Here are a few of the apps and my thoughts…

1. Loopt - A service that lets you see where your friends are and what they are doing at any given moment. Nice idea, but there is no way to search for new friends–so if you are the only one of your group to have an iPhone, you have to know other members of Loopt to add to your friendslist. Otherwise, you see nothing but your location. Nice app and idea, but needs to be expanded so your friendslist can grow.
2. zintin- Service that lets you see (not on a map–why not?) other “nearby” zintin users. You can post photos on your “wall,” but you can not add text (why not?). I would combine the services offered by Loopt with zintin’s services to get a much better product/site/app.
3. Limbo - Service to see “nearby” members (not just friends–yea!) and lists/reviews of local bars, eateries, and shops. Nice, but I don’t like the “loot” idea (go read about it on their site). I live in a city of 100,000 and the nearest member to me is about 89 miles away…
4. Whrrl-Service showing people and reviews of places they have been and location of places (stores, food, etc.). Described as Yelp + Twitter. Nice, but the map centered around your location covers about 2 blocks–with no way to expand the coverage… (Why not??). Today, my map isn’t being updated (not sure if it is busy, being updated, crashed, etc…).

Summary

It would be nice to have groups–aikido fans, Steeler fans,–and descriptions based on the language of the user (English, French, etc.) so that people could search for people to chat with or get to know in all of these apps–more modification of the maps, pins, groups, etc would also be nice.

Some nice social apps exist, but I hope that the updates to the apps bring functionality and improvements. I’ll update as updates are made available

What say you? Do you like/dislike these services?

It appears that the iTunes server is down on Friday–the day of the new iPhone 2.0 release.

The error I get is

We could not complete your iTunes Store request. An unknown error occurred (-4) or (-9838).

I know a few people (1 or two at least) are trying to update and “iimprove” their iphone… I did notice that the 2.0 software was installed on the iPhone, but that iTunes was not connecting to the store once the update was completed.

So I tried to install apps from the iPhone. It worked. So if you get that error, give the phone a shot–it may just work.

Many people are upset that things are not working as “they should.” However, people need to realize the demand for the service and have some patience–whether it is in the activation or in the access to the Mobileme features (.mac e-mail has been hit by the transfer).

Breath. Say, “Namaste” or “Wooosah.” Whatever keeps you calm would be better than getting upset. Remember, this is technology, and there will always be something going wrong–whether it be a down database, down BlackBerry service, or something else. So long as we keep our smiles (and our perspective), we will be just fine.

I have mentioned this before (no, no link provided), but the iPhone, the new one, really won’t help most people.

Why?

Not many of us have ANY 3G service.

The AlleyInsider has a post where he has maps of the areas where AT&T has service.

Go look. Note that there is not much blue on that map…

Researchers have found a way to break the encryption used to secure data within a system designed and marketed by NXP Semiconductors.

The article states that

Dr. Bart Jacobs of Radboud University Nijmegen demonstrated last month how he could ride the London transit system for free. Once he obtained the key used by the London transit system, he then brushed up aside passengers carrying the Oyster transit cards and was able to collect their card information on his laptop and make a clone of it.

Another article state that a dutch researcher stated

A Dutch researcher said he was able to clone the Mifare Classic smartcard used by Boston, London, Hong Kong, Beijing, Madrid and New Dehli transit systems, among others.

The expert only needed a laptop to ’sniff’ out the actual identification data stored on riders’ ID cards. The data was then used to create cloned Oyster cards, allowing the researcher to ride London’s transit systems for free for a week.

I am not an expert (anywhere near it) on English Law or the Law of other countries, but isn’t what Dr. Bart Jacobs did illegal? If so, has he been charged with a crime? If not, he should be…

The researches, including Dr. Jacobs I assume, are crying foul because NXP is suing to stop them form publishing their findings. However, the researchers are also willing to use the information to clone information and ride transit systems for free… I just don’t get it.

A story on CNN shows how a Houston woman and other activists say a Mexican comicbook character is racist and offensive.

A person interviewed states

“Look how they portray his mother, with huge ethnic lips, dark skin, making her look like the big gorilla and him like the little monkey.”

It is a little odd looking, I admit. However, was any ill intent meant? I think not. Instead of taking it in the “worst light,” I would advise trying to see things in their eyes before yelling “racist.” Why? If one group is, we all are. Meaning, if a person’s intent is determined by how others react, then there will never be a time when someone is not offended… Get over it…

I have to also admit that I do not think there is anything wrong with

• huge ethnic lips; or
• dark skin.

Do you think there is anything wrong with ethnic features? ANY ethnic features? I am proud of my features, even if I don’t know where they come from because my features are me… I would love to hear why African-Americans are offended, somehow, by ethnic lips or dark skin. Or is it that the drawing makes them think of a monkey?…

If a single comic book character is white and displayed as a monkey, should “white America” (whatever that is…) get offended? If we do, how are we different from those who complain that we should not be able to draw Muhammad in a cartoon? Learn to laugh at yourselves–we all have a lot to laugh at, but I have to admit that nobody should be ashamed of “ethnic features” or “dark skin.”

