mjm wired :: Politics

Louisiana elects first nonwhite governor since Reconstruction

Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:48:20 -0400

I copied the title of this post directly from the CNN news article. To me, I find it very misleading. My first impression to "nonwhite" is that they were trying to say "black" as in African American, but did not want to use those words. After reading the article however, you find that they are referring to an American born Indian: Bobby Jindal.

U.S. Rep. Bobby Jindal became the nation's youngest governor and the first nonwhite to hold post in Louisiana since Reconstruction when he carried more than half the vote to defeat 11 opponents.
...
Jindal, the Republican 36-year-old son of Indian immigrants, had 53 percent with 625,036 votes with about 92 percent of the vote tallied. It was more than enough to win Saturday's election outright and avoid a November 17 runoff.
...
"My mom and dad came to this country in pursuit of the American dream. And guess what happened. They found the American Dream to be alive and well right here in Louisiana," he said to cheers and applause at his victory party.

I actually find the set of circumstances a little unique. Apparently he's a Republican Indian who was born Hindu but converted to Catholicism ... to become a Governor in the United States? What are the chances?

Election 2006

Fri, 03 Nov 2006 21:00:18 -0500

I have received at least a dozen different automated calls telling me to vote for someone. Majority after I voted. So much for Do-Not-Call.

Anyways, this is the second draft of this post. Originally I had planned to explain my reasoning for the candidates and state proposals for which I had voted. I did vote earlier today, but after I did, I realized that my reasoning does not make much difference for others to read. The bottom line is that common sense and rational thought does NOT prevail in politics. It is up to the voters to do that. I want to emphasize how incredibly devisive and partisan this country has become. To affiliate with anything seems to imply close-mindedness. I don't know how to combat that ignorance.

I did vote for change and balance. We'll see tomorrow if it makes a difference.

Remember the Name

Tue, 30 May 2006 21:43:09 -0400

I think it was 1996 and someone whose opinion I valued, asked me what my greatest fear was. I answered that outside of closest monsters, laughing hyenas or having to shave my legs, that I feared being forgotten. Granted it was a very common response, so I would guess its a common fear. Whether or not it is genuine for others is beyond me.

So for Memorial Day weekend I went (with my family) to one of the usual places I "vacation" (shop rather). Along the way to Chicago, we visited a family friend who is dying of cancer. Its one of those odd situations where there's nothing you can do and they do occupy a notable part of your thoughts, but outside of that? ... Everyone who's lost someone to cancer, feels connected. Everyone who's lost someone to drugs, violence or war, they feel connected. They remember.

Passing through the Michigan highway system I noted at least 1 dedicated portion of highway. Entering Chicago from the south, you're bound to see Soldier Field, yet another dedication. I can't help feeling how wasted some of these dedications are. They don't really connect people. I'll drive on the road and curse the potholes. I'll get stuck in traffic and curse the Chicago Bears for having a game when I'm arriving. But then at the same time, does a concrete slab with someone's name on it in the middle of an infrequently visited graveyard somehow imply those people are remembered any more or less?

The names will be forgotten but everyone who ever gave a damn and could see past their own wishes, will undoubtedly leave an impact on someone or something. Names, faces, tombstones - all fade, but the actions make the difference. At the end of the day (or end of the race), I just hope that I helped someone or leave a positive impact. As for wishing someone remembers my name? Well, that I can see, is just plain selfish.

Long Live MJM!

Tue, 09 May 2006 08:22:51 -0400

The "real" Mahesh Reddy started blogging ... again. When I was chatting with him he mentioned that he happened to stumble upon a link to my site, by accident. I thought that was cool. Its funny what we find by accident on the web.

Apparently those who read my resources on my website are very appreciative. Some much more than others. Often I get some messages from overseas. I so very much want to publish my "fan" mail (or email rather) but I don't want to humiliate or make fun of people who may not speak english as their primary language.

I stumbled upon this by pure accident and apparently it is an old post, but it made me smile. Someone from Burma: Nyein Chan

Cheer MJM! Long Live MJM.

