Earnest Observer

Web Fun, Ctd.

2008-07-09T22:53:00.003-05:00

I must admit, as a huge music fan, this is really exciting. One of the websites I mentioned a few months ago, Deezer, allows you to embed songs or entire playlists on your own site. The increasingly free flow of music, via Myspace, iTunes (ok, maybe not all free) or this make the internet that much more fun and engaging. The short playlist below is representative of my work or study music.

Citizen's Arrest

2008-07-08T19:47:00.009-05:00

Running down the daily blog roll, I found a particularly interesting comment on The Cunning Realist.

Not to mention a citizenry with very little interest in citizenship. It will take a great crisis to get things moving.
--Mary, July 8, 2008

This is a recurring theme in much of my recent reading (and viewing). Our culture has shifted so far toward capitalism, it is no longer a facet of life, but life itself. Citizenship, community, family and personal lives have all taken a back seat to our material aspirations.

From Bill Moyer's Journal:

Bill Moyers: Here we are, at the height of the holiday season. The malls and the shops are packed. Stuff is flying off the shelves. And like Grinch or Scrooge you stand up and say, "Capitalism's in trouble." Why?

Benjamin Barber: Because things are flying off the shelves that we don't want or need or even understand what they are, but we go on buying them. Because capitalism needs us to buy things way beyond the scope of our needs and wants to stay in business, Bill. That's the bottom line. Capitalism is no longer manufacturing goods to meet real needs and human wants. It's manufacturing needs to sell us all the goods it's got to produce.

I would encourage everyone to watch this interview in its entirety. Mr. Barber is on point regarding not only the American consumer, but also American capitalism. We work harder to produce and purchase more of what we do not need and corporations respond with an unwavering focus on developed markets. In an increasingly pluralistic and informed society, the focus is somehow progressively self-centered.

For example, global warming has become a hot-button issue and being "green" is very fashionable. Yet "green" equates to buying new light bulbs, new cars, new homes even. Two minutes on Google and our supposedly informed public can find that "the US consumes 25% of the world's energy (with a share of global productivity at 22% and a share of the world population at 5%)." (Wikipedia) The most effective and immediate way to be "green" is to reduce your consumption of energy and energy intensive products, not the other way around. It all seems fairly intuitive, but we are accustomed to the healing power of consumption and would hardly know how else to spend our time.

Similar concerns are voiced in an excellent Orion Magazine article:

Today "work and more work" is the accepted way of doing things. If anything, improvements to the labor-saving machinery since the 1920s have intensified the trend. Machines can save labor, but only if they go idle when we possess enough of what they can produce. In other words, the machinery offers us an opportunity to work less, an opportunity that as a society we have chosen not to take. Instead, we have allowed the owners of those machines to define their purpose: not reduction of labor, but “higher productivity”—and with it the imperative to consume virtually everything that the machinery can possibly produce...

Our modern predicament is a case in point. By 2005 per capita household spending (in inflation-adjusted dollars) was twelve times what it had been in 1929, while per capita spending for durable goods—the big stuff such as cars and appliances—was thirty-two times higher. Meanwhile, by 2000 the average married couple with children was working almost five hundred hours a year more than in 1979. And according to reports by the Federal Reserve Bank in 2004 and 2005, over 40 percent of American families spend more than they earn. The average household carries $18,654 in debt, not including home-mortgage debt, and the ratio of household debt to income is at record levels, having roughly doubled over the last two decades. We are quite literally working ourselves into a frenzy just so we can consume all that our machines can produce.

This brings us back to Mary's comment about the lack of interest in citizenship. Our competitive marketplace is not just amongst companies, but also the consumers. For most, the daily struggle is to prove your material worth. Intellectual challenge, intimacy with family and friends, artistic ability, health and fitness, service and charity, religious commitment... these are all nice and occasionally fit into our schedule, but they are no longer priorities.

Consider life's true gifts and consume vivaciously. Embrace your family and friends, your pet and the great outdoors, a nap on Sunday afternoon or conversation with friends, good music and laughter. Consume the material excesses less often and let your life be filled with authentic pleasures.

Bear Stearns

2008-06-05T08:50:00.003-05:00

From today's Financial Times:

Bear Stearns sought rescue financing from Temasek of Singapore in the days before its sale to JPMorgan Chase but was rebuffed, underscoring the growing reluctance of sovereign wealth funds to make high-profile investments.

Could it be Temasek thought Bear Stearns was a bad investment and not necessarily concerned about being "high-profile" or not? More...

...Sovereign wealth funds from the Middle East and Asia that were recently asked to provide capital for Wachovia - another US bank with a strong domestic orientation - but refused.

The FT seems to imply that SWFs are not going to be interested in US businesses that are large and/or have a domestic focus. I think the conclusion should be poorly managed investment banks are never a good investment, regardless of whether its my money or a SWFs.

Web Fun

2008-04-25T13:12:00.008-05:00

Bored at home over the weekend? Check out a few of these sites:

Twine - labeled as a knowledge networking site, it is part of the semantic web movement to further integrate our life with technology... as if we need that...

Deezer - if you've been using Pandora or some other internet radio site, this is a fun one to try. Best feature I've found so far is the ability to create your own playlists and not being limited to the same songs over and over like Pandora tends to do.

Viewzi - difficult to say much here. You must register for the site and wait for your invitation to join (like Twine). I haven't been invited yet, so there isn't much to comment on. However, it is interesting to consider what an alternative to google might look and function like.

Vimeo - like YouTube, but better. More interesting content and higher quality videos. Some pretty eclectic stuff on here.

Last FM - another fun music site. My favorite part of the site is the "similar artists" section. It provides a long list of similar artists, but ranks them in order of how similar they are to what you were listening to.

cleanhotdry - if you like coffee, you'll like this site. It's a very new blog coming from Vancouver. Sounds like they have a vibrant coffee scene there and the writers seem very informed. Hope they update often.

Audio Visualization

2008-04-25T12:24:00.007-05:00

I've recently become interested in the concept and creation of audio visualization. When we listen to music, it can stir emotions or memories that translate into images. In its most basic form, this resembles Windows Media Player and its various moving images to accompany your music. The video below is much like that. Points of inflection are shown by brigter lights or a larger image, while softer moments have softer images.

However, I think the concept can be expanded upon to produce something that resembles a hybrid of what's below and a more traditional music video.

Taxi to the Dark Side

2008-02-29T10:10:00.004-06:00

Of my Oscar predictions, I missed only two. Among a host of great movies and actors, the category for best supporting actress was destitute; so I won't spend too much time grieving that miss. However, I am deeply interested in documentaries. No End in Sight was a wonderful look at the Iraq war and examination of America's easily avoidable and drastically deleterious mistakes therein. Despite this, it was not the winner of Best Documentary. The winner was Taxi to the Dark Side. Therefore, Taxi is on my agenda for the weekend and hopefully a brief review on EO is as well.

