Fairly Fairey

Today's Fresh Air with Terry Gross included a piece about Shepard Fairey and the issues surrounding his appropriation of a Mannie Garcia/AP photo as the starting point for his famous Obama Hope poster.



Fairey and the Associated Press are engaged in a lawsuit over the question of fair use; I will render a verdict on that later.

Photographers, particularly those that are trying to make a living at it, face rights issues because photography necessarily appropriates reality and reality is often owned. As a member of an organization of photography professionals, ASMP, we are advised to always obtain model and property releases so as to gain rights to content of our own images. Photojournalists, such as Mr. Garcia, need not do so because content from the public domain or otherwise newsworthy imagery is usually considered fair use.

Sometimes a misunderstanding or fear of fair use policy creates a chilling effect. For example, in 2005 I photographed The Gates by Christo and Jeanne-Claude, which is an art work consisting of the temporary installation of suspended orange fabric all over Central Park. The artists do not accept donations or sponsorships but collect revenue by selling product related to the exhibit. A few months later, I submitted a photo essay on The Gates to a photography website which rejected it for fear of litigation, in spite of the fact that images of The Gates were appearing in the national media.

Terry Gross also interviewed a lawyer, who reported that fair use law is based on various tests, whose application is open to interpretation.

My opinion is that Shepard Fairey's use of Mr. Garcia's image does constitute fair use. As a photojournalist, Mr. Garcia makes photographs that are expected to be factual and possibly newsworthy. He also enjoys the special privilege of preferred access, which is extended only to credentialed members of the press. Within the commercial world of news photography, Mr. Garcia has rights which obligate those who exploit his photographs to both pay him and credit his work.

But Mr. Fairey is not in the business of consuming or redistributing news photography, rather, he is an artist who creates new works of cultural and political significance based on news artifacts. Just as Mr. Garcia enjoys the privilege of access to Obama and the rights to Obama's image, Mr. Fairey should enjoy the privilege of fair use of these news artifacts. To do otherwise would limit free artistic expression and would tend to chill political commentary and parody.

Ironically, Mr. Fairey is being ripped off more than anyone. Obamicons are the new smiley face and I am assuming that Mr. Fairey is not profiting in anyway, nor is he being asked for permission.

The Oscars Are Our Superbowl

Fashion wrap to come, but first, a few comments on the show. It was wonderful even though it ran 3 and a half hours. The Hugh Jackman opening-on-a-budget was funny and a bit surprising, as Jackman was totally unknown to me. The best parts were the actor awards, where prior winners gave personal tributes to the nominees. We got verklempt. Foodwise, it was an Oscars to remember as Clare made her special mac and cheese.

My fashion commentary is based on the Yahoo oscars fashion report. Please open that in a separate window and follow along. I have three grades: honors, pass, and fail.

Angelina Jolie, honors. The "best in show" of the night, AJ put it all together in one super-star red carpet look. Understated emerald earrings and cocktail ring highlighted a black strapless cocktail gown that showed a hint of leg.

Miley Cyrus, pass. Miley is in a difficult situation, being too young to pull off dressing sexy, but too much of a star to dress like the average prom queen. Her solution was to go out of box for something resembling a christmas tree made out of aluminum foil. It was not awful, rather, it was fun to see. So you other critics, lay off her as she's still just a kid.

Kate Winslet, pass. Kate Winslet is best actress this year. Everyone knew that, including Time magazine, who announced this on their cover prior to the Oscars. She put on a dignified appearance, transitioning from the sexy starlet look of former years. The gun metal grey gown was beautiful, but yelled out "don't go all Meryl Streep on us just yet."

Mickey Rourke, fail. I am always a bit in awe of those who insist upon being themselves, regardless of where they are (yes, I'm thinking of you Johnny Depp and Alexander Calder). Mickey was just being Mickey. Liked the boots.

Marisa Tomei, honors. Marisa looked as good as Marisa can look. The Versace satin gown flattered her form while dazzling onlookers with pleated complexity. Perfect hair, jewelry, and makeup complimented the look. Good to know MT has still got it, as in prior award shows, it seemed as if she wasn't even trying.

Beyonce, fail. She failed not just because the bottom of the dress looked like some really bad curtains, but because the dress made her look fat. Not sure if anything could save this look, but a touch of jewelry might have distracted us.

Anne Hathaway, honors. White, tight, and shiny. Miss Hathaway has the most amazing face with features that are just too big, but somehow combine to render beauty. This dress was a pedestal for all that. She did not appear busty (but she is), consequently the look was not afflicted with any distractions.