So to pay my respects: Free Burma!!!.

But one of my favorites will always be from a Chinese student last year:

I am boy come from China , I am major in computer too , So I get your website from www.google.com. I am fall in love with Linux too.

There was more, but I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea. Why can't more females contact me??? I would say free China or something to that effect, but I would hate to be blocked out by the "Great Firewall of China". Ahh well, it is good be appreciated.

Corporate Stranglehold on Technology

Sun, 02 Oct 2005 15:24:43 -0400

This was actually a response on Jeff's blog, but it got so long that I decided to post here instead. Anyways for anyone who doesn't know, more and more lawsuits are being given to peer-to-peer software companies and consumers alike. Even Apple is under pressure from the Industry to raise prices.

I'm normally much more passive on this topic, but lately I've been getting terribly frustrated at the obvious BS coming out of the likes of the Recording Industry and Motion Pictures Industry. They keep claiming that initial production costs keep media (CD, DVD, etc) prices high and that piracy compounds that. I don't get it really. CD's ARE NOT THAT EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE. They've been around for 20 yrs, you think they would have figured it out by now. Look on Billboard's charts - CD's are still selling at their full (rediculous) price. Furthermore, outside of promotion costs, most movies CAN cover expenses at the box office - I remember paying $3.25 once upon a time. Fine it costs $10 now, and for the cost of a family set of tickets, you can purchase a handful of DVD's or a good boxset.

To me this boils down to money and politics. Obviously none of the bigwigs want their revenue streams interrupted and hence the best aproach is stifling competitive innovation via litigation. Money rules here. And, although I do beleive in capitalism, I also think that regulation is very important. But nobody is regulating tyrannical monsters like the RIAA and MPAA. Instead we have DMCA laws which give them MORE exclusive power. Even before that, both these groups could sue for copyright infringement, piracy, etc., -- only now the burden has been placed on the defendant (you and me) to defend ourselves, while they get unfair legal powers. Money rules the rule makers here.

And the Apple thing irks me further. I was never a fan of iTunes, but I did think that $0.99 was a *seemingly* fair compromise. Have you seen the price of a CD single? So if the distribution costs HAVE NOT RISEN, why should Apple have to raise prices? In fact I was waiting for them to go down a little in cost. Oh well. I am really behind Steve Jobs here, I really hope he sticks to his guns.

Something really needs to be done before the corporate stranglehold on technology spins out of control. The Clinton administration missed a great oppertunity for consumers, and I know now that the Bush administration has other priorities. So, maybe internet advocacy and a better educated populace will try to fight back, however futile that may seem.

American Life

Sun, 11 Sep 2005 20:25:22 -0400

A more appropriate title would be American Lives. Oh, wait, maybe I should be more specific: Value of American Lives. ... A coworker told me he saw firefighters in the street intersections collecting donations with their boots and hats for victims of hurricane Katrina, which at this moment the official death toll is now exceeding 400. I commented that I recalled firefighters in the same area doing the same after September 11, 2001 (2,752 dead). He asked me if I saw them do it for victims of the 2004 Tsunami (over 250,000 dead across 11 countries). I can't say that I did...

I'm not drawing any conclusion from this one incident ... but then again, maybe someone should.

The New Homes in Ann Arbor

Sat, 23 Apr 2005 11:54:57 -0400

I had a conversation with some co-workers recently about how some neighborhoods use intimidation and coercion to make some of their denizens comply to their standards or force them to move out. Some of the more egregious incidents were with Arabs in a white community or a Christian in a liberal community. Anyways, the reason I bring this up is because the housing that was so apposed by the wealthy community in NE Ann Arbor is finally near completion. To those who read my blog, I mentioned this case in September of 2003.