William F. Buckley

2008-02-28T10:13:00.004-06:00

I'll post some original content on here soon. However, I don't have the expertise or knowledge to comment on the death of William F. Buckley. There are plenty of tributes and obituaries worthy of your time, just not from me.

Despite this, Ezra Klein's comments resonated with my sense of a current conservative anti-intellectualism. I believe new media is slowly elevating our national discourse away from cable news and conservative radio, however we are far from a nation where being a political thinker "made you a cultural figure."

As a slightly more general point, in the last two or three years, a whole host of giants have passed away, men who were political thinkers at a time when that made you a cultural figure. John Kenneth Galbraith, Milton Friedman, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Norman Mailer, and now, William F. Buckley Jr. Gore Vidal is just about the last of their number left. And that's a shame. They would write serious books of political analysis and sell millions of copies -- they were the writers you had to read to call yourself an actual political junkie. Now, the space they inhabited in the discourse is held by the Coulters and O'Reilly's of the world. Where we once prized a tremendous facility for wit, we're now elevating those with a tremendous storehouse for anger. Run a search on quotes from Galbraith, Buckley, or Friedman, then do the same for O'Reilly and Coulter. We're really losing something here.
-- The American Prospect, February 27, 2008

The Food Crisis Has Arrived

2008-02-25T09:05:00.007-06:00

I pointed to talk of a "coming" food crisis a few days ago. Well... it's here.

The United Nation’s agency responsible for relieving hunger is drawing up plans to ration food aid in response to the spiralling cost of agricultural commodities...

WFP officials hope the cuts can be avoided, but warned that the agency’s budget requirements were rising by several million dollars a week because of climbing food prices.

The WFP crisis talks come as the body sees the emergence of a “new area of hunger” in developing countries where even middle-class, urban people are being “priced out of the food market” because of rising food prices.

The warning suggests that the price jump in agricultural commodities – such as wheat, corn, rice and soyabeans – is having a wider impact than thought, hitting countries that have previously largely escaped hunger.
--Financial Times, February 25, 2008

Oscar Predictions

2008-02-24T16:20:00.004-06:00

I promised to get a few of my picks up for tonight's Oscars, so here they are. One note: I have not seen There Will be Blood yet...

Actor in Leading Role: Daniel Day-Lewis

Actor is Supporting Role: Javier Bardem*

Actress in Leading Role: Marion Cotillard

Actress in Supporting Role: Cate Blanchett

Animated Film: Ratatouille

Documentary Feature: No End in Sight*

Music: Atonement

Best Picture: No Country for Old Men*

I think my favorite film of the year was Bella. The film is not nominated for any awards.

* Denotes a personal favorite.

The Coming Food Crisis

2008-02-15T11:50:00.007-06:00

The rising costs of food and subsequent potential for crisis should not come as a surprise to anyone paying attention to commodity markets and policies.

From the New York Times:

The distortions in agricultural production are startling. Corn prices are up about 50 percent from last year, while soybean prices are projected to rise up to 30 percent in the coming year, as farmers have replaced soy with corn in their fields. The increasing cost of animal feed is raising the prices of dairy and poultry products.
--September 19, 2007

The general media is not paying much attention to this, as subprime related news continues to dominate most outlets. However, the situation demands a shift in focus to a problem that will likely have a much deeper impact on the world (i.e. famine and starvation).

Today's Financial Times points out a few more structural problems within the current market:

Rising food prices pack a powerful political punch in the developing (or partly-developed) world, to a degree that is sometimes underappreciated by the pampered west...

Goldman Sachs thinks this is just part of a much bigger problem of capital and resource misallocation. After all, Mr Currie argues, if the world today was a rational economic place, then regions such as the Gulf which are food-constrained ought to be investing heavily in agriculture. And since the US is the world's biggest agricultural supplier, this implies that the Saudi Arabians, say, should be snapping up farms in Wisconsin - as America secures oil in the most efficient manner by sending teams of Texans to Riyadh.

But in practice numerous investment controls prevent Saudi Arabians from buying Wisconsin farms and Americans owning Saudi oil wells. And these controls are not being dismantled now. On the contrary, mutual mistrust is now rising. Hence the fact that Gulf leaders are currently considering desalinating sea water to plant wheat in the desert - while the US and Europe are trying to turn corn into fuel. Such exercises might make sense in domestic political terms; but they are apt to be fiendishly expensive. Thus the upshot of this misallocation, Mr Currie would argue, is even more inflation - even if the world does experience some form of growth slowdown.

This campaign season, consider the issues facing the rest of the world and America's role in finding solutions. We need a leader who is informed, capable and willing to deal with situations unrelated to subprime or Iraq... immediately.

There Will Be Blood

2008-02-15T11:48:00.005-06:00

I'm hoping to see There Will Be Blood this weekend. It is the only nominee for Best Picture of the Year that I have not seen. Before the Oscars, I will list my favorites for a few of the categories and try to rank the best picture nominees.

Detroit Auto Show

2008-01-17T09:03:00.000-06:00

The Detroit Auto Show has finally given us some interesting news. Emerging markets are fueling demand for new cars and, as sales there outpace developed countries, these customers will be increasingly important to major auto companies. The most recent demand is for an ultra-low cost (~$2,500 - 4,000) vehicle.

This type of car would open the door to innumerable new drivers. Temporarily ignoring the increased congestion and adverse effects on the environment, the prospect of a new paradigm in car manufacturing is a relief.

Americans are particularly fond of their large, comfortable automobiles. Current pricing differentials on small to mid-size vehicles are not enough of an incentive to buy a smaller car. However, if the price tag dropped to $4,000 on a small vehicle, I predict many buyers will reevaluate how much space they really need. The price would create a breaking point to finally separate Americans from over sized and inefficient vehicles.

Another benefit of the $4,000 car option is greater flexibility for American consumers. The U.S. personal savings rate in November was negative 0.5%. With finances stretched to the limits, it is no wonder we are dealing with the sub-prime mortgage crisis and a looming recession. The sensitivity of American consumers is levered so tightly to home prices and interest rates, the rest of the economy falters soon after any housing disturbances.

Below are a few scenarios based on estimated car prices and basic assumptions for payment. Specifically:

- $300 Monthly Payment
- $1,500 Down Payment

My conclusion is the economy, the environment and our culture would be improved dramatically by shifting priorities away from ostentation to conservative and thrifty consumption.

Bush and Facts

2008-01-16T12:24:00.001-06:00

Why do we even fund an intelligence service if the President dismisses what they say based on his wants? This administration, even after all its mistakes, continues to embrace arrogance and ignorance to guide policy.

We live in dangerous times and desperately need a pragmatic and truthful leader.

