Religious Bigots Slow on the Draw for Prop 8 Promotion

Proposition 8 is a Californian initiative to eliminate the right for same-sex couples to marry.  Amusingly, the intolerant imbeciles who support this discriminatory measure were a few minutes late to their own party…

YesonProp8.com directs to the homepage of their opposition.

The Importance of Crediting the Competition

I’ve previously written about the importance of properly identifying the competition.  However, that post didn’t go far enough.  It’s not enough to simply know who the competition is, you must know why the competition is.  You must become their biggest proponent, take a walk on the dark side and sympathize with rival supporters.

In other words “to beat one, you must become one”…

Take business.

Sunkist Naturals is a Silicon Valley start-up that astonishingly sells juice rather than technology.  A large part of their success can be directly attributed to their obsession over the competition – from production to marketing.  For example, the size of the company was determined by being small enough to create a quality product – e.g. use premium ingredients and a state-of-the-art packaging facility with 0 oxygen – but large enough to get their product on the shelves of 5,000 stores nationwide.

Sunkist Naturals understands the pros and cons of being a large manufacturer/distributor in their vertical and effectively positioned themselves to enjoy the best of both worlds (sizable distribution while maintaining quality standards).

Thanks to Robert Scoble for the tip on these guys

Take politics.

Imagine how effective a candidate’s speech would be if it took the following form:

Today I’m going to talk about X.  My opponent’s policy is a,b,c.  People support that policy because d,e,f.  People criticize that policy because h,i,j.

My policy is z,y,x.  People support my policy because w,v,u.  People criticize my policy because t,s,r.

Ultimately, my opponent’s policy is good because k,l,m.  However, I believe my policy is better because I value p,o,n more than k,l,m.

(as an interesting aside notice how difficult it is to read examples in reverse alphabetical order – i.e. the second paragraph – as opposed to those in alphabetical order)

The best thing a politician could do to is give his/her opponent’s policies the strongest possible support and then explain why his or her own policies are still better.  What then could be the opponent’s response – you did a better job explaining my own position than I have…?

Identify, understand, and support the competition.  Then worry about beating them

This Makes Me Happy Part X

Photo credit here

That Damn Availability Bias

People often base their prediction of the frequency of an event on how easily an example can be brought to mind.  This is called an Availability Bias.  For example, what happens more often – murder or suicide?  The correct answer is suicide but most people say murder because murders receive more publicity than suicides.

Why is this important?

Consider the news media.  It’s their job to report current events; what’s going on today.  Right now with the presidential election less than a week away, national politics understandably dominates the headlines.  However, two weeks ago it was the banking crisis, and before that it was oil and the Iraq war.  It’s important to stay abreast with current events but equally important to keep the big picture in mind and not become distracted by the new, shiny issue of the week (i.e. fall victim to availability bias).

So here’s a thought: after the election on November 4 and the spotlight leaves Sen. Obama or McCain for a few months, let’s not lose sight of the global political landscape.  Undoubtedly new issues and “crises” will appear between November 4 and the January 20, 2009 inauguration but few will be as significant (to Americans at least) as the direction this country will take under new leadership.

My First Night at Sea

…well not exactly at sea (docked at Mariner’s Bay) but the boat was in the ocean and I grabbed a solid 6 hours of zzzz’s.  It was the first night I’ve spent on my new (old) boat and it was fantastic.  A sleeping bag on plywood beats anything that crap Westin has to offer

I replaced the “bed” (see new plywood under the sleeping bag) by tracing the old pieces on new 4×8 sheets of 3/4″ plywood and using an orbital jig saw to make the cuts ($40 at Home Depot).  Also notice the “white”… kind of… walls.  For that project:

I sanded and cleaned the area to be painted

Filled the holes with stainable (therefore paintable) wood filler, painted (using an exterior, water based all-in-one paint/primer) and then filled some more (picture above).

Painting was easiest with a roller + sponge brush.  I used the sponge to get corners and small areas and then rolled over everything for a clean look.

Filling was even easier, I just grabbed a $0.78 plastic putty knife and went to town – pushed filler into the hole, scraped away most of the excess, waited 30 minutes for filler to harden, and sanded for a smooth finish.

Other points of interest:

The project was running a little behind schedule so I employed some child labor

I found this while tearing out the desk (no it’s not mine)

But this is what it’s all about…

Seen and Heard #9

Wednesday night, at a drugstore buying some hair stuff…

Effeminate male cashier: Is this good?

Me: What’s that?

Effeminate male cashier: This product, is this what you’re wearing in your hair?

Me: … No, that’s sweat

This Makes Me Happy Part IX

(Chimpanzee + Segway) x Japanese Television = Awesome

LA Times Engaging in Dishonest Journalistic Practices Under Stanton’s Watch

The top headline on today’s print edition of the Los Angeles Times reads “McCain Doesn’t Seal the Deal”. That same story is also the lead on LATimes.com but with a different, more appropriate headline: “McCain Deals no Lethal Blows in Final Debate With Obama.”

First, the headline on the print edition is wildly misleading. Stating “McCain Doesn’t Seal the Deal” [obviously] suggests he was in a position to “seal the deal,” which isn’t the case. McCain is and was losing to Obama in every national poll. McCain was no more likely to “seal the deal” in the third and final debate than he was to levitate or feed the audience with a couple sardines and a piece of toast. No McCain didn’t seal the deal but he also didn’t turn invisible or ride in on a unicorn.