Vanessa Hudgens, fail. This dress looked cheap to me, both in fabric and in execution, particularly the bottom. The flowers seemed to be a mess. Otherwise, from the shoulders up, Vanessa looked great.

Zac Eftron, fail. The tux was standard issue and the collar did not seem to fit. Spring for some nice studs next time.

Jennifer Aniston, pass. The Valentino gown was beautiful, well fitted, and had nice bead work. But the braid across over the forehead and limp locks made me think she wasn't too jazzed about the Oscar's this year.

Heidi Klum, honors. Nixon said, "if the President does it, then it's not illegal". And so it goes with Heidi, if she wears it, it can't be bad. Heidi is from the world of fashion, not Hollywood, and rules are different. It is not enough that she be simply beautiful, which happens without breaking a sweat. She must dazzle. Perched on red satin open-toed stilettos, she dazzled us with an origami-inspired red asymmetric Jane Jetson masterpiece, complete with train. Someday the other critics will agree.

Meryl Streep, pass. The job here is to dress so that people will know you're going to an awards show. Mission accomplished. Next year, consider a diamond necklace. You'll look great.

Hugh Jackman, honors. Crisp, clean, well-fitted, shoes shined. Above all, everything was in the correct proportions.

Freida Pinto, fail. I wanted to like this dress but there was something about it that wouldn't let me. Finally it hit me. Her mother should be wearing it. Freida is a young beautiful woman and this dress does not match that reality. The ornamented left sleeve says "I should be covering up an arm that needs covering up."

Sophia Loren, fail. This dress is so bad, the worst of all the season's award shows, that it deserves a special place of honor. Ms. Loren is 74 years old, and that she would go out in public in such a tight, boob revealing, flouncy thing is amazing. Unfortunately, no woman of any age would look good in this monstrosity. My suggestion is that she be buried in it. Nice diamond choker though.

Brad Pitt, pass. Mr. Pitt looked good, however, I expect a bit of cuff to show.

Taraji P. Henson, honors. The white mummy-like strapless gown with train flattered her figure without suggesting a wedding. The rather heavy necklace was unnecessary but did not detract from the overall look.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman, fail. Black on black on black on black with a black skull cap is not a good look for anyone who can pose for the Ab Lounger "before" pictures.

Halle Berry, honors. If you are going to do a black strapless column mermaid dress, Halle shows you how. The gold brocade texture and diagonal stripes make this a winner.

Reese Withespoon, fail. The asymmetry of this dress of this dress did not work, as it leads the eye nowhere and fails to flatter an otherwise beautiful body. The mismatched color patterns on the bottom look like a mistake.

Jessica Beil, pass. Take off the strange floppy bow from this white satin strapless gown and we may have something. The dress is not a disaster, but it does not flatter her figure, which in Ms. Beil's case, is considerable.

Penelope Cruz, honors. A beautiful dreamlike vintage wedding dress for the ages, only we are not at a wedding. None the less, I am so happy we got to see Ms. Cruz in this wonderful work.

Whoopi Goldberg, pass. Ms. Goldberg also belongs to the club that enjoys their own personal set of rules. On anyone else, this leopard print mu mu-like flesh cover er would be outrageous, but on a smiling Whoopi decked in shades, it works.

Amy Adams, fail. Ms. Adams is adorable and one of my favorite celebrities, but I just don't like this dress. For starters, the color is wrong for her hair. The geometric upper is distracting. And the necklace looks like a yoke from King Tut's tomb. Amy, please ask me next time, I'll steer your right, I promise.

Nicole Kidman, fail. A white strapless column gown with applied feathers. The texture of the gown is pleasing, but the feathers are a huge distraction. Hair was a bit amiss. From the shoulders to the forehead, Nicole is otherwise flawless.

Queen Latifah, fail. The black single strapped gown with applied white beading could have done without the wispy see through train, which makes it look like costume.

Josh Brolin and Diane Lane, pass. Josh looks smart in his tux-with-a-regular-old-tie. As I require, the cuffs are peeking out. I am hoping that that civil-war-general facial hair arrangement is for a role. Ms. Lane is gorgeous in a black strapless tight fitting gown with a bit of fringe. Unfortunately, her hair looks as if she has just done a few laps with Dara Torres.

Virginia Madsen, pass. Ms. Madsen looked beautiful in a red strapless gown with an angular asymmetric upper part. The matching belt appears out of place as it is too informal for the gown. The dangling over sized diamond-shaped earrings are killer.

Natalie Portman, pass. When Ms. Portman was presenting on TV, this gown looked fantastic, perhaps because we could only see the upper part, strapless and symmetrical with multicolor bead inlays. The bottom portion is a simple stretch of boring fabric, hiding everything.

