The Incompetent or the Incoherent?

That's The Economist's cover story title. OK, the incompetent is easy; but I was a bit surprised at the magazine labeling Kerry incoherent.

Perhaps is has something to do with a world according to a conservative talk-radio host featured on CNN:

There are not many liberal talk-radio hosts. They are not interesting. They see everything in shades of gray. We see the world black and white, as all conservatives tend to do.

In other words, a talk show host must be an opinionated moron, because his audience is. And, apparently, so should a presidential candidate, at least American one. Sad.

Bin Laden Jumps Into Campaign

The new Bin Laden's tape appeared some three days before American presidendial elections. Bin Laden look almost academical, sitting at the lectern, "clean shaved, as far as these folks get", as Walter Cronkite put it at CNN. Naturally, Bin Laden attcked Bush. Also naturally, this helped Dubya (although just slightly, judging by polls). Again, in paraphrased Cronkite's words, "this is as if Karl Rove got him to reappear". One can draw one of two conclusions:

1) Bush is actually better for Bin Laden that Kerry. OK, no surprises there, we knew that.

2) Now, the other possibility is too terrible to contemplate, because it would mean that the most radical conspiracy theorists were right. I refuse to even think about it.

The Buttiglione Affair

Two weeks ago "Charlemagne", a columnist for "The Economist" wrote that European Parliament is playing "an intoxicating game of 'let's pretend'", pretending that is was a real parliament, deciding about a real cabinet. Of course, the matter at hand was confirmation hearings before parliamentary commitees, which Rocco Buttiglione, nominated for justice and home portfolio, failed. ("The Economist" thinks that nomination of José Manuel Barroso for Commission president was also result of such pretension games.) Charlemagne noted that the Parliament has no power to reject individual commissioners, and that "the nuclear option" of rejecting the whole commission was unthinkable. Buttiglione was almost a random victim, said Charlemagne; what about a handful of other nominees with very checkered track record, or being too close to industry and various lobying groups, or simply not looking all that competent?

 
Well, Mr. Barroso withdrew his cabinet from confirmation vote when he realized the Parliament would go for the "nuclear option". Mr. Buttiglione decided to stand aside (although his national government, i.e. Mr. Berlusconi, stood behind him, and Catholic Church mounted quite a campaign in his support), but Barroso was told this would not be enough. It seems MEPs really do have concerns about some of those other commissioner nominees.

 
What is "Charlemagne's" comment now? This migth be a case of elected politicians asserting themselves against the bureaucrats (and their own governments), and the Parliament might have gained new admirers, but perhaps they should stick to benefits of quiet obscurity... It seems that European Parliament can do no right, in "Charlemagne's" opinion.

 
News outfits like CNN reacted to this development with assorted worried noises about "the future" of the Union, "credibility" of the Commission, even the Parliament, things like that. Is it so strange for an elected body to do its job? Apparently so, for many.

 
BTW, I agree that a guy with Kirche, Kueche, Kinder outlook at women's place in the world who thinks about other people's behaviour in their bedrooms in terms like "sin" has no place in Europe's executive branch. I thought that his sincereness during confirmation hearing about his beliefs was quite commendable and unusual for your typical politician. However, he soon returned to business as usual, trying to paint himself a kind of martyr (see here). Perhaps he was sincere because he misjudged commitee's "balance of power", and then again, perhaps I am just cynical.

 
Anyway, this incident can be interpreted as a part of long struggle the smallest European (and world's, I think) country, that is, Vatican, leads to stop decline of its influence on the continent. It is said that Margaret Thatcher considered all this EU affair a "Catholic conspiracy". Indeed, it looked as if the Church has good shot at cramming a line on "Christian foundations" of Europe into preamble of the new Constitution. But I think that, after the wave of fresh Catholics who all of sudden found their faith in coutries like Poland or Slovenia subides and only actually religious people are left in churches, such efforts at "de-secularization" of Europe will gradually cease. In the meantime, the Buttiglione affair is sure not to be the last we have heard about the place of "official religion" Vatican would like to be has in the continent's political life.

Wow, this started as a one-liner about Buttiglione's honesty; then "The European's" take was added, and look at it now....

Dr. Hebrang, Everything is Forgiven

I read another day an article (I lost the link) about more and more US veterans not having health insurance. The article also complained that those who are covered through VA enjoy less than stellar level of care. An VA official retorted along these lines:

Veterans insured through VA enjoy approximately same level of service as general population on a HMO plan: for example, they rarely wait for a primary care physician appointment for more that 30 days.

I felt that systematic destruction of Croatian health care system done during last decade by our homegrown right-wing morons put as at something like 189. place among world nations. However, there seems to be long way to go to catch the most powerful country in the world. Dr. Hebrang, everything is forgiven, you weren't so effective.

Boom again? (I hope not!)

Down the short Rue Greuze in which I temporarily live are embassies of Spain and Thailand. For the last week or so in front of the later are those omnipresent (in Paris) barricades used for corraling pedestrians for the purpose of avoiding falling into a hole in the pavement, making show ticket queues more orderly, keeping streets free for Tour de France competitors or trying to keep protesting students in check. Barricades are manned by half a dozen soldiers and few police officers; two military 4WDs are always here. But, as pedestrians (i.e. me) are not stopped, I was not nervous about that. However, two days ago soldiers and police began regular sweeps of the street, looking under cars, poking at trash bags, removing cardoard boxes left out for garbage collectors, chatting with staff of the corner bistro. Looking for bombs, in other words. Now I am nervous a slight bit.

