Dodd gets big endorsement ... but will it really help?

I don't know. But the IAFF, representing tens of thousands of firefighters, could help in some key states. It might give Sen. Dodd a few extra points. I just don't see him getting much more than that out of this. He, frankly, is too far down in the polls at this point to really factor in. He is barely middle tier, if there was a middle tier. Richardson is middle tier, alone. Dodd is barely a blip on the screen, a point or two above Gravel. Unlike John Kerry, who was in the top tier of candidates when he received the IAFF endorsement.
Anyhow, here is some video from the endorsement:



Bubba's $$$
I was sent this link from an aquaintaince who thought I might be interested in Hillary Clinton's financial disclosures. I wasn't, really, but clicked through anyway. Here is the link: ["U.S. Senate Financial Disclosure Report"]. What shocks me about this disclosure is that Bubba is making $150k to $250k a speech! No wonder everyone wants to be president!! The post-presidency speaking fees!

I love this woman
Katherine Prudhomme-O'Brien, rightwing trollop or gadfly Goddess? You decide, but I know what I think: ["Inquisitive NH Voter Reacts to Giuliani Remark"]. This is the same lady who asked Al Gore in 1999 during a town hall meeting what he thought about Juanita Brodderick's rape allegations against Bill Clinton and Gore looked dumbfounded and said, Hmm, hmm, alot, without really saying anything. Had he had the stones and said he believed her or thought Bubba should apologize or something relevant instead of looking like a mannequin, he would have shown he was a true leader ... and champion of women's rights, too.

Short cuts
* Someone punk'd Rove's car: ["White House pranks punk Rove's car"].
* Ted Nugent was a chickenhawk!: ["Facing a draft, Nugent wet his pants"]. For all his big, bad-ass talk about machine guns and Democrats, and he found a way to get out of it. He should shut up and play his guitar.
* Interesting potential czar find: ["Find Could Be Russian Heir's Remains"].

* While this tart is out of jail after one day, the guy who stole the slice of pizza and it was his third strike, is still in jail: ["Lohan Gets 1 Day in Jail on DUI Plea"].
* A cartoon about Mormon history: ["What Mormon Theology Is Really All About"]. I love the bit about the "Mormon Jesus" and his wives and how blacks are neutral in the war between the "Mormon Jesus" and Satan and that is why they are black. Oh my word.
* Hmm, this is interesting: ["Hannity's "Freedom" concerts are reportedly a money scam"]. I wonder how much money is actually getting to the kids.
* I got a nice mention in Chris Lovett's piece on whether or not Boston should cancel its preliminary election during non-mayoral race years: ["For Council at Large: Later and Less Often"]. Civil Boston, Lovett's blog, is a good read.
* The Weekly World News is now, officially, defunct: ["Weekly World News"].

Making Economic Growth Work Ecologically

Guest Perspective/Roy Morrison

Our hearts tell us what we should do. Prices tell us what we will do.
The principle is clear if we want to make economic growth mean ecological improvement, not ecological destruction. More pollution must mean a decrease in the rate of profit. Less pollution must mean increasing profits.
It’s not hard. We need to tax consumption, not income. Pay taxes on whatever we buy or use. More pollution, more tax. Lower pollution, less tax. Ecological consumption taxes can enlist the invisible hand of Adam Smith in the cause of ecological sustainability.
An average 18 percent ecological value added tax, or E-VAT, can replace all U.S. government taxes on income, fund the federal budget, and get the prices right by raising taxes on more polluting goods and services. The more polluting, the higher the E-VAT tax rate, and the lower the rate of profit.
Helping save the planet and our kids’ futures is to phase out income taxes and the IRS. How painful is that? Just make the E-VAT rate on all goods and services increase with the amount of pollution, depletion, or ecological damage. That is the path to ecological sustainability and peace, instead of climate change and resource wars for oil, water, and fertile high ground.
We can phase in the E-VAT over 10 years as we phase out income taxes. The E-VAT is simple for consumers. You pay a sales tax at the point of purchase. You file no tax forms. You avoid taxes by buying less polluting goods or services with lower tax rates indicated by color codes.
And the E-VAT is simple and largely self-enforcing for businesses. Businesses file only a simple form reporting the tax you collected from your sales and taking credit for the tax you paid your suppliers. You send the difference between what you collected and what you paid to the government. This credit for invoices system means that the value sellers add to their product is only taxed once. The E-VAT could be based, first, on average amounts of pollution, depletion, and ecological damage by S.I.C. code (Standard Industrial Classification) with less polluting items applying for reductions.
The E-VAT is consistent with WTO rules that permit taxes on imports with exemptions for exports. If the U.S. adopted an E-VAT, it would make exporters from China to Germany change their practices.
The E-Vat tax base is final sales to domestic purchasers, more than $13 trillion a year. An 18 percent average E-VAT, with allowances for collection and non-compliance, could replace all personal , corporate, and payroll taxes.
The E-VAT as a tax on all consumption, not simply on pollution, is positively reinforcing. As the market responds to E-VAT rates, highest polluting items would lose market share. To maintain revenues, the tax on moderate polluting items would rise. Over time, this would mean the E-VAT would tend toward a flat tax on most items that were sustainable in impact with high taxes indeed on the few polluting outliers.
The regressive nature of the E-VAT can easily be remedied by a targeted negative income tax. An additional $64.5 billion for a negative income tax would keep federal tax rates flat for the 40 percent of U.S. households with the lowest income. My forthcoming book, "Markets, Democracy & Survival," discusses the E-VAT in detail.
The simple relationship between less pollution and higher profit will lead in short order to a fundamental transformation in the way we do business and make investment and consumption decisions. If polluting goods and services cost more, we just need to be price conscious shoppers and businesspeople. Our ethics and our pocketbooks will be once more aligned.

