SPAM at the Door So it is just too hard to pass on the opportunity to give you conservatives the old jibe on this one. Principles for the current group of conservatives seem to be very much tied to the whims of the focus groups. This law, and the very related do not call lists, would actually fly in the face of many conservative thoughts. And they have so few.

It is first and foremost a restriction on commercial activity. You've probably already heard the stories of mass marketing exec's crying about the jobs that will be lost in the industry. The SPAM industry has workers, though not as labor intense as most phone marketing. These laws will have a real financial impact.

There is a real correlation between this and the issue of gun ownership in that it seeks to restrict behavior instead of assuming equitable social behavior amongst all parties concerned. I don't honestly think that the message will be lost on callers when they disrupt dinner and get a testy response. After all, they are seeking a favorable reception on the other end. The solution seems as simple as saying there's no way in the world I'd bite now that you've disrupted my meal.

It is restrictive. It seeks to legislate when solutions exist. The idea that these technologies are intrusive doesn't hold up. Municipalities have had only limited success in limiting Jehovah Witness's knocking on your door. There are some exemptions in the do not call lists for these activities (political, religious and non-profit), but are not any reason to forget a basic conservative principle. That a commercial endeavor can carry as much importance as any ideological one. That economic and political freedoms go hand in hand.

These industries are outgrowths of technological ability and the economics of demographics. Technology and that same economics of demographics would seem to drive possible solutions. There is caller identification (and the related "zappers") and SPAM filtering software. Many ISP's are instituting limits on e-mail traffic. It eats up bandwidth and resources.

I've seen the studies that say SPAM is such an onerous burden in terms of cost and time. It all kinda registers on the whose-ox-is getting-gored meter. Statistics can lie. And I am sure that some idiot mofo has bit on that penis enlargement solution. It all seems to be driven with just a little bit too much currency. There appear to be social and technological solutions to address the issue that would make legislation unnecessary.

For the politicians, they get to be heroes. It some short-sighted way, people get the feeling that something is being done about the burdens of technologies in their lives.

  ¶ 10/26/2003 01:48:00 PM 0 comments

  Gross and O'Reilly I don't claim to know Terry Gross's politics nor am I content to say that simply because she is on NPR she is a Lefty. But I do think she has received some unfair criticism over the Bill O'Reilly segment. She was doing her job as she sees it, which is very much the point of her job. A slightly different take on what Barb Walters does.

O'Reilly is a factually-challenged, self promoter- face the facts. When the likes of he and Rush are challenged on their veracity, not far underneath their explanations comes the excuse that they are just entertainers. It just seems really lame for them to expect to be accorded some great intellectual gravitas when even they will cop a plea on intellectual honesty.

O'R has made great fodder out of his interactions with Al Franken. Why was it inappropriate then to question him on the points raised in Franken's book? Try to imagine any performance-artist appearing in any venue who would not be questioned about their performance.

NPR's ombudsman, Dvorkin, doesn't think that this is the way the debate between these cultural/political differences should take place. O'R is "on" all the time. Every appearance, speech, interview or what have you is an opportunity to showcase the O'R phenom. His walk-out during the interview just happened to coincide with the time Gross's interviews usually terminate. Not likely that this was just a coincidence. He's been in the business for a while and knows the in's and out's. The "empty-chair" part of the segment was a justfiable response to a discussion ending bit of theatrics.

Gross has a point, O'R got nothing less than what he dishes out on an almost daily basis. Not once did she use the future Fox trademarked "shut-up". He's definately crying victim for effect.

So, given that O'R is not inclined to discuss these intellectual matters in any productive way and that all any venue represents is merely an opportunity for self-promotion, what was Gross to do? Once again, you don't bring an incisive rhetorical knife to a scatter-gun fight.

  ¶ 10/25/2003 03:18:00 PM 0 comments

  California About this Arnold in California thing, the voters probably took a turn for the worse. The recall election was a measure instituted by progressives some time ago in reaction to large moneyed interests in California. Now Republican activists have sought to use it for their own ends. Admittedly, Gov. Davis gave them an excellent opportunity to use it.

The big problem I have with the outcome is that it probably won’t serve the people of California. Why? Well just ask the people of Minnesota. An often justified criticism of politicians is that their ego’s take over, become overwhelming. They lose touch with the real basis for their status, the voters. In Minnesota, the people became so disenchanted with the power structure that they decided to elect a professional wrestler. I think you would have to go pretty far to find a larger and more flamboyant ego than that of a professional showman. It didn’t work in Minnesota. I have to wonder, what made the voters of California think an ass-grabbing actor would work in their state.

  ¶ 10/12/2003 10:41:00 PM 0 comments

  Update Well, I finally started building my web site. Plain, quick to load and really uncertain about how I'm going to fit all the elements that I want without making it too busy. I have, so far, decided to go with what appears to be the common format: three columns, with the center the predominate section broken horizontally. And I have this crazy idea that I actually have to set up sometning so I can get payed for advertising. We'll see.  ¶ 10/04/2003 09:25:00 PM 0 comments

  Launch date uncertain I have decided to launch a webzine. The form it will take has not been decided but will more or less cover the subject area of this blog. One of the final decisions to be made is just how sarcastic or sardonic it will be in tone. One of the most aggravating things about the current political landscape is that one side seems to feel it has some great moral advantage. This is most laughable iwhen compared with their lack of integrity and humane purpose.

I am now seeking contributors and submissions. Any interested parties can email to penheaded@the-spa.com  ¶ 10/03/2003 05:54:00 AM 0 comments