Disappointing news from today's New York Times:

On the question of Iran, Mr. Bush said he tried to explain his desire to intensify international pressure on Tehran over its nuclear program, despite a National Intelligence Estimate released in Washington in December that concluded that the Iranians had halted a covert nuclear weapons program in 2003.

He distanced himself from that finding more starkly than before, arguing that Iran’s continued enrichment of uranium was a threat because the knowledge used to master that process could be transferred to weapons research.

“I defended our intelligence services,” he said, “but made it clear that they’re an independent agency, that they come to conclusions separate from what I may or may not want.”

Clintons and Values

2008-01-08T15:02:00.000-06:00

If you had any doubt about what matters most in the Clinton household, look no further:

He [Bill Clinton] continued: "I actually tried to talk Hillary into leaving me when we were in law school, that's the God's truth. I told her, 'You have more talent for public service than anybody in my generation that I have met... I shouldn't stand in your way.' She looked at me and said, 'Oh, Bill, I'll never run for office.'"
--The Trail, January 7, 2008

Bill and Hillary have lived their entire lives in pursuit of power and influence. This blind ambition leads to policies and campaigns based on polls, a loss of values and purpose and ultimately a weak leader. As Hillary's campaign continues to unravel, realize the Clinton's willingness to elevate politics above marriage (and everything else) set her on this path long ago.

Schultz Back at Starbucks

2008-01-08T08:48:00.000-06:00

It seems Howard Schultz is one of the informed readers of Earnest Observer. The company replaced Jim Donald with Schultz yesterday and it finally appears Starbucks is concerned with serious issues raised in a recent post.

From the Financial Times:

A company statement said the move was part of a set of initiatives aimed at "refocusing the company on providing customers with the distinctive Starbucks experience, and building on Starbucks' legacy of innovation."

This is a good decision for Starbucks and possibly the last chance for a company on its way to competing with McDonald's:

McDonald's is setting out to poach Starbucks customers with the biggest addition to its menu in 30 years. Starting this year, the company's nearly 14,000 U.S. locations will install coffee bars with "baristas" serving cappuccinos, lattes, mochas and the Frappe, similar to Starbucks' ice-blended Frappuccino...

The coffee chain has evolved into more of a filling station. It is now battling fast-food outlets for some of the same customers and meal dollars. Today, about 80% of the orders purchased at U.S. Starbucks are consumed outside the store. The average income and education levels of Starbucks customers have gone down, the company has said. As part of a big push into food, Starbucks sells lunch at more than two-thirds of its company-owned locations in the U.S.
-- Wall Street Journal, January 7, 2008

Defining Conspicuous Consumption

2008-01-03T17:01:00.000-06:00

From the New York Times:

The office, which Mr. Cappello said cost $300,000 to $350,000, holds three dozen antique chess sets, several hundred globes, 1,800 handmade canes from around the world and thousands of antique books. The paneling came from a castle in the south of France, and the Empire-period fireplace, he said, was built for one of Napoleon’s residences. A billiard table from 1849 and a large partners’ desk anchor opposite ends of the room, and 19th-century military and animal paintings adorn the walls, along with two big plasma screens, “for watching football games with my buddies,” he said.

Here are my predictions, based on the limited (thankfully) exposure I've had to people like this:

1) He has no idea how to play chess.
2) He does not use a cane.
3) Someone else picked out the antique books to adorn his walls.
4) The real reason for the room is to avoid his family while claiming to work. (You can just see the love he has for his daughter pouring out in the picture...)

All this reminds me of a quote from an earlier post:

Whatever happens, the old American scorn for pretension is bound to reassert itself someday, and dear God, let it be soon.
--B.R. Myers

Hoping for Cautious Captains

2008-01-03T10:18:00.000-06:00

From yesterday's Financial Times:

In politics, business and finance, as on the seas, the hero is the person who tackles a problem, rather than the person whose actions prevent the problem arising. The statesmen we need are those who avert wars and prevent depressions, but such individuals gain little credit.

I thought about posting the entire article written by John Kay. It raises questions about politics and the leaders we choose, businesses and the compensation and stature afforded top executives and even challenges the integrity of modern capitalism and the pursuit of a career therein.

I have not conducted a detailed study, however, it seems that many of the problems in business and politics are faced by the very leaders who created them. President Bush and the Iraq war and bank CEOs and the subprime financial crisis are the most obvious recent examples. The public often praises fortitude and resolve during these events, rather than the intelligence to avoid the situation altogether. (However, in these two events, the failure has been so widespread and pronounced the public has lost its willingness to watch in awe as the leaders charge ever onward. "Stay the course" as a slogan has lost its appeal.)

In business and politics, praise is often directly related to compensation and success. The cautious manager is in danger of producing average results, but will rarely lead a company or country to ruin. Whereas the "bold" leader will more likely achieve stellar results or massive failures. These failures not only affect their reputation and legacy, but also have lasting effects on the citizens and employees who count on their judgement and expertise.

Steady growth and progress in business and politics are admirable goals. However, steady usually isn't associated with fame, fortune and unfettered praise. Consider the potential inverse relationship between these desires and a future leaders results.

Mayor Bloomberg and Education

2007-12-12T09:18:00.000-06:00

Mayor Michael Bloomberg in today's Financial Times:

I have made public education reform a top priority in New York City and the progress we have begun making - substantial gains on math and English scores and graduation rates at 20-year highs - offers hope that by injecting acountability and standards into schools, we can aim for excellence, rather than settle for mediocrity.

This appears in an editorial by the Mayor discussing globalization and the threat of protectionism. Mayor Bloomberg recognizes the vital role of education in dealing with such issues. Instead of making threats against China for currency manipulation or lead paint on toys, the Mayor redirects our attention inward to a growing threat to American leadership. Further evidence of the Mayor's committment to education:

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg announced yesterday that the city's Department of Education will require all schools to maintain arts programs, and that principals will be rated in annual reviews on how well they run those programs.
--New York Times, July 24, 2007

Presidential campaigns have not given enough time or energy to this country's education problem. My hope is that more candidates will address the issues therein and begin to offer solutions.

Starbucks Today

2007-12-06T12:04:00.000-06:00

Starbucks recently made announcements regarding its corporate strategy and new advertising initiative. From the Wall Street Journal:

Chief Executive Jim Donald said Starbucks is getting into TV advertising because "as we grow our stores, we're trying to reach out to this broader audience that maybe [has] not had the chance to experience Starbucks."

Regardless of what the company says, this is a direct response to the following developement:

The average number of transactions in Starbucks U.S. stores fell for the first time during the most recent quarter...

Ignoring the advertising initiative and focusing on the company's broader strategy, a few observations come to mind. Hardly a victim, the success of Starbucks will force the company to make further changes to its business model and target market. My experience with Starbucks is limited to the recent past. I am not familiar with its early stores or original culture. However, I have witnessed changes within the company. The most obvious changes are related to the environment of its stores and the ubiquity of the brand.