War's a Bitch!

Some American reservists are discovering that war is, generally speaking, dangerous, and that military discipline on the frontline is not always a pleasant thing. Perhaps their parents, friends and relatives will have that in mind before being too gung-ho about going to the next war. (See, for example, here, or Google for 'Iraq mutiny' or something like that - it will be all over the Web.)

I'll Skip This One

I like a good thriller, mystery, police procedural novel, whatever these are called. The best authors seem to be women: P.D.James, Minette Walters, Elisabeth George. I will also gladly read a competent techno-thriller, like those from an old reactionary Tom Clancy (but emphatically not those thom "his workshop"). Recently I tried to add another one to the trio of my favorite lady writers, a quite popular Patricia Cornwell. I was a bit doubtful after reading her short work, a kind of truncated Dr. Scarpetta'a cookbook. The recipes were incomplete and quite uninspiring - nothing to learn there. Anyway, there was nothing new from my favorite reliable authors at the place I was browsing and 'Cause of Death' is a full novel, so perhaps it's worth a try... Well, it wasn't.

I don't know much about forensic pathology and post-mortems, but do a bit about computers, technology in general and physics (all of which play a part in the novel). I can warn you that Cornwell has done a very poor job at research. She obviously has no first idea how a computer works (which is not a big deal - you ask someone who does), but decides to impress the reader by phrases such as "programming discs of his 486 computer". Of course, it did not occur to her that "486 computer" has no meaning (for the purpose of placing the machine as ancient, mainstream or bleeding-edge, which was the intention) without knowing the timeframe within months (and being computer history buff). Scarpetta's wunderkind niece designs databases and pattern-recognition software FBI uses for forensic ballistics, constructs robots, writes telepresence software for them and operates them (a piece of dialogue between her and one of colleagues about robot's software is particularly laughable), all while being 23 year old self-destructive alcoholic. Very realistic. Cornell commits more writers' mortal sins, like develping a sub-plot and then simply forgetting it, because the main one concludes. Et cetera. Nuclear physics parts are no better (though power plant bits seem to be at least perfunctorily researched).

But I have another gripe: for Scarpetta (and, I am afraid, Conwell) those who cannot afford to live in "mansions" or at least gated-in communities are sub-human. Scarpetta is divorced without children, but finds it necessary to build a two-story house inside one of those guarded compounds. She does not know her immediate neighbors, and considers that a virtue. Very exceptionally, in someone consistently and reliably does Scarpetta's bidding (like a police captain who follows her like a puppy) can be reluctantly granted human status. Only "mansions" are called "homes" by Cornwell; anything where people have actual neighbors is a "project", something to be avoided at all costs and populated with drug addicts at bests and dealers and other criminals more probably; they are just Scarpetta's "cases". For example:

Century-old row houses and Greek Revival homes had been brilliantly restored by people bold enough to reclaim a historic section of the city from the clutches of decay and crime. For most residents, the chance they took had turned out fine, but I knew I could not live near housing projects and depressed areas where the major industry was drugs.

Therefore, live in the "project", and you are doomed to a early death from a bullet, stab or overdose.

Sigh.

Speaking of 'Projects'

Jenny Barchfield writes in "Newsweek" about debut novel "Kiffe Kiffe Demain" by Faize Guene, a 19 year old French girl of Algerian origin. By the second paragraph we read:

In "Kiffe Kiffe", Guene takes readers across the proverbial tracks - in this case, the superhighway that divides Paris proper from the sparawling ghettos that surround it - to her home in projects. Not since director Matthieu Kassovitz's 1995 hit film "Hate" has there been such a compelling portrait of the Parisian suburbs: drug-dealers on the street corners amid massive, dilapidated housing projects.

I haven't read the novel nor wathched the film, but I am pretty sure that for discrepancy between these few sentences and what I see in Paris Barchfield is to blame, not Guene and Kassowitz. Paris (including its 20 'inner' arrondissements) is full of "housing projects" with very colorful tenants, all very well kept, clean (maybe cleaner that "old Paris", at least doue to less dog poo all over the pavements), without much graffiti, with functioning street lighting and unvadalized playgrounds. Periferique (not a particularly "super" highway) rarely makes a border between sharply contrasting neighborhoods; more often you don't even notice it, as it goes through series of tunnels and over viaducts, and the neighborhoods on both sides are very similar, although administratively different cities. This not to say that everything in Paris is idyllic: I currently work in Saint-Denis, really not a very nice place; pretty depressive, actually. But even here the "bad" part is derelict old town core, not "the projects" of which there are quite a few (and revitalization seems to be working, including the parts of the centre).

What is it with Americans that they cannot imagine normal life in an apartment building (except if it very expensive, in which case it ia not a "project" any more and becomes a "condo")? As if the problem is in city administration trying to provide housing (especially for lower-income population) without paving over the whole country. I suggest that they try and see for themselves how it works in Paris (or, for example, Vienna; even Zagreb's southern "projects" seem to be heaven compared to what Americans expect).