The next question is why did the Times change the headline for the internet? Did they realize their error after the print edition had gone to press? It’s possible but I have a very hard time believing the headline for the top story of the day was a simple mistake.

The current editor of the Los Angeles times is Russ Stanton, he has held the position since February of this year. His reputation is of a business man first, a journalist second. It’s possible the headline is a result of his personal right wing political preferences. Regardless, the bottom line is Stanton is ultimately responsible for what is printed by the LA Times and today’s headline is disingenuous at best. Thus, the headline is either the result of a (fairly large) oversight by Stanton or an underlying political agenda.

Dishonesty or incompetence – I’m not sure which is worse.

Since I Can’t Say it Better Myself…

… I won’t.  From Bob Lefsetz’s (marginally offensive) blog:

America is pissed about so much.  And feels too often that politicians don’t care about them.  And there’s scads of ignorance, purveyed by biased talk show hosts and bloviating, supposedly neutral, TV talking heads.  And everybody’s afraid.  You get people saying Sarah Palin won the Vice Presidential debate and you wonder if you watched the same show.  When I didn’t answer the questions in school, I flunked.  And suddenly, by going to school, working damn hard, studying to get good grades to get into a good college, I’m an elitist, my opinion is to be discounted.

I shouldn’t have gone to public school, I should have gone to a parochial institution, to be indoctrinated in viewpoints that don’t square with reality. Worse yet, be home schooled… tell me you can get infections hanging with the underprivileged in regular high schools, that you can teach your kids better than those underpaid teachers.  But what about socialization, what about opposing viewpoints?  How can there be a dialogue when there’s not another side?

And that’s what we have in America today, only one side.  Everybody’s on his own side, only speaking to himself and like-minded people.

It’s easy to bash America and Americans right now and that’s not my intent.  Just like any other country, America has its own pros and cons; we’re taking our lumps now and will come out the other side all the better for it.

However, Lefsetz makes points worth considering – why do so many place so little importance on things like academic ability and experiencing diversity (be it diversity in race, religion or opinion)?  Why is there an increasing tendency to polarize, to associate with a like-minded group of “yes friends”?

Are our beliefs really that fragile?

A Positive Argument for my Presidential Choice

Photo credit here and here
Update: while you’re at it this is funny too

99% of political conversations today go something like this:

“Who are you voting for?”

“Obama”

“Why”

“Well McCain thinks …..”

McCain’s flaws are not cause to vote for Obama. Obama’s flaws are not cause to vote for McCain. Both are great reasons to vote 3rd party (or not at all) but in no way justify voting for the opposition.

Technically speaking, a negative argument (like the one above) supports not doing an action. A positive argument (like X is the right thing to do because A, B, C) supports doing an action. So if you are going to vote for McCain or Obama (a positive action) you better have a positive justification for doing so.

I’m voting for Obama and this is why:

1. Foreign Policy – In general I support speaking with people and working together to find a mutually agreeable solution. Many enemies of the past are not enemies of the present (Germany, Japan, etc.), and there is no reason enemies today cannot be allies tomorrow. Bulling and fear tactics will do little to achieve this end but face to face conversations will. Obama has pledged to meet with many world leaders without forcing them to meet any predetermined criteria. Some call this naive foreign policy, I call it treating others as we expect to be treated. Update: apparently General Petraeus agrees
2. No Vote on Iraq War – The +80% of politicians who originally voted for the Iraq war have spent the past 6 years downplaying the importance of that decision. Generally they say “I trusted our leader and gave the president the power he said was necessary at the time.” That’s foolhardy, not patriotic. That’s how dictators are born. That’s how an American President expanded his executive power beyond what any former President had previously enjoyed. That’s what happened in Germany half a century ago. Choosing to go to war with Iraq was the biggest decision America will make in our generation. I believed it was the wrong decision at the time and so did Barack Obama. Unfortunately we were in the minority.
3. Economy – Simply put, tax cuts do not jump start an economy. Fact. In times of economic hardship, the general public save, NOT SPEND, money distributed via tax rebates. However, money earned is much more readily spent (for obvious reasons). Fundamentally I do not believe in “Priming the Pump,” and am quite justified in holding that position because it has never once been proven to work in the history of this country. However, as both candidates are advocating some form of this ill-fated Keynesian economic strategy, I support Obama’s plan because it at least makes a little bit of sense (spending money through government programs instead of issuing tax cuts that will be promptly stored in low interest savings accounts). It’s the same cost to tax payers but with Obama’s plan the lower and middle classes will reap greater benefits (which I support even though that does not include me) and there’s actually a fighting chance the spending will positively impact the economy. (Again, this is supported by history, look into some of FDR’s policies during the Great Depression – CCC, WPA, etc.).
4. Intelligence – This one isn’t a matter of opinion. Obama graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law school. McCain graduated 894 out of 899 from the US Naval Academy. The contrast between VP candidates is even starker. It’s a simple fact that of the four presidential/vice presidential candidates, the two smartest indiviuals are both on the Obama ticket. One can still discount the importance of academic ability but I think we all know how well things go when there’s a “regular guy” in the White House…

This is why I’m voting for Obama, not against McCain