Despite the evolution of the business, management clings to tennants of the original strategy.

Starbucks likes to think of itself as a collection of thousands of corner cafes that sponsor the local zoo and have baristas who know their customers' favorite drinks

While this strategy provided the catalyst for its impressive growth, it has now reached a point where that game will no longer work. "Thousands of corner cafes" is inherently oxymoronic and the company is too large to maintain a local feel. This is particularly true when the "corner cafe" is hawking espresso machines, DVDs, CDs, packaged coffee, cups, etc, etc. Most Starbucks stores no longer resemble a cafe, maybe a "Coffee Wal-Mart", but not a cafe.

Now, compound the changes in environment with the ubiquity of the brand. Living near the center of Houston, I could locate at least 5-7 Starbucks stores in the time it would take to locate 1 McDonalds. If the cafe theme is still a goal, how is this prevalence aiding the company in meeting its objectives? The corporate feel of the stores is sharply enhanced by the corporate image invoked by seeing a Starbucks on every corner (or two on every corner, circled here on West Gray Street in Houston).

The money quote from the Wall Street Journal article hints at the fate of Starbucks.

"There is a huge battle of the coffee brands and everyone is encroaching on Starbucks's turf," says Dean Crutchfield of Wolff Olins, a branding firm owned by Onmicom Group. "The competitiveness is diluting and commoditizing the entire coffee category, so it's critical that Starbucks maintains its message in the marketplace."

The most interesting thing about this observation is his focus on the commoditized portion of the market. I believe he is referring to McDonalds and Dunkin Donuts and ultimately comparing Starbucks to these down-market competitors. Starbucks has not maintained its message to the marketplace and therefore will be forced to compete with the national chains. The quality of the coffee will most likely begin to resemble these chains rather than the local coffee shops and cafes. A lower quality product, marketed to the masses is inevitable. The corporate strategy has deviated too far its the original intent to return now. Also, the logistics of supplying thousands of stores with coffee does not allow for local or heterogeneous experiences.

The size and culture of Starbucks indicate further shifting in strategy. I believe this shift will be toward the lower end of the coffee market and allow local coffee shops and cafes to fill the "corner cafe" gap left behind. Hopefully that means a few more places like the one below.

No Country for Old Men

2007-12-06T11:19:00.000-06:00

There has been a lot written about this movie over the past few weeks and I don't feel the need to elaborate much. However, here are a few thoughts and the trailer for your viewing pleasure:

While not something I would recommend to my grandmother, I enjoyed the movie. Being from Texas, I have grown accustomed to seeing the state portrayed in greatly exaggerated forms. No Country for Old Men depicts west Texas and its people fairly accurately. The studied landscape and restrained characters were appreciated.

The movie has several themes, however most obvious to me was the dispiriting effect evil has on our lives. While it kills some and merely depresses others, it affects everyone. There is no fighting it and despite your efforts to defeat it, evil lives on.

Evil is personified in Anton, a hired killer who has no regard for pity or humanity. His job is clearly defined and his determination is limitless. The theme is consistent in his character, showing evil cares nothing for your ideals and has the ability to engulf and ultimately consume your life.

Where's the Style?

2007-11-15T11:48:00.001-06:00

One of the most dissapointing things about living in Houston is the lack of style. This includes both men and women. In most cities, the streets are not full of dashing gentlemen and modern women. However, they exist and remind their peers that one's appearance can be drastically enhanced with proper clothing.

The most prevalent style in Houston reminds me of the no-face camera shots shown on the news when discussing obesity statistics. The few supposedly style concious count an Hermes tie or Gucci purse as the vanguard of cosmopolitanism. But, I digress...

Fortunately, I found The Sartorialist about a year ago and am able to follow trends and see examples of truly stylish men and women. A few of my favorites follow, but I would encourage anyone interested in fashion to check out one of the best blogs out there.

This gentleman was photographed in Milan. I am particularly impressed with the subtle details, yet relative simplicity of his clothing.

This gentleman was photographed in New York. Again, the details and accessories are what interest me the most. However, it never hurts to have a tailor as talented as his.

This gentleman was photographed in London. Simply classic.

Milan

New York

Stockholm

via The Sartorialist

Texas Rail

2007-11-13T18:08:00.000-06:00

I've often wondered how well a high speed train system would work in Texas. Trains in Europe are reaching speeds of 200 - 357 miles per hour.

These speeds make previously dreaded road trips or flights unnecessary. For example:

Houston to Dallas by:
- Car = 4 hours
- Train at 200 mph = 1 hour 12 minutes
- Train at 357 mph = 40 minutes

San Antonio to Dallas by:
- Car = 4 hours 30 minutes
- Train at 200 mph = 1 hour 22 minutes
- Train at 357 mph = 46 minutes

Even shorter times separate cities like Austin from the rest of the state's major business districts (due to its central location). This would not only make business travel easier, but would also enable residents of one city to easily work in another. I know many people who would love to live in a different Texas city, but are constrained due to their employment situation.

One caveat for any development plans, however, involves the sprawl of a city like Houston. Personal transportation after a train ride is a necessity. This isn't Europe and walking or even biking are not a feasible options. Fortunately, MIT engineers are making progress on an innovative solution.

Meant to work more like a car sharing service than that of a personal vehicle, MIT hopes to change the way that we think about personal transportation. Stacks of vehicles could be placed throughout the city to create a small network that is linked to the existing mass transportation systems within the city. When a person comes gets off a bus or train, they can just hop into one of these vehicles and go about their business. They can either drop it off at the vehicle stack at their destination, if there happens to be one, or returned to their original stack, where the vehicle will be recharged and wait for the next person to take it.

via Inhabitat

Subprime

2007-11-13T09:31:00.001-06:00

The subprime fallout and subsequent roller-coaster financial markets are not entirely funny (after all, lowering my year-end bonus is no laughing matter). However, the decisions and business practices leading to this turmoil are quite amusing. Below is a short primer about the events leading to our current situation, made tolerable by British wit.

Peak Oil?

2007-11-12T16:44:00.000-06:00

Oh, the infinite wisdom of Matt Simmons:

"If the world is nearing peak oil supply output, alternative fuels take on a more ominous urgency," said Matt Simmons, chief executive of Simmons & Co., a Houston-based investment bank. Simmons, a long-time proponent of peak-oil theory, popularized the idea with his 2005 book, "Twilight in the Desert."
--Dow Jones, October 23, 2007

It amazes me how often people talk without saying anything. Anyway, "nearing peak oil supply output" is broad and hard to criticize, but this surely doesn't help his argument:

Last week's news centred on the Tupi field - at present, little more than a couple of exploratory wells 280km off Brazil's coast in the Santos Basin. But those two wells have confirmed that the field holds between 5bn and 8bn barrels of oil, not far short of the entire reserves of Norway.
--Financial Times, November 12, 2007

Further developments to watch:

The president of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, said the discovery of reserves that may total as much as eight billion barrels of oil and natural gas might lead the country to join the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.
--Bloomberg News

My How Things Change

2007-11-12T15:00:00.000-06:00

I'm too young to have full knowledge of what I'm about to say, but for posting sake I'll count movie watching and book reading as "industry experience."

