The venerable "Anger Management Course" has now moved to the "No Hair News."

Adjust your bookmarks.

With the upgrade to MovableType 4, the venerable "Anger Management Course" has moved. The No Hair News is now the name and address of the blog. Still under development, I'm afraid, but coming along.

The fact that this occurred at a John Kerry appearance has allowed the VRWC and associated media apparatchiks to smear Kerry as being ineffectual ("mumbling some response," etc.) or being against free speech, as if the UF cops were directed by him.

In fact, nothing like this would happen at a Bush appearance as the White House team only allows in true believers who will stand in shock and awe and certainly not ask any difficult questions.

The New York Times Sunday featured an article titled "Sending Back the Doctor's Bill" by one Alex Berenson. Mr. Berenson writes that doctor's incomes are so much larger than those in Europe and other countries and tries to argue that this is a major problem. For example,

But many health care economists say both sides are wrong. These economists, some of whom are also doctors, say the partisan fight over insurers and drug makers is a distraction from a bigger problem: the relatively high salaries paid to American doctors, and even more importantly, the way they are compensated.

“I always find it ironic that when I go to doctor groups and such, they always talk about the cost of prescription drugs,” said Dana Goldman, director of health economics at the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research institute in Santa Monica, Calif.

Prescription drugs cost, on average, 30 percent to 50 percent more in the United States than in Europe. But the difference in doctors’ salaries is far larger, Dr. Goldman said.

If you read this article without benefit of knowing the real dollar amounts involved, you would be certain to conclude that those f*cking doctors are bankrupting our system before they drive home to their waterfront villas in their Mercedes Ferraris.

In some geek forums, the poster signs with a sig which describes his l33t machines. In some other forums I have seen people sign with lists of their surfboards. As I was reading, started thinking of my current boards and how they worked as compared to ones I had in the past. For non-surfers, this will be tedious and arcane, so feel free to piss off.

Not surprisingly, the immigration bill did not survive a cloture vote in the Senate, effectively killing the bill. In a fascinating bit of hypocrisy, we have Trent Lott and other members of the GOP criticizing talk radio for helping to scuttle the bill! Yet, behind the scenes, Lott, Rush, Bush and the entire GOP power structure were never behind the proposal. There were a few business groups behind the guest worker program, but the killer for the bill was the pathway to legal status for existing illegal immigrants.

Many low and middle income GOP voters, prompted by GOP radio propagandists including Rush, opposed that aspect of the bill as "amnesty." Sheep. All they see is that there are dark-skinned people who don't speak English standing in line at WalMart. Last time I checked, most of these misguided yahoos did not come to the US with an engraved invitation. My family landed in Pennsylvania along with a boat load of Irish immigrants with no papers. [To be fair, this was 1698, before there was even an INS.] The GOP doesn't care about the poor dupes who vote for them because of "family values."

What they fail to realize is that the GOP money and corporate powers, who really run the "Greed and Oil Party," did not want the bill passed at all. Why settle for a guest worker program which adds 200,000 new guest workers to the existing dozen guest worker programs when the status quo provides some 12 million "guests" already. If there was some sort of legal status of illegal and other immigrants, they would undoubtedly also have some level of protection by OSHA, disability and workmens' compensation regulations, wage and other labor laws. Why would the GOP base want that? Now businesses can pay illegal workers substandard wages, force them to work illegal hours, in illegal and dangerous conditions, and regularly swindle them without any fear of being reported or prosecuted. The illegals will not go to the police for fear of deportation. What could be better? Why change the current system where all the power is held by the employers? Why do you think that the Bush Administration has been characterized by the lowest level of enforcement actions against employers in the last 30 years?

So, when the Senate proposes to create a legal guest worker program for certain industries and farmers and to bring the other illegals into some (as yet undefined) legal status on the road to permanent residency, this is a threat to industries such as restaurants, construction, hoteliers, lawn maintenance, food processors, and even farmers. So, the call goes out to Rush and their other employees to kill the bill. At the same time, Lott whines about "unbalanced" talk radio. To paraphrase Hunter Thompson, Lott is so crooked he needs to screw his pants on in the morning.