Daniel Craig, pass. James Bond in a tux, as expected.

Evan Rachel Wood, honors. Ms. Wood's strapless off-white gown provide interest from top to bottom. The color was not that far off from her skin tone, however, in normal (non-TV) lighting, the contrast would be much greater. Color comes from hair, eyes, lips, and nails, yielding an elegant look. Well done.

Adrian Brody, fail. Looking a little bit like someone on the way to pick up their prom date. Next time, go for a jacket with contrasting lapels and cuffs that show a bit.

Sarah Jessica Parker, fail. SJP, what is going on with those boobs? The "almost mint" dress is fit for a princess, but with that bust, you come across as a housewife from Orange county. The belt is also too informal.

Viola Davis, honors. The iridescent gold halter dress flattered her figure and stood out on the red carpet. But the double white bracelets should have been left at home.

Amanda Seyfried, fail. This thin strapped red dress with the huge bow in front was just too heavy. Combined with some not so glamorous strappy sandals and an unnecessary necklace, we have the misfortune of a pretty young girl dressed badly.

Sean Penn, honors. Mr. Penn shows us that black on black can work if you leave the vest and skull cap at home, the jacket fits well, and you use texture for contrast. Robin Wright Penn is beautiful, even if she could be on her way to performing with the Philharmonic.

Tilda Swinton, fail. Ms. Swinton has always appeared to me as beautiful so I wonder why she swaddles herself in beige and black bunting. The matching ring brackets on each wrist appear too informal.

Alica Keys, pass. A strapless chiffon gown of similar color to Ms. Portman, keys simple look works because she is a beautiful young woman. The flowing over-the-shoulder hair looks good.

Robert Downey Jr., honors. A crisp and well fitting tux.

Marion Cottilard, pass. A strapless dress with blue beading, Ms. Cottilard is saved by the layering of the bottom, which suggests a mini dress that has been converted to a gown.

Tina Fey, honors. On television, Ms. Fey looked statuesque in an off white halter top gown. No nerd girl ever looked so good.

Melissa Leo, fail. If Ms. Loren had not attended, Ms. Leo would get my vote as worst dressed of the evening. It appears she thought she was attending a Renaissance Faire. A completely unflattering garment.

Robert Pattinson, pass. Hey, it fits great.

Bridget Fonda, fail. The entire look was too informal and not appropriate for the red carpet.

Melissa George, fail. I give Ms. George an A for effort in going with a strapless, tight, mermaid dress, however, the upper part looks like a girdle and the lower part looks like a tutu. From the shoulders up, she is gorgeous.

Leslie Mann, fail. This dress is all about the mirrored fabric, but for Ms. Mann, it should have been about tummy control.

James Franco, pass. A bit plain and no cuffs showing, but he didn't embarass himself.

Phoebe Cates, fail. Ms. Cates, like Ms. Pinto, is wearing a gown that is more suited to an older woman. Add that to boring hair and makeup and we have a red carpet bomb.

Maria Menounos, pass. The grey color is not my favorie but the heavy ornamentation of the bottom saves this strapless gown. Would have preferred fewer lines running through the tummmy. Love the hair, makeup, and lack of jewelry.

Lisa Rinna, fail. In the photo, I am seeing, nips, which is just nasty on the red carpet. The thin halter purple gown is uninspired.

Guiliana Rancic, fail. Is it me, or is this woman pregnant? If yes, then I give her a pass, otherwise, this dress makes her look pregnant. The asymetric strap is a distraction.

And so ends another fashion wrap. See you on the red carpet!!!

Keep Hope Alive!

This past week, President Clinton advised President Obama to be more hopeful about the economy. Better advice might have been to read The New York Times Sunday magazine piece about the undiagnosed diseases program of the National Institutes of Health, which presents a different paradigm for problem solving than the "blind man feeling the elephant" mode we are in (e.g. fix a bridge).