Roy Morrison is Director of the Office of Sustainability at Southern New Hampshire University.His latest book, "Markets, Democracy & Survival," is forthcoming in 2007. "Markets, Democracy & Survival" available now for download in PDF from: www.RMAenergy.net.

Link roundup: The end of July edition

Here is a bunch of stuff I haven't had a chance to post. It's hard to believe that it is the end of July already. So far, it has been a pretty good summer. But, it will all be over in six weeks. Enjoy it while you can.

The answer is more debates

Hillary Clinton and John Edwards were reportedly talking about limiting debate participants the other night in this exchange caught on camera and hot mics, I believe by C-SPAN, after a recent debate:

If they are frustrated because they aren't getting enough face time or need more than 60 seconds to answer a question, and who can blame them for that, that is understandable. But, the answer isn't fewer debates or fewer people in the debates. The answer is more debates.
I'm not surprised that Hillary would try and limit the voices in the debate. She calls her speeches "listening tours" even though she doesn't do a lot of listening during them. However, I'm a bit taken aback by Edwards' move. He never looks bad in these things and Gravel and Kucinich going after the frontrunners only really hurts Clinton and Barack Obama, IMHO.

Here is another YouTube clip worth looking at, with Edwards really taking it home:


FCC Hearings

The FCC has been traveling around the country, holding hearings concerning problems with broadcast media consolidation. C-SPAN has aired a couple of the hearings and they've been pretty interesting to watch. Recently, they held one in Portland, Maine, the only hearing in New England. Dan Kennedy has a bit about the hearing here: ["Local media and the FCC"]. And here is a letter from a resident complaining about hearing: ["FCC didn't hear me"]. So much for these hearings being about the public talking about consolidation. As much as I enjoy working in the broadcast industry and respect many of my colleagues, for them to do this just to protect their corporate masters is just intolerable.

9-11

Congress finally passed a terrorism bill including recommendations from The 9-11 Commission: ["Congress Passes Major Anti-Terror Bill"]. I don't know if this means anything considering both The Commission and its report seem like quite the whitewash, especially when you look at some of the outstanding questions. Interestingly, at my job, I constantly get emails from Lee Hamilton's PR firm, pitching columns. Since we only publish local stuff at work, I wouldn't consider them there. I hadn't thought about whether or not I wanted to publish them here on Politizine. I usually just give them a cursory glance and then delete them.

Speaking of 9-11, this French official thinks Bush was involved: ["French officials suggests Bush was behind September 11"]. This blog post caused a furor at the Post: ["Blog post that made the N.Y. Post"]. And here is a Web site with a slew of resources on it: ["9-11 Review"]. One of those resources is this interesting picture of a woman waving from the plane hole: ["Person waving from the plane shape hole"]. As noted, if this floor was burning so hot that it basically melted the infrastructure of the tower, how could a person stand at the hole and wave for help? Of course, it could be a cool video trick. But I really wonder about this.

Carbon taxes

Roy Morrison continues his work on alternative energy, including a long report on building a sustainable electric grid in New Hampshire: ["EcoPowerHedge"]. Readers may recall that I linked comments by Al Gore promoting Morrison's carbon tax idea. Well, now another person has taken hold of it: ["Counting on Failure, Energy Chairman Floats Carbon Tax"].