A common expression regarding leveraged buyouts is "cutting/trimming the fat." This references any unnecessary or superfluous spending within a company. Once the private equity firm has acquired the company, a significant amount of new debt is partially intended to instill discipline in the company's operations.

Because of their leverage they cannot afford bureaucracy and excess fat; they need shorter lines of communication to customers, employees, suppliers and other constituents. They need to invest their capital in highly productive assets. They need to address the very concerns that business critics have leveled at American industry in its recent years of decline. Because they have few near-term prospects for liquifying their investment, they must take the long-term view.
--Wall Street Journal, May 31, 1984

Fast forward to the height of the subprime fallout and halting of LBO deals and the expression suddenly carries the opposite meaning:

Compare that to Blackstone and KKR, which larded their deals with ever increasing amounts of borrowings until investors turned off the high-yield spigot this summer. Until that spigot opens again, big U.S. buyout firms will largely be sitting on their hands, not exactly a recipe for cranking out the profits public shareholders will expect from them.
--Wall Street Journal, November 12, 2007

I believe more profound shifts in rhetoric will surface regarding "sustainable" and "renewable" energy sources. Sure, corn and soybeans are renewable resources, but are they viable sources for renewable energy?

Veterans Day

2007-11-12T12:22:00.000-06:00

We are who we are because of these men and women. Honor them today and always.

Picture of the Day

2007-11-09T18:36:00.000-06:00

Here's to the weekend!

Waitress 1 - "Journalism" 0

2007-11-09T12:40:00.000-06:00

After all the pundits and indiscriminate blogs have had their say, a voice of reason is heard.

Ms. Esterday, waitress at a Maid-Rite diner in Iowa, regarding the accusation that Hillary Clinton failed to leave her co-workers a tip:

“You people are really nuts,” she told a reporter during a phone interview. “There’s kids dying in the war, the price of oil right now — there’s better things in this world to be thinking about than who served Hillary Clinton at Maid-Rite and who got a tip and who didn’t get a tip.”
--The New York Times

Via Eunomia

Internet Radio

2007-11-09T10:43:00.000-06:00

After a host of cynical posts yesterday, I'll try to lighten things up for Friday!

Starbucks has changed its cups, movies return to tired plots and the weather is forecasted to be in the 80's this weekend. That, of course, means only one thing. Christmas is approaching with the grace of a freight train and even 23 year olds pause to consider their list for Santa!

One interesting item is an internet radio player. A recent article from The Atlantic discusses the overlap of relatively new technology with a century old medium. Listeners are no longer constrained by their location when seeking local content. For example, I live in a city 150 miles from my favorite radio morning show. Hauling a laptop around my apartment, I listen every morning. The prospect of having an actual radio to play these stations is appealing.

As mentioned in the article, radio is one of the most inexpensive forms of media. This allows programs with a limited local audience to continue operating. Unlike television (which I strongly prefer in HD), the number and diversity of quality radio stations is immense. Rather than standard U.S. dominated television programming, a listener can tap into the rhythms of Africa, opera from London, news from Dubai, etc, etc. This is the type of technology I can get excited about.

** For those of you who know who I am: If I link to an article that requires a subscription, let me know and I'll email it to you. **

Clueless

2007-11-08T13:34:00.000-06:00

From the New York Times:

Looking for someone to curate your life? Need a personal concierge whose expertise is not picking up dry-cleaning but helping chose your wardrobe, your tastes, your friends? Ms. Storr calls herself a personal manager, but her duties go far beyond that. Her clients, all of them men, pay monthly fees of $4,000 to $10,000 to have her be their personal decider in nearly all things lifestyle-related.

The New York Times really should stop printing things like this if they want to enhance the image of the city. While hiring Ms. Storr in the name of being fashionable and having the right friends, her clients exemplify the rapid homogenization of the city.

Calling on assistants including a stylist and a caterer, Ms. Storr helps people figure out their tastes.

All in all, if you are a grown man (all 8 of her clients are men) too busy to know what your "tastes" are but wealthy enough to spend $10k a month for hipster school, take time to reexamine some things.

A-space

2007-11-08T11:39:00.000-06:00

From The Atlantic's December calendar section:

December 21--
Spooks join the social-networking craze this month when the director of national intelligence launches “A-space,” a Facebook of sorts for the top-secret set. The spies’ new tools—blogs, wikis, and Amazon-style recommendation engines—aim to spread information and surmount the intelligence agencies’ “need to know” culture.

See a previous post for some of my concerns with this new system.

Judges vs. Jihadis

2007-11-08T08:44:00.000-06:00

I have a strange feeling David Rivkin and Lee Casey did not put too much thought into today's Wall Street Journal op-ed. The piece swerved its way to a conclusion regarding a law enforcement approach to fighting terrorism, criss-crossing an irrelevant and dated issue.

As the great Italian legal scholar and reformer Beccaria wrote in the 1760s, to prevent crime, "make sure that men fear the laws and only the laws." Where respect fails, of course, there also is fear of punishment under the law -- deterrence. The system breaks down, however, when the criminals neither have respect for the law nor fear its potential punishments.

My first suggestion is to stay off Quoteland.com if you aren't going to find something that supports your argument. The quote is admirable and hopefully applicable to the U.S. court system, however we are to believe this standard won't suffice in the current state.

The followers of violent jihad do not respect the laws of democratic governments, but claim a superior legitimacy in the form of their own interpretation of Islam's Quran and Shariah law. Many of them also do not fear punishment.

This is the point where we are expected to celebrate the policy of the U.S. vs. that of many European countries. If al-Qaeda doesn't respect laws or fear punishment, what are we supposed to do? Apparently the most logical solution is military attacks in which we kill all terrorists. This is as empty a policy as any. Anyone who believes it is possible to eradicate terrorism and/or the ideals driving it is delusional. In fact, I believe our latest efforts will in fact backlash in spades. The world is a big place and has citizens gripping twisted ideas of Islam throughout. Committing considerable time, effort, resources and lives to one country that was initially only tangentially involved is irresponsible. Continuing such a policy, bolstered by the use of torture and violating treaties, is obscene.

Although the Civil Law system is marginally better suited than the Common Law system for antiterror prosecutions -- permitting more closed proceedings and less technically demanding evidentiary standards -- both are built upon the assumption that it is better to let the guilty go free than to convict the innocent.

That is an appropriate balance when a society is dealing with its own reprobates. It is not so obviously correct when the threat is a foreign movement whose purpose is to cause death and destruction on a grand scale...

