Welcome. The Podium section is where you can read my various commentaries, opinions, and rants about various topics, which will typically be related to politics, current events, or whatever stirs me to write. Enjoy.

Booby Trapped (Feb 9, 2004)

First, let me say that I never watched (or watch) the Superbowl, so I missed the infamous incident involving Janet Jackson's accidental (?) "wardrobe malfunction" during the game's half-time show.

However, what I have not been able to miss or avoid is the resulting noise in the news media about the whole incident. From radio morning shows to the newspapers, the media was abuzz about the whole thing. Predictably, the more conservative media venues and commentators did not look favorably upon the incident.

However, this being an election year, an event that normally would barely get notice in the Beltway has become the focus of government scrutiny and a lightning rod for outraged conservatives. FCC Chairman Michael Powell (son of Colin Powell) and the other FCC commissioners wasted no time reacting to the incident. In Powell's own words: �I am outraged at what I saw during the halftime show of the Super Bowl. Like millions of Americans, my family and I gathered around the television for a celebration. Instead, that celebration was tainted by a classless, crass and deplorable stunt. Our nation�s children, parents and citizens deserve better. I have instructed the Commission to open an immediate investigation into last night�s broadcast. Our investigation will be thorough and swift.�

If only the Bush administration would have investigated the Enron scandal with as much outrage and zeal. Sigh. Evidently, a singer's bare bosom is a far more serious threat than corporate greed resulting in financial ruin for many.

Given the conservative climate in Washington, I'm afraid that common sense will probably be crushed by those who will use the Superbowl incident as their own little "9/11" event to advance their cause. Specifically, they will use the FCC to put the screws to more edgy programming on radio and television. For starters, there is already talk of the FCC jacking up fines for such incidents. It wouldn't take much effort for the FCC to effect a chill upon free expression. All they need to do is to make an example of a particular radio program or television show and the others will quickly fall into line with the FCC's new crusade against �indecency.� And if the FCC doesn't hang a few heads on the wall themselves, then certainly corporate Big Media will do it themselves beforehand in order to evade FCC action.

Pat Robertson and his ilk must be ecstatic right now.

Lost In Space Again (Jan 20, 2004)

President Bush's recent speech outlining his administration's vision for NASA's future is both troubling and heartening. However, more than anything, I think his speech and proposed ideas are merely election year grand standing and little else.

I agree that the shuttle fleet should be retired, as the shuttle program has been going since 1981. Designed in the 70's during NASA's post-Apollo budget crunch, the shuttle was flawed from the beginning. It never lived up to its promised goal of cheaper manned spaceflight, rapid turnaround times, and lower maintenance costs. It has proved to be the exact opposite. If the shuttle is to be retired in 2010, then its successor should be well past the drawing board phase by now, but it is not. Over the years, NASA has made several efforts to come up with a successor, but none have gotten very far. If the shuttle is retired in 2010 and a new manned vehicle isn't on line until around 2015, then that means the US will be without a manned space vehicle for five years, leaving the country reliant upon the Russian Soyuz or the ESA's future manned transport. 2010 is only 6 years away.

The ISS is almost as bad, if not worse, than the shuttle. True, nobody has died on the ISS, but in terms of scientific value for the money, ISS is largely worthless. It has gone through several redesigns and way over budget. It's nothing more than orbiting pork to the aerospace industry. It would be of greater value if it was designed to also serve as an orbiting drydock for the construction of other spacecraft in orbit, but that is not a capability that was part of its current design.

The early retirement of Hubble is also another questionable, if not outright bad, decision. The equipment for the Hubble's next servicing is built and ready to go. NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe's rationale that it is too dangerous a mission is not very convincing. In addition to pretty pictures, it has been a very valuable instrument for astronomical research. Yes, other space telescopes are up (Spitzer) and in the works (James Webb), but those cover different parts of the light spectrum. Adaptive optics used in ground based telescopes such as the Keck have yielded amazing clarity, but still not quite as good as Hubble. If Hubble were in its final few years, then the argument to retire Hubble would have more credibility, but Hubble can still give us another decade of service before it is ready to be brought down.

As for returning to the moon and a manned mission to Mars, both ideas are long overdue. We have been not-so-boldly going where John Glenn has gone before for the past 30 years. Going in circles in low earth orbit is NOT space exploration.

While Bush's proposed plan for NASA is laudable, I am skeptical about the financial and political commitment behind it. Predictably, it's being done on the cheap by killing existing programs to make room for the new program (sound familiar?), with only a modest budget increase allocated to NASA�s �new direction.� It will take more than election year rhetoric to convince me that NASA is serious about moving beyond the shuttle and reach for greater goals.

Bush's Epiphany (Nov 13, 2003)

Anybody who knows me knows how little regard I have for the Bush administration. Record budget deficits, an unpopular war that has damaged our foreign relations, an era of corporate scandal, and basically being an all-around tool of big business interests. Yeah, you know who I won't be voting for in '04.

So it will come as a surprise that, for once, I actually have something good to say about Dubya. Yes, please remain calm. I am not drunk or under the influence of anything.

President Bush's recent speech outlining his vision for the Middle-East displayed an unusual amount of intelligence. I don't know who wrote the speech, but gone was the usual cowboy bluster and instead there was genuine insight.

The Middle East has been the last holdout against the rise of democracy in the world during the past 20 years. If the war against terrorism is to prevail, then the social and political fabric of the Middle East must change.

Fortunately, there are some small stirrings of change for the better in the region. Saudi Arabia is having low level elections for the first time and Iran is yearning for reform but is stymied by hardliner mullahs and clerics. Libya seems to be slowly coming around and, while not reforming internally, is at least seriously reforming its relations with the US and the world.

I was against the Iraq invasion, but now that we have defeated and occupied Iraq, we must succeed in shaping it into a democracy. A civil war, regression to a dictatorship, or Iranian-style theocracy would be a disaster for the region and the US. The same holds for Afghanistan.

Not only is there the challenge of reforming former foes, there�s the more difficult task of reforming Middle East "allies" as well. From the "soft" dictatorships in Egypt and Pakistan to the Saudi Arabian kingdom, the US must assert its influence on these states to bend them towards democracy. It won�t be easy, and will probably take years to accomplish. The US must show the same kind of patience in reforming the Middle East as it did in conducting the Cold War.

However, it isn�t just the Middle East that needs to change its ways. Why is it that Arab resentment and extremism towards the US has only emerged during the past 30 years? It certainly isn�t culture or religion, despite what some jihadi nutcakes may believe. It is largely because of US knee jerk support of Israel and lack of even-handedness in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the occupied territories since the 1967 Six Day War. Until the US is willing to distance itself from Israel and not give preferential treatment, American credibility in the region will suffer.

Bush seems to recognize the problems in the Middle East. I just hope he knows what needs to be done in order to realize the lofty goals and ideals laid out in his speech.