Short takes

Here is a long piece about microchips worth the time it takes to read: ["Microchip Implants Raise Privacy Concern"]. And then there is this: ["Microchips mulled for HIV carriers in Indonesia"].
By accident, I found this pretty cool horror movie site: ["Bloody Disgusting"].
Another 2008 candidate? Possibly: ["General Zod 2008"].
Rightwing newspaper says it's time to go: ["Scaife-Owned Newspaper Calls for Iraq Troop Withdrawal -- Questions Bush's 'Mental Stability'"].
Kerry dishes some out: ["Kerry to Mitt: Who's flip-flopping now?"].
AP Poll: ["GOP pick is 'none of the above'"].
This guy isn't too happy: ["The Audacity of Fraud: How Barack Obama Is Losing My Vote"]. It should be noted that Foreign Affairs is published by the Council on Foreign Relations, the same think tank that is coming very close to suggesting that the United States basically absorb Mexico and Canada and make the best of it: ["Building a North American Community"]. GOP candidate Rep. Duncan Hunter was able to get his amendment to keep federal funds from going to the NAFTA Super Highway down in Texas: ["Hunter NAFTA Super Highway Amendment Passes House"].
Kristin Gore: Dad's not running: ["Gore Daughter: '08 Run Not Happening"].

Join a March for Climate Action!
Guest Perspective/ReEnergize New Hampshire

Dear Friends,
Imagine this: thousands converging on New Hampshire's capitol, uniting to demand national action for a clean energy economy and real solutions to global warming.
Join us for the March to ReEnergize New Hampshire to help make this vision a reality:



Global warming is serious, and people are catching on. We read it in the newspaper and hear it on the radio. Now it's crept into the centerfold of Vanity Fair and it's printed on our yogurt lids. It's a hit in Hollywood and a focus of classrooms across the country. Yet despite the buzz, we haven't seen actions that match the scale of the problem.
But with all eyes on the Granite State this primary season, we have the opportunity to make sure something is done.
RSVP here to join us for an hour, a day, or for the whole march: http://www.climatesummer.org/march
We'll gather on July 31st in Greeley Park in Nashua, ready to kick off five days of walking to call for the scale of action our country needs. We'll stay at farms where the bounty has diminished over the warming years and churches whose congregations have found faith in our ability as a community to confront global warming.
We'll walk beside Bill McKibben, founder of Step It Up and a guiding voice in this movement. Granny D will be there, who - at the age of 89 - crossed the country afoot for a cause of her own. Now at 97, she's promised us that she'll be back on the road.
You, your family and friends are invited! RSVP and bring everyone you know: http://www.climatesummer.org/march
On the morning of Aug. 5, we'll gather with thousands as we walk the last mile into the center of Concord and rally on the State House lawn. En masse, we'll make the loudest call to our leaders yet: we want clean energy, green jobs, and a strong economy to cut our carbon emissions 80 percent by 2050.
We're writing this because we want you to be there too. We're just 25 college students who figured tight quarters and long hours was a cheap price to pay for our future.
So please, join us. Sign up to march for one day or all five. Prepare a meal or play a song. Make a few calls, and send this letter to everyone you know. Time is short, but together, we've got all the energy we need.
We look forward to seeing you there!

Sierra, Zo, Lindsey, Ian, Kelly, Maura & the whole ReEnergize NH Team reenergizenh@gmail.com. 610-220-5378

Live Earth, what's the point?
I'm sitting here watching some of the Live Earth concert wondering, what is the point of all this?
I thought I read somewhere a couple of months ago that they were going to try and figure out a way to make all the coinciding concerts carbon-neutral. That would seem like quite a task when you consider all the electricity the musicians are using all day, all the trash produced by the hundreds of thousands of people attending concerts, and the thousands and thousands of airline miles musicians, celebs, and fans burned through to attend the concerts.
This Brit newspaper kinda nails some interesting points on the head: ["Live Earth is promoting green to save the planet - what planet are they on?"]. You have to love this line:

Matt Bellamy, front man of the rock band Muse, has dubbed it 'private jets for climate change'.

And this one:

Indeed, Madonna's carbon footprint is dwarfed only by her ego - she has vowed that she will 'speak to the planet' at Wembley. In fact, an apology might be in order - for the superstar's energy consumption is only the tip of the iceberg in this epic vanity-fest.

Ouch. The newspaper later reveals that Madonna consumes about 10,000 tons of carbon annually. Or, how about a little more reality:

The total carbon footprint of the event, taking into account the artists' and spectators' travel to the concert, and the energy consumption on the day, is likely to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specialises in such calculations. Throw in the television audience and it comes to a staggering 74,500 tonnes. In comparison, the average Briton produces ten tonnes in a year. The concert will also generate some 1,025 tonnes of waste at the concert stadiums - much of which will go directly into landfill sites.