...Only the law of armed conflict permits the flexibility needed to disrupt al Qaeda's operations on an international level.

Finally, the authors reach their conclusion that an individuals rights and the applicability of American values is safe and acceptable when dealing with American murderers and rapists. However, when a foreign movement is involved (are we are still arresting people or have we started taking foreign movements to our prisons?) we must lower our standards and invoke war. This contradiction within American policies belittles the effort to bring democracy and stability to Iraq and beyond.

Terror's Advocate

2007-11-07T18:16:00.000-06:00

On my list of things to see, Terror's Advocate is very high. From the trailer it appears to be a chilling story about the nexus of terrorism, moral judgement and the rule of law. My personal belief is that everyone is entitled to a fair trial in front of an unbiased court. One injustice not perpetuating another. However, I feel this documentary will question humane treatment for some of the world's most inhuman actions.

Bella

2007-11-07T17:15:00.000-06:00

This past weekend I saw Bella. Not wanting to spoil the movie for my legions of readers :), I'll share my thoughts without revealing too many details.

Bella was a refreshing movie experience in many respects. First, the story and the sequence in which it develops were enough to keep viewers engaged. Many movies I have seen recently rely on cinematography or force of personality to bring viewers in. Bella simply has a beautiful story and is revealed with perfect tempo (until the end that is). Second, the main character, Jose, is a sharp contrast from what society has come to expect of people like him. Once a rising professional soccer player, a tragic event alters everything about him. His sudden humility and good-heartedness transform his life and remind the viewer of a love for others rarely seen. Finally, I appreciated the subtlety throughout. The movie is never quite a love story and never quite an argument, no matter how natural the progression would be. Rather, the characters treat other with respect and understanding. The events taking place and emotions therein are heavy and raw, yet gently navigated. Bella leaves viewers reassured of a love that transcends personal gratification, a love simply of life.

Facebook

2007-11-07T09:53:00.000-06:00

I don't blame Zuckerberg for trying to monetize Facebook to a greater degree. Realistically, any successful website will ultimately function as a business with profit and market value driving content decisions. However, Facebook does not sell books or news, rather it creates a social gathering place for "friends." Now, this quasi-genuine interaction is at risk of becoming just another marketplace for advertisements. If I wanted that, I would turn on the TV.

Facebook's new technology will let businesses build custom-designed "pages". Users will be able to become "fans" of a company's page, 10,000 of which were launched last night.

Anything they do on the page, such as reviewing a product, would then be communicated to that user's friends and accompanied by a logo, creating "social ads". These will be auctioned, and buyers can opt to pay for impressions on the number of clicks. Mr Zuckerberg said that, by interacting with a company's Facebook page in this way, the site's users would act as "trusted referrals" for advertisers. "A trusted referral is the Holy Grail of advertising," he said.

Facebook also announced two other related technologies. One, will track purchases users make on outside websites, and then report those to friends on Facebook.

The other, will allow advertisers to track how their social ads spread among users.

Facebook took pains to assure its users that the new technologies would continue to respect their privacy. But one analyst said there was a risk the new idea could backfire if users felt the new system violated their privacy or bombarded them with unwanted ads.
--Financial Times, November 7, 2007

Continue to be aware of the privacy issues surrounding this site and others. I feel real invasions of privacy slowly creeping into our daily lives. Don't look to Zuckerberg or the Google guys for comfort either, as their business plans are built on accessing every last drop of information.

Clumsy Writing

2007-11-07T09:33:00.000-06:00

Yesterday I came across A Reader's Manifesto by B.R. Myers. My literary reading has increased lately, so finding this essay was incredibly timely and relevant. Myers challenges the modern literary elite to return to a natural prose style. His examples help a novice literary reader understand the pervasive mediocrity in modern writing.

The only way out is to look back to a time when authors had more to say than "I'm a Writer!"; when the novel wasn't just a 300-page caption for the photograph on the inside jacket. A reorientation toward tradition would benefit writers no less than readers....Whatever happens, the old American scorn for pretension is bound to reassert itself someday, and dear God, let it be soon.
--B.R. Myers

Changes

2007-11-07T09:10:00.000-06:00

Today Earnest Observer changes course and will function as an everyday journal. While maintaining anonimity, I will post on what I have been reading, watching and otherwise doing. There will be times for essays and pictures, videos and one-liners. I am dissapointed my last post is two months old and think this format will make me a better and more active blogger.

Web 2.?

2007-08-23T14:33:00.000-05:00

A few months ago I finally joined Facebook. Seeing as how I am twenty-two years old and only recently graduated from college, there had been plenty of opportunities and encouragement from friends to do this much sooner. However, I simply did not have any desire to display personal information, pictures and discussion to the world. Call me crazy for not fully endorsing the product, but I remain skeptical of the applications use. However, somewhat contradicting what I just said (albeit anonymously), I sit here beginning to document issues in my life in an open forum. With so many new outlets for the exchange of information becoming available, I have been considering the usefulness and value of those resources. Therein lies the topic of this post.

ORGANIZATIONAL BLOGS

I was prompted to this subject by a recent essay in Foreign Affairs by Mike McConnell. McConnell is the current Director of National Intelligence. His position was “created in 2005 to transform and modernize intelligence institutions, rules, and relationships to meet today’s intelligence needs.” Considering my dismay with U.S. intelligence capabilities surrounding the war in Iraq, I was obviously curious as to his methods. Among those mentioned in the article, albeit not the focus in any respect, is to develop virtual communities for his analysts to exchange ideas and information. I’m not certain where, but I have heard knowledge sharing ideas like this from business leaders as well. The hope is that, by allowing your employees/analysts/etc to write freely about their area of “expertise”, others will be enlightened to the point of doing their job better. If only it were that easy…

The most inherent problem I see with this is the contributors themselves. In all likelihood, some of the brightest minds within an organization will share something. However, so will some of the most ill-informed and confused. For the most part, this is not entirely important in the blogosphere. Individuals are free to pick and choose what they read and determine if the source is reliable. Traditional, unedited blogs do not carry a presumption of accuracy and journalistic integrity. We have newspapers, journals, magazines, etc for that. However, within a company or more seriously, the CIA, a blog authored by professionals could be perceived as trustworthy and wholly accurate. Unedited content and a lack of skepticism from the reader could be a dangerous combination. The possible outcomes as a result of sabotage, misinformation or sheer ignorance are endless and I will leave you to consider the consequences. I feel confident with my concerns, as I have read some of the most enlightening and worthless writings on blogs.

SOCIAL NETWORKING

Returning to where I began, over the past few months I have become familiar with Facebook. (For purposes of full disclosure, this is the only social networking site I have used and I know nothing about Myspace or the others.) The site has become, I believe, an integral part of some people’s lives and a necessity for communicating with friends. My excuse for not joining earlier was: if I want to talk to a friend, I’ll call them. Not complex reasoning, but possibly an unreasonable expectation that I would actually some of the people I would like to stay in contact with. The tipping point was graduating from college. I realized, if I did not sign up and left school, there was a real possibility of losing touch with some interesting people. This chain of events led me into the abyss that is social networking.