The media is doing it's job in deconstructing the crisis and assigning blame. Time magazine gives us a list of the 25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis. In summary,

1. Phil Gramm, US Senate Banking Committee chairman, deregulator
   
2. Chris Cox, SEC chairman, failed to provide oversight
   
3. Angelo Mozilo, predator lender (Countrywide)
   
4. Joe Cassano, AIG exec, issued credit default swaps
   
5. Frank Raines, Fannie Mae CEO, abused position of Government Supported Enterpirse (GSE)
   
6. Kathleen Corbet, Standard & Poor, gave unreliable ratings
   
7. Ian McCarthy, predatory home builder (Beazer Homes)
   
8. Dick Fuld, led Lehman Brothers to failure
   
9. Bernard Madoff, ran fraudulent investment schemes
   
10. Herb and Marion Sandler, predatory lenders (Golden West Financial, World Savings Bank)
    
11. Stan O'Neal, created collateralized debt obligations (Merrill Lynch)
    
12. John Devaney, facilitated predatory loans as a hedge-fund manager
    
13. Sandy Weill, led Citigroup to insolvency
    
14. Jimmy Cayne, led Bear Stearns to failure
    
15. George W. Bush, US President, deregulator
    
16. American Consumers, over borrowed, under saved
    
17. Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman, deregulator and economic overstimulator
    
18. Hank Paulson, US Treasury Secretary, ineffective policies
    
19. David Lereah, National Association of Realtors economist, promoted housing bubble
    
20. Lew Ranieri, father of mortgage-backed bonds (securitization)
    
21. David Oddsson, Prime Minister of Iceland, led Iceland to bankruptcy
    
22. Fred Goodwin, predatory banker, led Royal Bank of Scotland to insolvency
    
23. Bill Clinton, US President, deregulator and politicized mortgage lending
    
24. Wen Jiabao, supplied US with cheap credit from China
    
25. Burton Jablin, TV programmer, encouraged housing bubble

The list is not "scientific" as it was created by popular vote, but that hardly matters. No matter who is on the list, the point would be same... everyone wanted more, just like Oliver Twist. This list could be easily titled "25 People Who Rose to the Top of their Field".

My favorite post-mortem works so far are Bethany McLean's Vanity Fair piece on Fannie Mae and the CNBC documentary on predatory lending, The House of Cards. As a society, we live and learn, and one must hope that these types of mistakes will not be repeated. We do live by the rule of law, and laws might prevent future tragedies of the economic commons.

So does Obama have reason to be hopeful? Can one be honest about a bleak reality and hopeful at the same time? I say yes, if you look at the world with a perspective that transcends maintenance of America-as-we-know-it. Frank Rich in a NYT opinion piece wrote that

Obama’s toughest political problem may... [be] with an America-in-denial that must hear warning signs repeatedly, for months and sometimes years, before believing the wolf is actually at the door.

But in the same piece he points us towards something hopeful, an America remade.

Writing in the Atlantic, Richard Florida presents a vision of How the Crash Will Reshape America. The world he describes is actually a place I would want to live... highly productive mega-regions, decline of the automobile, smart people being smart together. Home ownership, rather than the American dream, is recast as the bonds that hold you down.

Yes, there is hope, not for pointless attempts to save the doomed, but for nurturing new growth and way people will live in the future.

21 Years in North Lake Tahoe

Bonnie Tsui's Sunday New York Times article on North Lake Tahoe raised a few eyebrows among the Renaud clan. Thanks to Jane, who alerted us to it's online presence. Tahoe locals are very much tuned in to the tourist experience, as our economy is based on tourism, recreation, and second home getaways. For the record, we have had a second home on the north shore since 1988 and have lived here full time since 2005.

By the way, Royal Gorge is nice but not the best choice for an opening photo. If you were doing an article on Central Park, would you open with a shot of the Statue of Liberty? Hey, there's a lake here and it's really BIG.

Here are some of our family favorites that we regularly visit.

Getting Here

Nevada State Route 431, from Reno to Incline Village, is the most beautiful way to enter the Tahoe basin. It's a vertiginous two-lane road that climbs above timberline and affords breath taking vistas of Lake Tahoe, Reno, and the Carson valley.

Nice Restaurants

Wolfdale's in Tahoe City is our favorite place for a special occasion or for guests. Not sure on the labels, but I would call it it a California/Asian fusion cuisine.

Spindelshank's in Tahoe Vista has no lake view but makes up for it with consistently excellent American cuisine. We took a large group their during a Thanksgiving holiday and everyone enjoyed it.

Gar Woods Grill in Carnelian Bay is the place for lakeside summer dining on the deck, even if its only for cocktails and bar food. They are famous for the Wet Woody, which is similar to an orange Hurricane.

The Blue Onion in King's Beach is a great place for breakfast or lunch. You can dine on the deck overlooking the first hole of the Brockway golf course.


Less Expensive Eats

The Log Cabin Cafe in Kings Beach is our favorite place for breakfast, particularly if we are jonesing for some french toast. The only downside is that it is small and there can be a wait. The Old Post Office in Carnelian Bay is a reasonable alternative but not quite up to the Log Cabin. When you sit at the counter, you feel like a local.