Or this expert:

Collins says: "It is patently absurd to claim that travel of this nature doesn't have an impact. Each person attending the event will have to make a return journey to the venue, be it by air, rail, bus or car. This burns fossil fuel - precisely what we are trying to reduce."

Is the Daily Mail a Murdoch rag? I wonder. But either way, there are some pretty good points in that story. And the standard "one rule for them, another rule for us" shines brightly in this entire situation.

And, why won't Al Gore, or anyone else from the global warming crowd, debate these guys?: ["Global Warming Heartland"]. This group has been running small ads in the WSJ for months now, trying to get Gore to debate them on some of the issues. Maybe they are cranks. Maybe they aren't.
What we do know is that there are data out there to suggest that humans have nothing to do with this phenom. In fact, scientists state emphatically that these temperature increases have occurred on earth randomly six or seven times over the last 400,000 years. The problem is that they can't tell us what caused the rising temperatures previously, because, none of us were alive then. In addition, there were no machines then either, so it had nothing to do with industry or humans.
Personally, I believe in global climate change. We can see it happening. We can see that we get sunburns after 45 minutes in the sun when 25 years ago we could be out in the sun all day and nothing would happen to us. But, as a reporter, I have to question everything, look at data, and make my own judgment. And, after looking at a lot of this, I don't know what is actually causing global climate change. I also know that those who support the theory that humans are causing all these problems - and especially Americans, since we are 4 percent of the world's population while consuming 35 percent of the resources - refuse to even discuss any other theories or debate any of this with anyone. They just designate anyone who questions it, or any part of it, as a loon, even though scientists don't actually know. They use words like "this might happen" or "this could happen" or "this may be the cause" ... those are not absolutes.
In the end, it might not be human beings. There are others who challenge that humans are the ones causing this problem. Again, I personally do suspect that humans have a lot to do with the problem or, more accurately, are probably making the problem worse. But I don't actually know it to be fact. We can, as Americans and citizens of the world, all use a lot less. As I was reminded recently, the conservation theme isn't just "recycle," it's "reduce, reuse, recycle." Of course, that goes against American marketing principles so ...
Seriously though, I suspect that much of this global warming "hysteria," for lack of a better word, is an attempt by powerful people in the world to control how we live as Americans. The powerful global elite have been talking about these things for more than three decades. They ideally would like Americans riding bicycles to work like the Chinese do [well, those globalists who aren't in the car business]. Imagine riding your bike to work in say, New England's February. Yeah, some maniacs do it. But the rest of us? Not.
And why do you think they are shipping all the manufacturing overseas? It isn't just about low wages leading to higher profits. It is about lowering our wage standards - which are plummeting for most Americans - and raising global wage standards. The rise globally is happening at a meager pace, BTW. But, how do you think all those Chinese are going to afford E! Hollywood News on their cable systems if they are earning 10 cents an hour, as the theory goes?
This is the myth of free trade, a theory which has had more negative effects on climate change than anyone not recycling a plastic bottle. In the eyes of many of the world's powerful people, Americans have it too good. And, everyone should be close to equal or, more accurately, close to serfdom. Then, the Davos crowd and the people they pull up along the way will be way up here, running things as they see fit, while we are all down here, fighting over crumbs. This isn't a conspiracy theory; many of these people have publicly stated these theories for years and years and their comments have been well-documented in the alternative press.
If you talk to your typical Democrat [one who thinks Hillary Clinton is a Godsend] about stuff like this, you'll lose them ... quickly. But, at the same time, they point to PNAC's 1998 report that a Pearl Harbor-like terrorist event was needed against the United States as reason that George W. Bush is evil and had a role in 9-11 in order to jack up defense spending, control natural resources in the third world, overthrow Saddam Hussein, etc. They don't doubt that one for a minute. It really depends on which side of the bed you sleep on and nothing more. Most folks can't go beyond their personal, political space on anything. It would question their perspective and, we can't have that now, can we?
Personally, I think both theories have some merit because they are essentially the same thing, just different agendas: Powerful people trying to control weaker people. It has always been this way and it probably always will be. But, you can find small ways to carve out personal freedom for yourself. If that means changing all the lightbulbs in your house to save money and carbons, go for it. But if it means that I want to run my ACs at 65 degrees in the summer, then leave me alone [I don't run them that low but I'm just trying to make a point].

