From a review of the new documentary _Jesus Camp_:

Pastor Becky Fisher started the camp in 2001 because she wanted to see "young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus as the young people are to the cause of Islam. I want to see them as radically lay down their lives for the gospel as they are in Pakistan, Israel, Palestine, all these different places because--excuse me--we have the truth."

I am deeply freaked out by this quote. Not because she wants to form the Anti-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (plenty of others in the Church of Dubya the Modern Day Saint have hinted the same) but because she feels so utterly confident that she's willing to declare it as her camp's official on-the-record policy.

It used to be that psycho fanatic mega-vangelists would at least have to mute their true feelings with a bunch of fluffiness about the Prince of Peace and good will towards all. Now they can preach violence straight up and not face widespread condemnation.

Or . . . perhaps that actually is the toned-down phrasing, and her real goal is immanentizing the Eschaton. God, are you testing me?

I think I'd like to take a week off from work and volunteer for a campaign. Make it a biennial standard (starting last time). However, I'm having trouble finding a worthwhile challenger to support. The only bad guy within 300km who approaches the "oh my God this guy has to GO" level of Dubya is Senator Rick "Anal Froth" Santorum, but Casey has the win wrapped up already. All Bob needs to do is keep his happy face in the public eye, and not have a scandal.

So without a true bogeyman allowing me to overlook a candidate's flaws, I must consider my main policy criteria: the Neodemocratic Platform of smaller Federal government, fiscal responsibility, and states' rights (with the exception of world-affecting issues like defense, the environment & foreign trade). You know, the stuff that neither of the duopoly has been doing in my entire political lifetime?

Is there anyone even remotely similar to my positions? Suggestions & discussion would be greatly appreciated.

It keeps getting harder for me to dismiss the notion that our universe is an elaborate hoax, which is gradually being made more and more ridiculous to find out how long it takes before I reject it entirely.

• "How dare the Pope mention an old essay saying muslims are violent? Kill the infidel!"
• "United Nations, you must punish Iran for not obeying international law! Congress, you must stop trying to make *ME* obey international law!"
• People who want secure verifiable elections "are undermining our democracy".
• etc, etc, etc.

It's unbelievable that millions of people think any of those things make sense. This stuff has gone WAY beyond "outrage fatigue" and well on its way into the Twilight Zone. How can it possibly be "reality"?

The good side of Gattaca, known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis, has risen from futurism, through niche specialty, and up into the mainstream. Parents-to-be screen their IVF embryos for dangerous genes, then pick ones without. As genomic discoveries continue, PGD may eventually test for everything from cancer to crooked teeth.

The bad side of Gattaca -- behaving as if nurture no longer matters -- so far has not arrived with it. As someone with several (relatively minor) inherited disorders, some or all of which I have passed on to my children, I for one welcome my future eugenic (in the literal Greek sense) grandchildren.

One simple reason. Take a look at Intel's wholesale price chart (after the Yonah price cuts in September):

• $209 = Core Solo 1.66 or C2D T5500 1.66
• $241 = Core Duo 1.83 or C2D T5600 1.83
• $294 = Core Duo 2.00 or C2D T7200 2.00
• $423 = Core Duo 2.16 or C2D T7200 2.16
• $637 = nothing listed or C2D T7600 2.33

Hmm... pin compatible, same price (or lower until september), better performance... really can't see any plausible way for Steve's RDF to avoid this.

Which is of course a Very Good Thing, especially for me and my purchasing plans.

Core 2 laptops could be available to the public as early as... hmm... August 7th (just to pick a date purely at random).

If the terrifying scenes from An Inconvenient Truth weren't enough to get you interested in carbon neutrality, here's another new data point to deny. The oceanic pH of ~8.2 had been stable from as far back as science can measure up to the 1800s. Since then pH has fallen by 0.1, and it is expected to dive another 0.2-0.3 in the next 40-90 years, thanks to carbonation.

Most animals experience medical problems when subjected to such pH shifts, so imagining that happening to the entire ocean is, in proper scientific terms, damn f***ing serious. Says one researcher, "When I see marine snails' shells dissolving while they're alive, that's spooky to me."

As promised, Intel started shipping the Dual-Core Xeon 51xx series CPUs (aka Woodcrest) yesterday . This is the first release of their new "Intel Core" 64-bit microarchitecture with greatly improved performance and efficiency. As we all have heard many times already, this will power the Macintel Xserve and probably the MacMac Pro.

But you didn't hear it yesterday. At least not on Slashdot.

The usual suspects are reporting about a study that a magnetic pulse "zapper" can relieve migraine symptoms. However, none of the reports mention the crucial detail about ANY medical study: did the researchers use double-blind randomized control?

If the patients were able to deduce their role in the study (active or control) by any means (including the body language of a researcher who knows the roles), then placebo effect can render the entire study meaningless.

Based on the news reports, it's entirely possible that the active wing was given cool flashing zapper guns while the control wing was left sitting alone with their headaches. They just don't say.

Science reporters are the worst. Computer/technology reporters, OTOH, usually have a decent layman's understanding of their subject, and can explain stuff semi-accurately most of the time (excluding intentional troll columnists). But if a science reporter fails to ask basic research questions, the entire story is worse than useless.