The Char Pit in Kings Beach is the place for burgers, or so I have been told.

The Coffee Shop in the Tahoe Biltmore Casino in Crystal Bay, NV (on the CA/NV border) is good place to get a filling breakfast at a low price. They also have great club sandwiches, which we enjoy at least once a year.

T's Rotisserie in Incline Village, NV is our favorite Mexican barbeque place. The soft chicken tacos are sublime.

The Tahoe House, south of Tahoe City on the west shore, has great sandwiches and yummy desserts.

CB's Pizza in Carnelian Bay. A local place behind 7-11, CB's provides pizza, soups, and other comfort food. You can watch sports on large screen TVs or possibly witness someone's retirement party. Service is notoriously slow but it's kid friendly.

Pizza

Jiffy's Pizza in Kings Beach is our favorite, although there are other locations. The plain cheese pizza is very similar to what you might get in New York.

Bars

The Bar of America in Truckee is my favorite, not so much for drinking, but for the beauty of the interior. I love to take visitors here just to see the bar, which is old and very long. A great place for lunch, the food is tasty and you can sit on high stools near the front windows and watch people pass.

Coffee

The Java Hut in Kings Beach serves up coffee and expresso drinks with a local flair. They also have an assortment of bagels and wraps. If you must have Starbucks, there is one inside the King's Beach Safeway, which we affectionately call the Food Palace due to its "oversized-Tahoe-cabin" architecture.

Ice Cream

Our favorite ice cream stand is across the street fom Mourelators' Lakeshore Resort in Tahoe Vista. It is open only in the summer and serves Bud's ice cream, hence, we call the place simply Bud's. An adjacent lawn with tables provides the perfect place to enjoy three dollars of bliss.

The Char Pit in Kings Beach has soft ice cream year around. Go for the chocolate/vanilla blend.

Gyms

Need a workout or a fitness class? Asante Fitness in Tahoe City, located behind the Safeway, is well equipped and has lake views for those doing cardio work. The yoga classes are among the best in Tahoe.

Ski Areas

Squaw Valley, between Tahoe City and Truckee, is the premier area, due to its Olympic history, incredible terrain, and huge number of lifts.

Alpine Meadows, next door to Squaw, also has excellent terrain but is a bit less expensive. Alpine has very little bottom-of-the-mountain development, compared to places like Squaw and Northstar, and presents a classic (i.e. little shopping) experience.

Homewood, on the west shore, is great when there is lots of snow and provides incredible lake views.

Mt. Rose, on the road from Incline to Reno, is the highest ski area in Tahoe and provides wonderful spring skiing.

The Berm-(elim-)inator

In Tahoe, we are used to lots and lots of snow. The only things that hinder transportation are white-out conditions during blizzards and pre-plow snow depths that are higher than your axle. On highways, the plows run continuously, so snow depth is rarely a problem, but in residential neighborhoods, things can pile up. In the old days, the county plow dutifully pushed the snow into berms on each side of the road, blocking driveways. If your private plow had already plowed your driveway, or if you had no private plow, or if you really needed to get your car out, it was your task to shovel the berm... ugh. Berms are typically full of compacted snow and huge chunks of ice so the going can be tough.

But hark! Placer County, in their wisdom, has outfitted my local plow with a berm-eliminator, which I call the berm-inator. The plow is actually a big road grader, with a large blade a-midships. The berm-inator is an second blade attached to the right side of the main blade, which can be raised and lowered by the plow driver. When passing a driveway or other berm unworthy area, the driver lowers the second blade, which forms a V with the main blade, pushing the would-be berm past the driveway.

Gotta love it!

Defending Your Mankiw*, Not that he needs it

In an article titled Tax Cuts Won't Work, Newsweek's Daniel Gross argues against those who advocate tax cuts as remedy to the current financial crisis. But in a self-contradictory moment, he writes

And the way they read the relevant data, history, and experience, permanently reducing long-term tax rates has historically provided the best possible incentives to invest and spend. They may be right (emphasis mine).

Gross discusses Harvard's Greg Mankiw in ways that don't seem complimentary, which elicited a reply from Mankiw.

I take two issues with Gross.

1. Categorizing people as "Economists whose sympathies lie with the Republicans" and
2. mischaracterizing Harvard professors.

I am not one of those who sees the world as blue vs. red. There are Democrats who are fiscal conservatives (e.g. the blue dogs) and Republicans who embrace pork (e.g. ex-Senator Ted Stevens). Mankiw worked for W yet he is recommending "a gradual, permanent, and substantial increase in the gasoline tax". I did not fact check, but I cannot imagine that is in the Republican platform. Additionally, Mankiw has written that his opposition to proposed spending is for practical reasons; it is not possible for any government to spend that much money so quickly without inefficiency and waste.