While at first fairly overwhelming, the experience has faded. Pictures and a changing relationship status elicit the most interest, while the surrounding data is relatively shallow and uninteresting. The information typically reveals very little about an individual, unless you measure a person by their favorite movie or quote. My real question is what leads millions of people to join a site like Facebook and Myspace? Can we no longer garner other people’s interest by interacting with them on a personal level? Are we so hungry for attention that we resort to putting “interesting” facts about ourselves online, comforting ourselves with the hope that someone will see them and be intrigued or amused? Do we not have enough time to manage new and old relationships by actually being someone’s friend (in reality, not a “Facebook friend”)? Whatever the situation may be, the methods through which we communicate are changing drastically, for better or worse.

Despite being initially unimpressed with what these sites have to offer, I am convinced the concept could be used to promote a more cultured, informed and connected global society. More emphasis on creating an outlet for the exchange of ideas, art, knowledge, etc. is needed. The internet generally fulfills this definition. However, it will take a new platform to facilitate and hasten this process.

That’s all for now. More later….

American Revolutions

2007-08-14T22:18:00.000-05:00

I wrote the following in November of 2006. It was a difficult time for me as I struggled to make sense of the war in Iraq. I took to reading as much as possible about the situation and the complex role of the United States. Very characteristically, I choose to express myself through words. What resulted is not another fact book about Iraq, but rather my personal thoughts about the war set against the events surrounding the American Revolution.

In the coming weeks, I will elaborate on my current stance regarding the war and strategic options therein.

INTRODUCTION

I have been reading Joseph Ellis' book Founding Brothers, which recounts a few of the major events coinciding with the formation of our country. While I am fully aware that every successful revolution in history has secured victory through disparate methods, I am compelled to believe each movement has shared similar characteristics that enabled the victor. From a macro perspective and at the risk of missing some of the finer details, I recognized two of these characteristics in Founding Brothers. These are obvious in the American Revolution and owe their existence to the charismatic leaders and pure vision for the new country. My fears as I have read about our nation's success, however, are the vast differences that permeate any comparison to the modern day "revolution" occurring in Iraq. I will share some of the passages from the book that have caused me to make my own comparisons to Iraq and question the probability of success considering the current situation and strategy.

PUBLIC SENTIMENT

Ellis in Founding Brothers: "Bound together in solidarity against the imperialistic enemy, the leadership fragments when the common enemy disappears and the different agenda for the new nation must confront its differences. Securing a revolution has proven to be a much more daunting assignment than winning one."

Focusing on the first part of this quote, the American Revolution was based around the pervasive hatred of Britain and its imperial rule. American citizens were “bound together in solidarity” and were determined to win the war to gain their independence. Our countrymen experienced several years of fighting side by side to achieve a common goal that had been brought about through the citizen’s unanimous initiative (Declaration of Independence).

Iraq has no such common thread. The citizens were not the impetus for the beginning of the revolution. This was spurred by the invasion of Iraq by an American led force to expel Saddam Hussein from power. To our credit, we are highly skilled at modern day warfare (winning a war, not to be confused with winning the peace) and it was not long before we declared military victory from the deck of a naval carrier. Operation Iraqi Freedom began on March 20, 2003 and the announcement that major combat operations in Iraq had ended was made by President Bush on May 1, 2003, a mere matter of weeks. Iraq did not experience a unifying war for freedom and democracy initiated and fought by its own citizens. Essentially a revolution had been thrust upon the nation, despite the incompetence of its people to engage it. American and coalition forces had faced our equivalent of Britain based on a fear of weapons of mass destruction and a tyrant in power that would likely use them.

While I believe the fear of Saddam Hussein was supported by the intelligence we had and the invasion was justified based on these fears, was there no prophecy of the unique problems that would arise once the ruling government was displaced? Additionally, if there was some forethought concerning the need for a new government, was the consensus that the Iraqi people would cast aside their inveterate differences for a stable, Western-style nation to emerge? The Iraqi nation has been freed from a fascist leader, yet subsequently verges on anarchy. From the beginning of this conflict to today, the resonating theme has been success through military tactics and persistence. Therefore, while the composition of the nation has changed, the strategy for success has not. American soldiers increasingly face an indefinable enemy and support a increasingly divided government.

Current American desires to dictate a particular type of government for Iraq are simply "sentimental attachments or fleeting ideological enthusiasms." A country divided by religious factions and thousands of years of conflict face separate and much more challenging obstacles to a unified society than a young American nation. To assume we can win the peace in Iraq through American military force with American motives and methods while being led by American backed politicians is a vision that can be supported only by the most imaginative minds. Until the Iraqi people develop a unified, peaceful vision for the country and commit their efforts to attaining this, they will continue to be embroiled in an increasingly fragmented civil war.

An article from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a nonpartisan resource for information and analysis, on October 26 emphasizes the lack of unity and outlines society's limited choices of anarchy or militia allegiance:

"The presence of militias and death squads in Iraq threatens to drive a wedge between U.S. officials and the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. The U.S. military and Iraq's government blame militias for the recent bout of mass kidnappings and sectarian killings. The prime minister has dismissed calls from Washington for a timetable or ultimatum for the Iraqi government to disband the militias... There are a growing number of small, homegrown, paramilitary-style brigades being formed by local tribes, religious leaders, and political parties. Many have taken up arms against Iraq's Sunni insurgents since the February 2006 bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra. Larger, more established militias, such as the Badr Brigade and the peshmerga, are tied to Iraq's leading political parties, organized along sectarian lines, and in existence to enforce order in their respective regions... Whereas in 2004 and 2005, these militia groups primarily targeted ex-Baathists, rival militia groups, or U.S. troops, now they target everyday Iraqis based on their ethno-religious sect."

One important reminder for strategic planners concerning Iraq is the slavery issue facing the nascent American nation. This was such a divisive issue that a compromise was reached at the Constitutional Convention to prevent legislators from addressing it for twenty years. The American leadership understood that society was not capable of agreeing on every issue and without compromise, they would jeopardize the stability of the country. Without the agreement, southern states might have chosen succession and thereby ruined the grand vision for the country. Additionally, even when the abolition of slavery was discussed, leaders agreed that it would be necessary to relocate the freed African-Americans, as white and black could not coexist in that society. Those making assumptions that Iraq is capable of immediately securing a homogeneous republic should reevaluate the situation. If splitting the country into provinces, with equal political representation, oil rights, etc., would mitigate the divisive militia violence and lead to a renewed democratic effort, this option should not be ruled out.