I find an African-American site dedicated to starting African-American heros for comic books. See this site. Isn’t the drawing of “Joseph Wheeler III” look odd too? Shall we say that the artist is racist and/or offensive? I think not. The artwork seems quite nice and proficient. I certainly don’t want to say that the big, mean-looking, hulking hero is somehow a negative comment on African-Americans. Could I? Sure, but that would be a disservice to the artist, to African-Americans, and to the intent of the image. I happen to like the artwork on that site…

Just because someone views something as offensive may say more about the person observing the item/picture than the artist meant in the display. Perhaps we should work to “fix” the way we perceive things rather than altering different cultures or their ways–especially when some/many members of the group using the comicbook character are also dark-skinned–but refer to themselves as Mexicans or otherwise rather than African-Americans.

My thoughts

I don’t think someone is “white” just because their skin color is “light” or “African-American” just because their skin is “dark.” The “light” skinned person could be from southeast Asia (they really are not yellow you know..), and the “dark” skinned person could be Indian or from Australia and not from Africa at all.

In other words, I think that the color of your skin does not dictate how you should be classified.

And the answer is No. If someone drew a picture of a white, mean-spirited, ugly slave owner who was whipping his slaves, I would not be offended. Why? That person does not represent me or anyone I know.

Now a question for you… When I said “slaves” above, what did you “picture” in your mind? Your answer may say more about you than you care to admit…

Again, we see a man on a street corner yelling “The sky is falling!” We pass by feeling sorry for him and wondering why he thinks that way. Perhaps we think he is mentally unstable. Yet, we don’t get upset when a “madman” has an opinion. We all have opinions, and we should not get upset because everyone else does not view the world through our eyeglasses. Remember, our opinions are formed through our experiences, and very few people share our path through life.

What say you?

Stephen Johnson has an article available here that concludes with

In the absence of legislation, it may be the agencies’ best hope for a broad interpretation of the Clean Water Act.

Why do the agencies “want” a broad interpretation? Or is it that Mr. Johnson wants a broad interpretation. I am not sure.

I would think the agencies would respond to the comment from the Supreme Court and document, as best they can, what they can and what they can not regulate when it comes to “waters of the United States.”

This “hope” for “a broad interpretation” of the Clean Water Act is an emotional “feeling” that people have as they feel that it will “protect” the “natural environment.”

While it would limit or decrease development, why is it that these groups want to only protect wetlands? They bulldoze upland areas for their offices, do not complain when upland development impacts wildlife resources, or otherwise act on these issues in any “major” way.

If pollution is limited at the source, those wetlands that the agencies are not supposed to regulate (according to the Supreme Court) might not need protecting in the first place. Before you argue those areas serve a purpose be aware that so do upland areas.

You will need more than “because they are wetlands” for me to agree that an area needs to be protected. It doesn’t make much sense to me to have all of our uplands developed yet protect and not develop any wetlands. If that happens, where will all the “upland” wildlife go? What of the functions provided by that upland area?

Unfortunately, I think people have attached an emotional anchor to the term wetland. I’d rather see science determine what is necessary–note that scientists are not likely to always agree either (many times because they can’t remove the “emotion” from their theory).

What say you?

Counsel

The AP had a story that discusses how the EPA has not prosecuted several potential wetland violation cases because of a 2006 Supreme Court Case. However, the AP story did not cite the case…

The author, Dina Cappiello, states

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration didn’t pursue hundreds of potential water pollution cases after a 2006 Supreme Court decision that restricted the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate seasonal streams and wetlands.

Can anyone else think of a better way to open the article? I think a reporter should be specific and cite a court case if it is mentioned in the article. Specifically, the article could have read

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states the agency has not pursued hundreds of potential water pollution cases after a 2006 Supreme Court decision (Rapanos v. United States, 126 S.Ct. 2208 (2006), 547 U.S. 715) altered how the EPA and the Corps of Engineers can regulate “waters of the United States”–which include wetlands, streams, and other water bodies.”

I know space is a premium, but the “meat” of the issue is the Court’s decision and how the decision may increase or decrease jurisdiction over “waters of the United States.” The decision not only reduced what the agencies could regulate (saying they never should have regulated them), but the case also has led to an increase in the areas regulated by the Corps of Engineers–Meaning people know have to get permits and provide mitigation for impacts that prior to the case would not have required a permit at all.

Trust me when I say that there is not only a “decrease” in regulation due to this case…

Accurately letting the reader know what is the cause or the source of information for a change in how agencies regulate the public should be included in an article.

What say you?

On a side note, I wonder if the AP is going to contact me because I “used” their article without obtaining their permission…

Counsel

Is the Earth a nutrient sink? I ask this as I was discussing how soil formation works with my children. I explained that leaves and other debris land on the soil surface, get broken down, and become part of the soil profile.

“Do plants use the nutrients?” asked one.

“Yes.” I responded.

The other chirped up, “Do they use it all?”

I thought for a second, and I had to answer that I did not think so.

“What happens to it then daddy?”

I had to laugh. I hadn’t actually thought that far ahead. If there is a nutrient sink in the earth, then there are a few questions we, as humans, need to ponder:

1. How fast are nutrients added to the surface/atmosphere?
2. Where are those nutrients that are added coming from?
3. Is there a net negative or positive amount? Is the balance neutral?

I ask these questions because if there is a net sink of nutrients, what happens when they are gone? Can we, humans, mine them back out?

Funny, but I haven’t seen anyone ask this before, and I wonder why…

What say you?