During the 2008 presidential election, Republican campaign rhetoric painted Obama as an elitist, perhaps because he graduated from Harvard Law School. Gross implies that Harvard professors (and Mankiw and Barro in particular) are ensconced in a comfortable university lifestyle that has clouded their professional judgment. Obama is not an elitist because he is smart, nor is Mankiw distorted by his professorial income, which is most likely much less than many of his students who have gone on to well-compensated non-academic jobs. Tangentially, the Harvard economics department is not immune from pain.

As to the actual issue about whether or not tax cuts would help in these troubled times, I say yes. For Americans who live on anything resembling a budget, being able to keep more of your income will result in money being spent. Confidence has nothing to do with it. If you have a bill and you happen to have a few more dollars due to tax cuts, you are more likely to pay that bill.

Some people will take their tax savings and save rather than spend. Why is that a bad thing? Assuming they don't take the money in greenbacks and stuff it under their mattress, the money gets deposited in a savings account, or a CD, or whatever. The receiving institution can take that deposit and loan it out to someone who will spend it. Is this not a good thing?

Just for fun, my own stimulus bill would be structured as follows:

1. Do what it takes to keep banks working.
2. Cut taxes. I do not understand the trade offs between payroll tax cuts and income tax cuts.
3. Help state and local governments that are in imminent peril.
4. Spend on strategic projects that will help us survive over the next 50 years, such as energy, education, and transportation.

Veritas!

*the title is a riff on Defending Your Life, a movie starring Albert Brooks and Meryl Streep about dead people defending their lives in an afterlife tribunal

Darwin's Birthday

On February 12, 1809, both Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln were born. I was unaware of this historical coincidence until I saw Adam Gopnik talking about it on Charlie Rose. Mr. Gopnik has written a book called Angels and Ages: A Short Book About Darwin, Lincoln, and Modern Life that I am sure I will read eventually.

My first introduction to Darwin happened in a high school biology class in 1967. Evolution was not actually taught, as we were preoccupied with dissecting frogs and learning the Krebs cycle. However, evolution was discussed in the textbook in one of the final chapters and I found it curious that we skipped it. Later it dawned on me that teaching evolution in a Texas high school in 1967 was controversial.

As a biology major at Harvard in the early 70s, I saw no one questioning natural selection, the differential reproduction of genotypes, which implies that living things are not static, but change over time. Our job was to work out the details.

There was not much talk about Darwin. I read On the Origin of Species and found it persuasive and detailed, but only useful for a historical understanding of my field.

My appreciation is now increased. As was pointed out on a recent NPR broadcast, the genius of Darwin lay in his ability to observe what was in plain sight, to formulate a theory based on easily confirmed facts, and to persuade others by detailed explication of what most know to be true. Kind of hard to argue with that, even if the theory was at odds with a competing theory that relied solely upon authority.

Funny how certain things become obvious, once they are pointed out.

Catastrophe

In President Obama's weekly video address of February 7, 2009, he said

Because if we don't move swiftly to put this plan in motion, our economic crisis could become a national catastrophe. Millions of Americans will lose their jobs, their homes, and their health care. Millions more will have to put their dreams on hold.

What our president is saying is that a national catastrophe happens when unemployment reaches reaches a certain number, or foreclosures or rent evictions rise to a certain level, or some number of people cannot afford heath insurance. The common denominator is loss of income necessary to maintain the basic necessities of life. Note that this is a quantitative argument, as we have always had citizens without jobs, homes, or health insurance.

What is scary about our current economic predicament is that other types of catastrophes are looming. The one that Obama mentioned is the usual catastrophe brought on by the usual business cycle of recession, recovery, and expansion.

The other catastrophes include

(1) bank failure, where the ATMs and credit cards stop working

(2) hyperinflation, where greenbacks lose their value, absolving all dollar-based debt and wiping out all savings

(3) stock market crash, where equity-based retirement accounts get wiped out and old people must depend on the kindness of strangers and/or their families

(4) economic loss due to global climate change, that is, more devastating hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, and wintry weather

(5) a haves vs. have-nots scenario, where ownership of assets is concentrated in the hands of a few percent of the population and everyone else is impoverished

(6) Jim Kunstler's Long Emergency scenario, where our way of life becomes unsustainable due to the depletion of energy resources and the organization of American homes and buildings around automobiles.