Militias simply reinforce and incite the inveterate beliefs of the Sunni and Shi'a alike. An environment where they are clashing not only ideologically, but also violently, has facilitated a growing variance between each group in their society. Iraq does not currently fit the requirement for a successful revolution in the area of unified public sentiment. To assume that American influence can ameliorate this deficiency would be highly speculative and unrealistic.

LEADERSHIP

Ellis in Founding Brothers: "To secure the Revolution and stabilize its legacy on a national level required a dominant leader who focused the energies of the national government in one "singular character." Washington had committed himself to that cause, and in so doing, he had become the beneficiary of its political imperatives, effectively being cast in the role of a "republican king" who embodied national authority more potently and more visibly than any collective body like Congress could possibly convey."

Founding Brothers: "Throughout the first half of the 1790s, the closest approximation to a self-evident truth in American politics was George Washington. A legend in his own time, Americans had been describing Washington as "the Father of the Country" since 1776 - which is to say, before there even was a country."

In order for historical perspective and in an effort to continue my comparison to the American Revolution, I would like to look at George Washington's progression to the presidency. According to Wikipedia, Washington led the Continental Army to victory over Britain in the American Revolutionary War from 1775 to 1783. Instead of installing himself as king of the newly independent nation, which is widely believed to have been attainable, he retired for a short time to his home at Mount Vernon. He returned from retirement to preside over the Constitution Convention in 1787. The founding fathers were drafting the Constitution in order to replace the weaker Articles of Confederation. Finally in 1789, fourteen years after he began leading the Continental Army, Washington became the first president of the United States. His commitment to our country and its success was grounded in the sacrifice of his own blood and an unrivalled vision for the newly formed republic. He took the helm of the youngest national government in the world and was required to collaborate with his fellow American leaders, not foreign powers, to fulfill its destiny. During this time, Washington was praised for his ability to remain independent and his influence rose above any political infighting. His unsolicited withdrawal from consideration for the presidential election of 1796 contributed to the formation of a less centralized national government and eliminated the possibility of America becoming a monarchy. Does a modern day revolution demand a leader of Washington's preeminence? If so, we should examine the current leader of the Iraqi government for any resemblance.

The leading politician in Iraq is the current Prime Minister Maliki. It goes without saying that Maliki has never been compared to George Washington. It also goes without saying that Maliki has not been afforded the same opportunity to develop the reputation, respect and aura of omnipotence that Washington wielded as the first political leader of the United States. However, despite these deficiencies, Maliki compounds these problems by failing to maintain personal and national independence from the sectarian militia groups.

In two recent articles from the CFR, Maliki and his relationship with militia/religious/political leaders is discussed. These reports provide more than sufficient evidence to question his competence and ability to lead and "focus the energies of the national government in one "singular character.'"

From the CFR: "Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has come under fire from U.S. officials for his refusal, or at least inability, to disband the militia of Muqtada al-Sadr. Sadr's militia, known as the Madhi Army, is accused of carrying out a number of attacks against Sunni insurgents, coalition forces, and rival militias like the Badr Brigade. Maliki relies on Sadr, who controls a large bloc of parliamentary seats, for political support and can ill afford to alienate his religious and conservative base. Experts say the alliance between the two poses a serious threat to American efforts to hand over security duties to the four-month-old government and begin scaling back U.S. forces."

Additional evidence demonstrating a lack of independence and influence by Maliki in Iraqi politics from the CFR: "'The problem is that ultimately Maliki is completely dependent on Muqtada al-Sadr and Hakim (leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq) and a variety of other groups out there who, quite frankly, have no interest in doing the right thing," says Kenneth M. Pollack, a Middle East expert at the Brookings Institution, in an interview with CFR.org. As he grows increasingly isolated from his American benefactors, says Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service, Maliki is reaching out more to clerics like Sadr and the Supreme Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani to seek support in curbing the violence." (Sadr who ironically leads a militia group, the Madhi Army. Sistani who in September, according to Wikipedia, "announced that he had abandoned attempts to restrain his followers, admitting that there is nothing he can do to prevent the country from sliding towards civil war, and would in the future advise only on religious matters.)

Speaking of Maliki, the CFR continues to say "his temperament is not suited to strong decision making." This characterization hints at the balancing act he has perpetuated between the various other leaders in Iraq.

The article goes on to suggests that I should not have even bothered to compare him to Washington in the first place: "Most experts say Maliki lacks sufficient power to properly rein in Iraq's militias and reach a power-sharing agreement. "He doesn't even have control over his own branch or government, let alone the activities of al-Qaeda, the Kurdish militias, and Sunnis," Abbas Kadhim says, assistant professor of Islamic studies at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. Some say it is not Maliki's personality but his post that is to blame. "Maliki is not a weak person per se but he is in charge of a very weak institution, the premiership, which does not really have any teeth," Kadhim says. Adds Nasr, CFR Adjunct Senior Fellow: "He faces the dilemma of a prime minister who relies on powerful factions and is hamstrung by a constitution that requires an overwhelming majority [of parliamentary] to vote and be able to do anything.'"

For the time being, I think we can assume that a singular, dominant political leader is no where to be seen on the Iraqi revolutionary horizon. America was blessed with a generation of men who were destined and capable of leading our nascent nation. Despite any action taken by the United States, Iraq maintains no such men.

CONCLUSION

My reason for writing this paper and primary concern is the lack of influence that America has over these two characteristics of a successful revolution. The Iraqi people have failed to demonstrate a unified initiative to transform their nation into a functioning republic. While the American military can attempt to enforce a general level of security within the country, our presence does not inherently bestow the United States’ democratic ideals upon the Iraqi population. It will take something other than troops and elections for this society to embrace a peaceful way of life.

The current rhetoric expressed by the Bush Administration uses phrases like “finishing the job” and “winning the war” to describe our purpose in Iraq. I find both of these phrases flawed due to the context in which they presented. Each one has been used to define not only our mission in Iraq, but also our strategy. I no longer find it acceptable to say we will win the war by finishing the job, or vice versa. "Finishing the job" infers that our current methods and resources will be effective if given enough time and effort. "Winning the war" construes there is a defined enemy capable of being defeated. It is unacceptable that the same tactics that were applied to the situation three years ago seem to remain in existence today. Our role has shifted to that of a mediator over an increasingly expanded civil war and it necessitates an original approach toward strategy. I am hopeful the Iraq Study Group and Dr. Robert Gates will provide this in collaboration with the current administration. For America’s own public sentiment regarding this conflict, it is imperative that our leaders produce a progressive strategy after clearly defining success in Iraq.

A senior military official recently said to me, “We must get back to the point where, when people saw the American flag on the trucks rolling into town, they knew everything was going to be alright.” Going forward, our position in the world will be strengthened by focusing our efforts on genuine humanitarian aid and a willingness to combat terrorism in a manner that is appropriate to vanquishing the illusive enemies of the United States.