The Democrats also confirmed their profound stupidity by supporting the compromise. They were buffaloed into support of another bracero program of government-sanctioned exploitation of foreign workers. In return, some sort of legalization process would be created for some illegal immigrants. In fact, the bill would have done nothing except create yet another guest worker program for farm workers and certain select industries. The legalization pathway was completely bogus; both immigrants and employers know this. Mexicans, Guatemalans, Hondurans, and most other immigrants come to the US both for the promise and to run away from the corrupt countries where they live. In the US, they hide from the US government for fear of deportation, but also because they have been hiding from their own government for generations. In Mexico and Central America, the army, police and government bureaucracy are nothing but an extended gang of enforcers for the landowners, businessmen, and local caudillos. Taxes are collected from the poorest, but not from those with connections or power. Laws are not enforced arbitrarily, because that would suggest some sort of randomness, but are enforced only on the weak and powerless. Civil organizations, unions and political parties are actively destroyed to keep them from being a threat to the local and regional bosses. The banking system is a sham. The educational system is nonexistent. So, most Mexicans and Centroamericanos work for cash, under the table, and hide their income and property holdings. Their life in the US is no different. Their distrust of government, reinforced by generations of experience, would ensure that only a small fraction of the immigrants would apply for the legalization pathway however constituted.

Bit this is OK with the employers and the GOP. They all get their cut. the employers get a docile workforce with no objections about low wages, lack of benefits, and workplace conditions. Social Security and withholding payments are forfeited to the US Treasury. The employers send their donations to the GOP politicians to keep the game going. No wonder the Mexicans distrust the US government.

By the way, they aren't leaving. You see occasional reports on TV about some Mexican worker sending money home to "build a house." Most do not. They don't own homes. They rent so they can move if they are busted by La Migra. They keep below the surface with a network of dealers in false indentities and ready employment all over the US.

"When we start believing a statement must be true simply because it is arrestingly put, we are in the first stages of being spellbound, and the later stages are a kind of slavery." - Clive James, "William Hazlitt"

The independence of style and substance is the main discussion point of James in his essay. However, these two are most often more closely linked than he proposes and are often inextricable.

Psychiatrists, policemen, and interrogators are trained to look for changes in style. In an interview, the initial questions are tangential and elicit simple answers. The observer looks at body posture, incidental movements, and listens to the phrasing and cadence of the speech. As the questioning continues, moving closer to the point, more often than not a lie or stress is betrayed by a change in speech content and style or by other physical "tells."

The same is true with some of the lies we are told by the President. More accomplished liars such as Mr. Cheney and professionals like Tony Snow are able to dissemble without breaking a step. Indeed, they prevaricate with aplomb and even a bit of devilish glee. It is sometimes a delight to watch them display their talents and see the obvious enjoyment twinkle in their eyes. Mr. Bush is not so accomplished. A mediocre mind cannot aspire to the heights of even an Ari Fleischer. Mr. Bush's poor show usually consists of the ragged repeating of the same tired phrases. No doubt, these sentences were once crafted by talented writers, but the well-turned phrase delivered in the wrong context turns to word salad in the mouth of the President.

Here is Mr. Bush yesterday responding to a question about bin Laden's alleged plans to turn Iraq into a terrorist sanctuary.

"My point is, is that -- I was making the point, Jim, as I'm sure you recognized, that if we leave, they follow us. And my point was, was that Osama bin Laden was establishing an external cell there, or trying to, and he's been unable to do it. Precisely my point. That's why we've got to stay engaged. Had he been able to establish an internal cell that had safe haven, we would be a lot more in danger today than we are. His organization is a risk. We will continue to pursue as hard as we possibly can. We will do everything we can to bring him and others to justice."

If that's an example of his thought process, it's clear now why we are in this quagmire. Mr. Bush's classic tell is also demonstrated all over this news conference. He slaughters a phrase or scrambles some short argument, raises both hands off the lecturn, leans his head and shoulders forward, blinking both eyes, usually looking left and right, and says, "You see?" or "Uh-huh!"

An educated supporter of the current US administration, if there is such a person, might wince whenever the President speaks but could argue that just because a statement is inartfully phrased does not necessarily mean it is false. A plain speaker or an unsophisticated one can still reveal the truth, or not. This is a harder proof than the proposition. Facts and truths impose a certain inflexibility, so poorly organized thought and sloppy language are a clue to errors. It is never more clearly demonstrated than the public utterances of the current American administration, its flacks, its apologists, and its blind adherents. Here, twisted logic, neologism, and certain idees fixes don't just pepper the pronouncements but are the entire substance.

As I was fixing dinner, I had CNN's "Situation Room" on in the background as Wolf Blitzer began the daily report on the DC Madam scandal. Will ABC or another news source release the names of her little black book now or later?