Shockingly, or, I guess not so, Sting [or Stink, as I call him, to irk my wife] admitted to the woman from "Today" that, as a rock star, his global footprint is huge. So true. Nice that you could admit it. But, at least Sting has done some things, as both he and his lovely second wife Trudie noted, via their Rainforest Foundation. You had to have loved her comments about the oil companies mucking everything up in Peru or wherever. Hey, Trudie, what does your Rolls Royce run on, BTUs from rice? How do your maids get to work? I'm not happy with the oil companies either but come on.
Later, Al Gore came on after thanking Melissa Ethridge for this great song which we didn't even get to hear [Who's editing this damn show?]. Gore urged us to sign a bunch of pledges. Paraphrasing, pledge that all the developed nations cut emissions by 90 percent while the rest of the world cuts them by 50 percent. Hmm. OK. So, you can kiss goodbye more U.S. jobs, probably millions more, which will leave the country for countries where the emissions are less stringent. That will put more of our people out of work. Why can't we all sign the same pledge and be equals in the world? Next. Paraphrasing, that no new coal-burning plants get built. Oh yeah, go off on the coal-burning plants without any alternatives except nuclear, which is not an alternative at all. You can just hear the WSJ editorial board and the lunatics who don't give a crap about the world wringing their hands in glee at the thought of building more and more terrorist targets and 100,000 year cancer camps, i.e., nuclear power plants. Watch the global warming folks get suckered into building more and more Seabrooks in the name of saving the earth [BTW, they already are: http://www.climatechange.org/]. Sorry, no thanks.
Maybe we should be thinking a little more creatively about combating global warming. How about building hundreds and hundreds of desalination plants which would convert salt water into fresh water. This water could then be piped to areas of the world without water. If we started now, this process might be able to curb 50 years worth of melting ice caps and glaciers which are predicted to flood Manhattan and Florida in water by 2060. And, the money spent, probably hundreds of billions of dollars, is surely a better way to spend the money than to turn the sands of Iraq into DU-glass. I don't know if this would actually work but combined with all the other efforts, it might work. It is also probably more doable than getting folks to stop buying SUVs.
So, again, I ask the question: What's the point? If it is for all the little 5 second PSAs about everything people can do to stop global warming, OK, that seems like a worthy effort. Some of us though have already replaced virtually every lightbulb in our house just to lower the astronomical electric bills we pay [we've replaced 10 of them in our house, sans the bathroom, where we need more light]. If it is to get us to recycle paper, most of us are already doing that even if some municipalities, like mine, don't offer corporate recycling. But really, after that, what is the point?
Sure, none of us want to fry. None of us want to drown after the ice caps melt. We all want a healthy world for our children and their children. But some of Gore's pledges aren't realistic answers to the problems and that's what we really need.

Update: What? Wolf Mother? Who the heck are they? Nice Zepp ripoff. They also should have let Crowded House play the entire version of "Don't Dream It's Over."

Update 2: OK, I'm less cranky. The Beasties just played "Sabotage."

Update 3: Oh yeah, "Girls on Film," by Duran Duran. Nice.

Update 4: Stink singing off-key fronting The Police. Yikes. I won't be paying $110 per ticket to see the reformed Police anytime soon.

'Useful' press releases
Occasionally at my new job, I receive some pretty interesting press releases. But because they are not focused on the community I cover, I do not use them much, despite the usefulness of the text.
Here is one I received last month from a CT insurance company which has been sitting around the house, waiting to be posted. It is entitled, "8 Answers to $3+ A Gallon Gas," and some of the points definitely deserve republication. The press release is quoted verbatim below with my comments in [brackets]:

* Smooth out your driving by avoiding "jack rabbit" starts and sharp braking. Both waste gas and can present a hazard for others on the road [As well, I would add, that sharp braking wears down your brakes, meaning that the driver will have to replace them sooner rather than later. This costs the driver more money in the long run and adds more brake shoes to landfills in a quicker amount of time. This is assuming that brake shoes go in landfills. Maybe they are recycled at this point, I don't know].
* It is estimated that every mile per hour driven above 55 MPH costs 1 percent in fuel economy. So, slowing down can be both safe and fuel-efficient. Maintaining a constant speed also maximizes your car performance. If road conditions permit, use the cruise control [This seems logical but I have experimented with long distance driving and speed limits and have seen little savings between the two. In fact, for whatever reason, the slower speeds seem to cause even lower fuel economy. I have seen this when driving on secondary roads, at speeds of 35 to 45 MPH, and then, calculated the mileage after filling the tank, and found significant MPG loss, in the neighborhood of 5 to 6 MPG when averaged out].
* Air conditioners can account for 10 to 15 percent impact on mileage. If you can't avoid it, don't turn on the air conditioner as the first response to heat. Start your drive with the windows open to exhaust the hot air our of the rear windows and then put on the A/C if needed [Again, totally logical point here. I would add that I know a number of companies are experimenting with solar panels on cars to see if the energy produced by the sun can offset some of the energy used in our new, higher-powered automobiles, so they can produce fuel efficiency in the future].
* Accelerate as you approach a hill, rather than hitting the gas and switching gears once on the incline.
* Lighten the car's load by removing all unnecessary items from the trunk, such as the bag of sand and shovel from the winter. Every 200 pounds of weight reduces gas efficiency by one mile per gallon [In other words, don't travel long distances with overweight people in your car or charge them extra for the shared ride, hah. This could also be an added incentive for some of us to lose some unwanted pounds ... you'll save money in the long run].
* If you have to carry a lot of baggage, avoid using a roof-top container, which will increase the air drag. If you drive a pick-up truck, the open bed will have the same impact, so put a cover on it [It would, of course, be better to do a bit of math first before going out and buying an expensive cover. If you are only going to save a few pennies per fill up, over time, there might not be much savings in dropping a bundle on a cover. But, maybe pick-up owners should have them anyway, to protect the life of the truck].
* Keep your tires inflated to the level recommended by the manufacturer. Incorrectly inflated tires impact fuel efficiency.
* Plan your trip routes and combined trips to minimize travel.

Here is another one, from New Hampshire, which talks about work distractions:

NFI Research NEWS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Julia Stoddart

603-750-3020

julia@nfiresearch.com

Distractions at Work

Madbury, NH (June 19, 2007) - When it comes to workplace distractions, e-mail, the crisis of the day and personal interruptions top the list.

More than two-thirds (67%) of senior executives and managers say e-mail is the biggest distraction in the workplace today, according to a worldwide survey of 228 senior executives and managers conducted by NFI Research. Crisis of the day (42%), personal interruptions (31%) and changing priorities (30%) are the other top distractions in today's workplace.

"While e-mail is a great productivity tool, it can become a nightmare if not managed well," said NFI Chairman and CEO Chuck Martin.

Nearly half (46%) of business leaders get to work early to avoid distractions. The other top ways they avoid distractions are focus (41%), closing the door (37%), working at home (37%) and staying at work late (37%). More managers (28%) than senior executives (15%) say Web surfing is the biggest distraction in today's workplace. When comparing senior executives and managers to what is done to avoid distractions, 47 percent of managers say focusing is their main solution while only 34 percent of executives say it is.

"As a leader it can be tough to balance being available and staying focused," said one survey respondent. "When I really have to get something done, I will work from home or the library. Mostly when an interruption occurs, if I need to stay focused on what i am doing, I will look up and say is it something that can wait for an hour (or whatever the time frame may be)."

When it comes to organizational size, more executives and managers in large organizations say e-mail is the biggest distraction in today's workplace than those in small or medium organizations.

NFI Research surveys 2,000 senior executives and managers globally every two weeks. It has chronicled the transformation of business and countless workplace issues for more than seven years. NFI Research's membership represents some of the world's most renowned and innovative companies, including many members from Fortune 100 Companies.

Chuck Martin's new book "SMARTS (Are We Hardwired for Success?)" (AMACOM/American Management Association), which discusses the 12 Executive Skills, was just released.

Imagine, for a second, that you had a boss who hated both person-to-person meetings and telephone conversations, and required you to do almost all of your business communication via emailed memos. You might drive yourself insane ... or worse.

Lastly, here are two creative press releases from the folks at DemocraticMatch.com, the liberal dating site. The first, was actually sent in June. And interestingly, they haven't changed their name:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Edward R. Murrow Rolls Over in His Grave!

April 6, 2007:
Sounds of pounding, kicking, and bones splintering against pine were reported today, coming from beneath the startled feet of visitors to the gravesite of the world famous and beloved newsman Edward R. Murrow, known for his integrity and courage in reporting to the American people. Also heard filtering up from below, muffled and lispy yet clearly audible, were impassioned shouts of..."Cover The Real Stories" and "What Does Paris Hilton Have to do with ANYTHING?" "Bush, Cheney and their Oil Cabal are DESTROYING YOUR PLANET"... and then more quietly, as with a final effort, "fight you slackers"... then silence.

The flabbergasted gravesite visitors immediately fled and called the media to investigate - however they were otherwise occupied, dutifully distributing the latest press release from the White House.

This story was "dug up" by David Singelyn, founder of DemocraticMatch.Com liberal dating ~ where truth still matters.