It should be implicit that our supposedly pro-business leadership in DC would understand the most basic principles of economics... but they don't. Hello, this is Earth, calling Washington, come in please. You can't eliminate demand by trying to artificially stop supply. The inevitable result is that price goes up, as does the attractiveness of the black market, and the supply keeps chugging along just fine.

The most obvious application is the expensive, invasive, big-government "War on Drugs". We have freaking military surveillance planes circling the Carribean, multiple armies of TLA policemen, SuperBowl adverts linking drugs to terrorism, and what do we get to show for it? More drugs. Please, let's declare "Mission Accomplished" already and move on. Legalize (aka tax) a few lesser drugs, and pour some of that Drug Czar money into rehab for the hard stuff.

The recently-escalated "War on Immigration" works exactly the same way. Go ahead, build a giant wall, ship migrant farmers to Guantanamo, whatever. They'll find other ways in. Again, the correct solution is to go after the demand side: businesses who hire illegally. Enforce existing labor laws, multiply non-compliance fines tenfold, and give cash bounties to citizens who turn in cheaters. If the cost of hiring illegals is the same as the cost of legal labor, then the immigrants go home, problem solved.

May as well mention the "War on Poverty" too. It takes slightly more work to identify the variables, but old-school welfare cannot succeed long-term. Job programs, training, and drug rehab are better answers. Yes, this might require cutting some hungry people off the teat, including "baby mamas". Sadly, it'll take twenty years without backsliding to see good results.

BTW, have you noticed that all of these answers somehow happen to be cashflow-positive for the government and/or the overall economy? Economics is funny that way.

And of course the "War on Terra"(*). Supply = insurgents, terrorists, etc. Demand = aggrieved people who feel that they have very little to lose and a lot to gain. You do the math.

(*) = registered trademark of Bushco, copyright 2001-2006. void where prohibited by law? yeah right.

So, is he or isn't he? Like passing a car accident(*), I can't help but review the flip-flops one more time:

• 2000 Feb: The state can do what they want to do.
• 2000 Apr: The decision should be left up to cities and states.
• 2003 June: I'm undecided about GMA.
• 2003 July: There ought to be a law.
• 2003 Oct: Happy "Marriage Protection Week"!
• 2003 Dec: I will support GMA, AND I also support leaving it up to the states.
• 2004 Feb: GMA!
• 2004 Oct: How about if we just call them civil unions instead?
• 2005 Jan: C'mon guys, it isn't going to pass anyways.
• 2005 Feb: GMA!
• 2006 Jan: How about we talk about something else instead?
• 2006 May: GMA!

(*) = Actually, I don't rubberneck for wrecks. Partly because my peripheral vision is good enough to get the gist, but mainly because I'd really prefer if everyone didn't slow down so unnecessarily.

It used to be that you could rely on Cal Thomas. The kind of guy who believes the same thing on Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday.

If something good happened, it was clearly because Republicans, Christians, and/or Captains of Industry had done right. If something bad happened, it was clearly because Democrats, the Media, and/or America-hating Intellectuals had done wrong. Opinions so steady, every single week, that you could set your watch by them.

But NOOOOO, not any more. That was the OLD Cal Thomas. This weird NEW Cal Thomas has started saying things that sound dangerously close to TREASON:

• 2006 Mar 21: "That a Republican Congress and administration are engaging in such promiscuous spending is obscene. If voting in Democrats -who in the past engaged in deficit spending - punishes Republicans, little will change. What to do? Maybe it's time for a strong third party, or failing that, another revolution."
• 2006 May 2: "When Democrats want to hand out checks, Republicans call it "welfare" and they claim to oppose it on principle. What should it be called when Republicans do it, hypocrisy?"
• 2006 May 23: "The Democratic economic policy is higher taxes, more spending and bigger government. Republicans aren't much better. Their policy is lower taxes, more spending and bigger government. That's an echo, not a choice."

The GOP has lost its way? Bring back smaller government and balanced budgets? Dear Lord in Heaven, Cal Thomas has joined the bandwagon for NeoDemocracy!

Amazingly enough, none of the news articles I've read on this topic so far have mentioned a slightly imperfect but glaringly obvious correlation in the following dataset. One obvious trend: there is less money overall. You have 19 seconds to spot the second trend... ready, set, go:

States receiving LESS money in the latest Homeland Security budget:

• Arizona
• California
• Colorado
• District of Columbia
• Hawaii
• Indiana
• Louisiana
• Maryland
• Massachusetts
• Michigan
• Minnesota
• Nevada
• New Jersey
• New York
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Oregon
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• Texas
• Washington

States receiving MORE money in the latest Homeland Security budget:

• Arkansas
• Florida
• Georgia
• Illinois
• Kentucky
• Missouri
• Montana
• Nebraska
• North Carolina
• Tennessee
• Wisconsin

Hopefully I'll be posting several journal entries in the next few days. I've been mulling a lot of things and need to hear some feedback.

I'll start with a brief mention of my most recent annoyance (and work backwards from there I suppose): some Poster Children for "Those Who Can't Do...".