As to the probability of any of these other catastrophes occurring, I have no idea. One must imagine that the transactional functions of the banking system would be maintained at all costs, as this is the circulatory system of the economic body. The fed is supposed to be keeping inflation in check. The stock market is more of a symptom than a cause, that is, when the business cycle recovers, the market should recover. A consensus on the economic effects of climate change is undeveloped.

The last two catastrophes may be the same and both concern our nation's energy policy. Breaking us of our oil addiction is the key policy we must embrace. Kudos to Mankiw for suggesting a Pigovian tax on gas but it seems not to have a snowball's chance in hell of getting enacted by a politician.

DeMint Amendment Fails

Today the Senate is debating the economic stimulus bill (HR1) that came over from the House and voting on amendments. One was proposed by Senator DeMint (R South Carolina). HR1 contains the following language:

(3) PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS.—No funds awarded under this section may be used for—

(A) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities, including maintenance associated with any permissible uses of funds described in paragraph (1);

(B) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public;

(C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities—

(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or

(ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission; or

(D) construction of new facilities.

Senator DeMint's amendment is to strike section (C) above, which makes it illegal to use stimulus money to fix up buildings used for religious activities. Note that if the religious use of the facility is not "substantial", stimulus funds may be used.

I listened to part of Senator DeMint's argument for his amendment on C-SPAN (perhaps doubling it's viewership). His main concern is that a person's right to exercise their religion, for example by praying or discussing religion in a public speech or offering an invocation before graduation, will be compromised should the place of this expression be an institution that received stimulus money. Are not the restrictions on stimulus spending simply restrictions on spending? Does anyone think that if the University of Texas receives stimulus money, then the Longhorns can no longer play football in their stadium because the stimulus money cannot be spent on the stadium?

DeMint also appeared to give an argument against his own amendment. He stated that the courts have held that religious groups have the same rights as non-religious groups, which might mean that the fellowship of christian athletes has the same right to use a meeting room as the coed rugby team. The stimulus bill does not change this.

The vote on the amendment was 43 ayes and 50 something nays, which looks like it followed party lines. If the Republicans in Exile are to come back, they first need to shed their theocratic tendencies.

Frosty Nixon

When Richard Nixon resigned the Presidency in August of 1974, I was 21 years old and residing in Tincup, Colorado at a boys camp. People my age hated Nixon. His resignation was convenient for me as I had vowed not to reenter the real world as long as he was still in office. This was not much of a threat as the economy was down then and job prospects for a newly-minted Harvard graduate were not overflowing.

Why did we hate him? He was a crook. When a president stands before TV cameras and says "I'm not a crook", that's pretty much a tip off that he is a crook. Anyway, the evidence would eventually emerge.

By 1977, when the Frost/Nixon interviews first aired, the country had moved on. Nixon's hand-picked successor, Gerald Ford, had given him a full and complete pardon, then paid the price in the '76 election as Jimmy Carter won the presidency. The 1970's were a return to bad economic times, as the prosperity of the post-war economy withered under the burden of the Vietnam War, expanded social programs, and the oil crisis. People had other things to think about than justice for Richard Nixon.

When the interviews started, everyone wanted to watch, not so much for closure, but because we wanted to see him squirm. It was entertainment, not totally unlike today's reality TV shows.

The performance by Frank Langella, portraying Richard Nixon, in the movie Frost/Nixon was one of the best I have ever seen. Much of it is done in close-up, and here Langella speaks Nixon's mind, without saying a word. Nixon was a strange character, awkward in social contexts, driven by ancient demons, and never confident in his success. His immense vulnerability is perhaps his only endearing quality.

Frost is played Michael Sheen, who is good enough, but does not physically resemble the Frost that I recall from those days. It was nice to see Rebecca Hall playing Frost's girlfriend-of-the-month, Caroline Cushing. Nixon was mildly obsessed with Frost's personal life and fornicating ways. Director Ron Howard left us to wonder exactly what went on between Frost and Cushing, a Nixonian perspective.

The movie itself is well paced and full of suspense, much like Rocky or A Few Good Men (another Kevin Bacon movie). In summary, I say "well done, Opie." Nixon's legacy got polished a bit with the truth.

Daschle Dashed

The TV machine reports that this NYT op ed piece was the final straw that sunk the nomination of Tom Daschle as secretary of health and human services. It was not just his tax problems; the NYT believed that "financial ties to major players in the health care industry may prove to be even more troublesome." If Obama is to walk-the-walk of shutting down the lobbyist/government revolving door, then he needs to waive the waivers.