####
End of press release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Democratic Match may change name in protest of Iraq war funding

May 26, 2007:

To illustrate it's disgust of the Democrat's agreement on funding the Iraq war, DemocraticMatch.Com, the dating site for Democrats, has asked it's 25,000 members to vote on whether or not to change the website's name to eliminate the word "Democratic." David Singelyn, the website's founder has sent this message to all the members of Democratic Match:

We entrusted the Democrats to put an end to an immoral and illegal war, and they have let us down by agreeing to continue funding Bush's endless tragedy. Like a Tolkien nightmare, the Democrats ventured boldly into Mordor to cast Bush and his evil ring into the fire, only to come home wearing his ring on their own hands!

Besides the moral issue of supporting a war built on lies, there is the so-far undiscussed matter of Global Warming, which is accelerating beyond all predictions, and every 3 days we'll now be spending one BILLION dollars to secure even more of the substance causing the problem - OIL!

That's 100 BILLION dollars this year which we won't be investing in the wind turbines, solar panels, and reforestation that could RIGHT NOW be reversing Global Warming, the most serious threat mankind has ever faced! Who the hell is driving this runaway train? One week ago, We'd have said it was the Republicans - Bush, Cheney and their oil company puppeteers. This week, far too many Democrats have gone Gollum on us, and joined them in this utter insanity.

Therefore, we are asking our 25,000 members whether or not they would like to change the name of the site from "Democratic Match" to "Progressive Passions," or "Liberal Friends."

Democratic Match will be taking votes for the next week, and will then make a decision based on the votes of it's members.

####
End of press release

David Singelyn
DemocraticMatch.Com
PO Box 633 Lake Elsinore Ca 92530 951-442-9262

Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

Concord Monitor releases primary poll
This morning's Monitor has an extensive 2008 poll conducted by Research 2000 during the same time period pollsters completed a poll in Iowa. The online edition of the Monitor doesn't have the poll but the newspaper version does. Here is the article: ["Obama strong in new poll"]. Clearly the poll is biased because Sen. Obama was in the state just before the polling and got a slew of media coverage. But who knows. Here are some of the details:

DEMS:
Hillary Clinton: 22%
Barack Obama: 21%
John Edwards: 16%
Al Gore: 10%
John Kerry: 7%
Wesley Clark: 4%
Dennis Kucinich: 4%
Joe Biden: 2%
Tom Vilsack: 2%
Evan Bayh: 2%
Bill Richardson: 2%
Undecided: 2%

GOP:
Rudy Guiliani: 26%
John McCain: 25%
Mitt Romney: 10%
Newt Gingrich: 8%
Condi Rice: 6%
George Pataki: 3%
Jeb Bush: 1%
George Allen: 1%
Sam Brownback: 1%
Rick Santorum: 1%
Duncan Hunter: 0%
Undecided: 18%

Some thoughts: Where do the Gore voters go if he doesn't run? Kerry should just give it up. It's hilarious to see Clark, the war criminal, tied with Kucinich, the peace candidate. Kucinich got 1.3 percent in 2004's primary so he is already three times ahead of the game. It is also interesting to see voters naming a slew of candidates who are not running, like Bayh, Allen, Bush, and Santorum. Allen lost a squeaker but any presidential aspirations he had are over. Santorum got totally clocked ... by 18 points. Anyone thinking he is going to run, or has any chance of winning, is delusional. Lastly, Vilsack, Bayh, and Gingrich didn't seem to get any boost from recent visits to the state. Granted, it's early.

Global warming?
It's friggin' Christmas and it is 47 degrees outside! Where is the cold weather? Where is the frost? Where is the snow? I got my son a two-man rubber toboggan for Christmas ... but there's no snow to use it! Ugh.

Link dump
Here is a bunch of stuff I've been meaning to share.

Ralph Nader continues to make sense: ['This is about corporate-managed trade']. Lori Wallach is one of my heroes. I also haven't bought Sen. Byron Dorgan's book yet but I plan to when it comes out in paperback.

If the end of oil is coming soon, this is something we should all look at: ["DIY Fuel"].

Very interesting: ["Pyramids were built with concrete rather than rocks, scientists claim"]. So, I guess they won't be digging around the Sahara looking for those space machines from Exodus any time soon ...

Last night, I stumbled across the "Dark Skies" pilot listed in On Demand and watched it. I had forgotten how good the show was. And, it makes sites like this one, even more interesting: ["Alien Payback"]. I saw this linked at DailyKos of all places. I don't fault the guy for trying to get his story out there. But I find it strange that you can get booted from DailyKos for supporting Ralph Nader or for challenging anything but the official story about 9-11, but he then accepts ads from people who claimed to have been abducted by aliens and injected with stuff. Ohhhh-kaaayhh.