Of course, there is already one casualty - USAID chief Randall Tobias who, in case you don't remember, gave a speech in which he said that condoms were not effective in preventing AIDS. Under his direction, AIDS prevention aid to Africa can only be spent promoting abstinence before marriage and cannot be used to address condom usage or safer sex. Now, he is exposed as a client for an "escort service." Oh, the irony is delicious.

So, Wolf, I guess to provide historical perspective, says that this is not the first sex scandal to hit DC. In support, he mentioned the Clinton-Lewinsky dalliance, the Gary Hart-Donna Rice tryst and boat ride, and, dredging up black and white photos no less, the Wilbur Mills-Fanny Fox Tidal Basin Follies (1974!).

That's what I call highly selective reporting, but what do you expect from the Liberal Media™? Wolf completely forgot the large number of GOP sex scandals (see also here even though they misidentify Henry Hyde as a Democrat). Even an abridged list from this administration alone would have filled up the time in Wolf's report. I will avoid those new scandals involving Congress and the evangelical GOP "base"; those are too easy targets.

We have the above-mentioned Randall Tobias. Running concurrently is the ongoing troubles of World Bank President and ex-Pentagon Iraq war cheerleader Paul Wolfowitz's "pay for poontang." His girl friend gets a nice sinecure and a raise (no pun intended) for her service to the World Bank. Meanwhile, Mr. Wolfowitz insists it's a politically inspired smear because he has tried to "clean up" the World Bank by firing allegedly non-performing employees. Are Republicans always this tone deaf?

Speaking of neo-cons, DC Madam Palfrey alleged two weeks ago that ex-Pentagon strategist Harlan Ullman and creator of the "shock and awe" combat theory was also a client. Ullman, now senior associate with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, responded that the claim was "beneath the dignity of comment." Shock and awe, indeed.

Over in Langley, we have Kyle Dustin "Dusty" Foggo who resigned May 8, 2006, as executive director of the Central Intelligence Agency, closely following his mentor Porter J. Goss who resigned May 5, 2006, as CIA Director. Both are under investigation in the ongoing Duke Cunningham related bribery case. Both are alleged to have taken money as well as the earthly delights of prostitutes escorts masseuses.

This is just a short list from memory. I expect to add many more names to the list in the weeks to come. According to ABC, that small portion of the escort services's phone list provided by Ms. Palfrey numbers over 1000 unique numbers.

Bottom of a 6 foot hole that is.

As predicted, the tainted food products have found their way into the human food supply. This was obvious as soon as US government spokesmen went on the TV assuring us that the US food supply was safe.

The downside to globalization has always been the lack of any equivalent regulatory framework in our trading partners. The lack of labor laws allows foreign companies to pay workers much less, driving American workers out of a job. The lack of environmental laws allows foreign manufacturers to dump waste into the air and water instead of having to dispose of it properly or use other more environmentally safe manufacturing processes. The cheaper products put American firms out of business. And, the lack of any food or drug safety laws or inspections makes imported foods and drugs questionable.

The recent pet food recall is an object lesson in the downside of globalization. Chinese manufacturers of wheat and rice gluten apparently either adulterated the product with toxic chemicals (melamine, cyanuric acid, amiloride, and amilonine) perhaps to make the chemical appear to have a higher protein concentration. Or, the contamination came from one of their suppliers and the Chinese companies failed to detect the contamination of their raw material. This material was sold to a US manufacturer, no doubt because it was much cheaper than the equivalent product from a US or European manufacturer. The contamination of pet food has led to the recall of over 40 brands and the death of dozens of pets.

The same pet food determined as "surplus" is sold to pig farmers as swine food. Whether this is "spilled" food as the company says in their first explanation or it returned, recalled pet food shunted over to the livestock feed division has yet to be proven. The pigs eating this food were slaughtered and the meat was destined for human consumption.

The FDA has now admitted the potential contamination and is investigating. This is very reassuring. I'm sure some Regent University graduate political appointee at the FDA is right on it as we speak, probably praying he doesn't get called before Congress and trying to delete those damn e-mails.

I'm sitting in my office at 6PM, slogging through paperwork when, just for grins, I check out the new webcam at Steamer Lane in Santa Cruz. What an awesome cam and a wonderful break. Now the water's around 60 and everyone is in a full suit, but that doesn't seem to deter the crowds.

But really, what's wrong with this picture? Here it is, around 2PM on a Monday in Snata Cruz and there are over 50 people out. I'm trapped in my office at a desk and, meanwhile, there are bunch of guys out in the water, enjoying the unparallelled beauty, communing with nature, talking to their friends and acquaintances in the lineup, catching a few waves. Where did I go wrong?