Back to the tax issue, I have always been under the assumption that if you don't report taxable income or if you list bogus deductions, you are committing a crime, not an honest mistake. If the reporting is accurate, Mr. Daschle only came clean because he anticipated that his financial records might come under scrutiny. There was no smoking-gun 1099 from his employer, so had he been headed to retirement, he might never had amended his taxes.

But he did amend his taxes and pay off the IRS, without further allegation of wrong-doing, so what's the big deal? That would be perception, that is, the perception that change has not really come to Washington and the rules get changed for special people.

Daschle did the right thing by withdrawing. Nancy Killefer, the almost chief performance officer, also did the right thing. Timothy F. Geithner, our treasury secretary, not so much.

Obama went on the TV machine and admitted to Katie Couric that he had made a mistake concerning the Daschle nomination. Point to Obama.

No Way Out

Today I saw Bethany McLean on PBS NOW talking about the current financial crisis. Recall that she is the Fortune reporter, now working for Vanity Fair, that initiated the exposure of Enron and wrote a book about it. She points out that the big problem we face is who pays for this mess. There are no easy answers, but once government gets involved, it gets even harder. In the real financial world that most Americans live in, if you start a business and make bad decisions and run out of money, you lose along with your stockholders. Not so if the government decides to keep you afloat, however, you are now subject to scrutiny that "the market" is not usually concerned about. If your stock portfolio is soaring, it matters little if execs got obscene bonuses.

The stimulus now be worked on by Congress is a political event, not financial. Few expect that anything can be done to save 2009 and most expect that the global economy will eventually improve. The key thing for politicians is to be perceived as doing something. What we must hope for is that Obama will go beyond that and construct a compelling vision for the future.

Martin Wolf of the Financial Times provides as good an analysis as anybody. I saw him recently on Charlie Rose and he said that we do not want to return to the way things were, that is, with the US and a few European countries driving the global economy with mass consumption and mass debt. Add to that our self-defeating energy policies and you at least have a great vision of where we don't want to be.

Super Boooooooooooooooooowl

Super Bowl Sunday is, of course, the uniquely American holiday tradition that emerged in my lifetime, evolving into a cross between Halloween and Thanksgiving. Like Halloween, it is totally opt-in and allows participation with varying degrees of intensity. Like Thanksgiving, it is food-based but replacing extended family with friends. For the record, Clare and I had our own party with turkey hot dogs, deviled eggs (mmmmm), cole slaw, baked beans, and brownies.

The game was pretty good for a Super Bowl, but the best moments were the national anthem by Jennifer Hudson, making her first appearance since her family tragedy. The worst moment was when #92 of the Steelers mugged a Cardinal following a 4th quarter punt. John Madden, the dean of sportscasters, commented that he should have been ejected from the game. #92 is the same guy that set a Super Bowl record by returning an interception 100 yards for a touchdown on the last play of the first half. How quickly we go from hero to chump.

There were no great commercials this year but a few awful ones. The worst was by teleflora, a flower seller, in which a woman's happiness at receiving flowers in a box turns to horror when the flowers start spewing personal insults. Many commercials inflict cartoon physical violence on live action humans, but emotional abuse crosses the line in my book. The commercial was successful in that I do remember the name teleflora, however, the result will be a life long boycott.

The Budweiser horse ads were a little sad. In one, a horse tries to act like a dog my fetching a tree branch. His human oppressor is not impressed. In another, a horse escapes his barn and journeys to a distant circus to see his girlfriend. Chaos follows and you know it's going to end badly.

The most popular ad, as reported on my TV machine, was the Doritos crystal ball. A man believes it makes predictions and predicts free Doritos. After vandalizing a vending machine by throwing the ball and breaking the glass, the prediction comes true. Cut to a second man throwing the ball after predicting a job promotion. The ball hits his boss in the crotch... ut oh. People eat this stuff up.

The most inappropriate ad was by an internet job site, which showed small snippets of people being dissatisfied at work, over and over and over again. So the message is, in the middle of the worst recession in 60 years, find a new job if your boss/coworkers annoy you. Perhaps I missed the point. They were trying to be humorous, not realistic. But they failed because I don't even remember who ran the ad.

My favorite ad was the godaddy.com Danica Patrick shower ad, which was a take off on the American Pie webcam scene. The ad was riveting if you are a nerd and/or a huge Danica Patrick fan. (Advice to IndyCar... fire the other drivers and just have Danica drive around the track by herself.)

Coincidentally, my drenaud.com domain registration is expiring and I am transferring it from Network Solutions to Go Daddy. Was it Danica or their lower prices that motivated me?

Back when Walter Cronkite was America's news anchor, he ended a broadcast by reporting the previous day's Super Bowl score, and then added "an event which has no significance".