Speaking of 9-11, this site has a whole slew of stuff which is really worth a second look: ["Killtown"]. This site, along with this one: ["9-11 Truth"] this one: ["Share the truth"] and this one: ["Scholars for 9/11 truth"], are worth second looks. I would also advise people to watch the "Loose Change" documentary ... with an open mind. I don't know if 9-11 was an "inside job" or whether or not government officials had prior knowledge. But, I don't believe that a 757 was flown into the Pentagon and no one has yet explained why WTC 7 was "pulled." I wish the FBI would release all the security tapes they confiscated from the Sheraton and 7-11 right near the Pentagon. Which actually find out that it was a cruise missile and not an airliner which crashed into the Pentagon.

Aaron Russo, a former Libertarian Presidential candidate, has been working on this new documentary, which is now out on DVD: ["America: Freedom to Fascism"]. I'm looking forward to checking it out.

This guy created MySpace ... and he has a lot of complaining to do: ["Free MySpace"].

Joy Division doesn't like upcoming documentary: ["Joy Division doesn't like 'Control'"].

And then, there is this: ["Forespray"].

WSJ
I really enjoy reading the Wall Street Journal. Despite some delivery problems - it took six weeks to get the sub started and since that time, I haven't received a full week. I usually only get four issues a week and I don't think I'm the only person in Concord, N.H. getting the thing. But I really like reading it. There are changes coming and most of them look pretty good:

Dear Subscriber:

We live in an era of change, and the way we get our news has also changed.

So, starting January 2, 2007 you will see a more relevant Journal designed to better meet your needs. There will be increased focus on interpretation, insight and ideas …more of what the news means and not just what happened.

And your Journal will look different too. It will come to you in a slimmer, easier to handle size, with a more legible typeface. There will be better section labeling and more daily summaries to help you find what you need more quickly.

Some other great new features include …

• “Today’s Agenda” designed to alert you to the meaning of news expected later in the day.
• “In Brief” summaries which will mirror the popular “What’s News” on key industries and topics inside the paper.
• Value-added Statistics that graphically communicate market information and global market trends each day.
• NEW Markets Data Center at WSJ.com available free to all subscribers. This site will provide full stock listings and easy ways to put data into context. Innovative features include stock and index charting, access to market-moving headlines and email delivery of key market information.

Please visit now at wsj.com/mdctour to find out for yourself how easy Markets Data Center is to use.

We hope you like what you will see on January 2. Be assured that what has not changed is the high quality content and credibility you have come to expect from The Journal. As always we welcome your reactions, comments and thoughts. You can contact us at newlookfeedback@wsj.com.

Sincerely,
The Wall Street Journal

Happy Christmas and Happy Holidays. I'm on vaca this week so blogging will be limited ... unless the world explodes or something. Have a good one.

More on the Middle East
Here are two columns worth a read which make really good points. First, "Peacenik" Pat Buchanan drops this bomb: ["Where are the Christians?"].

"Now, Israel's rampage against a defenseless Lebanon – smashing airport runways, fuel tanks, power plants, gas stations, lighthouses, bridges, roads and the occasional refugee convoy – has exposed Bush's folly in subcontracting U.S. policy out to Tel Aviv, thus making Israel the custodian of our reputation and interests in the Middle East."

All I can say is wow.
Then there is this by Lou Dobbs: ["Not so smart when it comes to the Middle East"].

"While the United States provides about $2.5 billion in military and economic aid to Israel each year, U.S. aid to Lebanon amounts to no more than $40 million. This despite the fact that the per capita GDP of Israel is among the highest in the world at $24,600, nearly four times as high as Lebanon's GDP per capita of $6,200.
Lebanon's lack of wealth is matched by the Palestinians -- three out of every four Palestinians live below the poverty line. Yet the vast majority of our giving in the region flows to Israel. This kind of geopolitical inconsistency and shortsightedness has contributed to the Arab-Israeli conflict that the Western world seems content to allow to perpetuate endlessly."

Again, all I can say is wow. Maybe I'm not so "liberal" after all?

Why the stock market sucks: ["Yahoo Stock Falls to Biggest One-Day Drop"]. You make your target, you're selling tons of ads to basically no one, the Internet isn't a tangible thing like a factory, your company turns in millions and millions in profit, but because you aren't as big as Google, and won't become as big any time soon, well, you lose $10 billion in one day. What?! Insane.