There was a 1999 TV movie I saw where a African American family in Detroit, MI was taken to court because a deed restriction was in place barring blacks from owning property in an exclusively white community in 1941. They were allowed to move in because the father's light complexion led them to beleive he wasn't African American. The Supreme Court in 1947 eventually ruled that states could not enforce racially restrictive covenants. However the closing notes in that movie stated that even to that day, there were locations in the United States where such restrictions still existed. What this boils down to say is that even though such things are impermissible in writing or creed, they still persist in actions. The supposed progressives of Ann Arbor are no exception.

So I was thinking: maybe in the spirit of the actions of my community members in 2003, I should go around door-to-door asking people to sign a Welcome petition ... oops I mean card or to join a Greeting commitee ... err party to welcome all the new people who will be soon be our neighbors.

Multitude of Opinions as Facts?

Fri, 01 Apr 2005 19:03:09 -0500

An opinion is an opinion? Right? What if one opinion is accepted by majority, then what? ... So I'm reading Bill O'Reilly's April 1rst Talkings Point Memo and he, like most news stations, was giving his view of the Terri Schiavo case:

Now all over America, people have chosen sides, which is your right to do. "Talking Points" hopes that you base your opinion on provable facts, not speculation and emotion. New scientific poll by FOX News/Opinion Dynamics indicates the following.

If you read further what this scientific polls asks you will find 4 questions: (1) If it were you, would you want the feeding tube removed? (2) Could Terri improve? (3) Who would you choose as Terri's gaurdian? and (4) Do you think Terri told her husband that she did not wish to live in such a state?

Now the first question is pure opinion and it is a valid question when considering each one's personal life, however the remaing 3 are just plain stupid questions. How does a poll of seemingly scientifically sampled people determine the validity of one's actions? Or even medical issues for that matter? I don't understand why people think she could improve? It was permanent brain damage. Isn't it wrong to let someone beleive there is hope when there really isn't? I can understand that family members couldn't let go, but wasn't she already gone? How does a poll help me know if she could have improved?

And what bothers me more is attacking the establishment of gaurdianship and the basics of that relationship. If this woman told her husband something, how can he even prove it? She could have told him countless things how can people possibly know what she said to him? It's almost as if they were never married in the first place and some random person was entrusted with this woman. That marriage was a binding establishment ever prior to courts reaffirming it.

I'm not saying what happened was wonderful or that I liked the outcome. However I do think this opinionated fury fueled by media attention and innocent arrogance really hurts society as a whole. The situation was depressing, but the fact that people cared was nice. I just hope that this case's influence on science, life and law isn't based out of opinion or scorn but rather understanding and rational thought.

With Apologies to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:22:07 -0500

I hope that some people don't label this as somewhat racist, but I feel that since MLK was assinated in 1968, his message has become somewhat perverted. It may not be intentional but I can't help feeling that irreverance and politics have take over.

I remember when I was in college many students complained that they would rather attend MLK rallies and events instead of going to class today. So to appease what I would think is a minority, the University gave the time off to attend such events. However the majority did the opposite, they slept or did whatever activities they would do on a day off. I understand the point of the holiday, but I would seriously question if it makes people anymore aware of what the slain civil rights activist stood for.

So last friday's news showed that a major automotive company had pledged $10 million to a $100 million project to construct a memorial to MLK. To contrast: $9 million was spent on the Vietnam Memorial. I may be comparing apples to oranges, but I am uncertain whether or not $100 million will help keep the "dream alive" across the world? Could it not be better invested into the communities and problems that plague the very people MLK was trying to help? I don't know, I may just be another ignorant person.

So I wonder. Does race based affirmative action go contrary to being judged "by the content of their character"? Is MLK's widow correct to question if non-violence would still work today? And is Bill Cosby's challenge to the African-American community correct to say "Forget about Dr. Martin Luther King. What would Jesus think?". I do not question what King stood for, I question if his legacy is pure to this day.

Why the Schools?

Fri, 03 Sep 2004 21:05:23 -0400

I'm beyond disgusted at this turn of events. I heard it a day or so ago, but never expected it to end so poorly.

A group of 40 children broke out of the school. Terrorists started firing at them, and armed bystanders in turn shot at the hostage-takers, he said. The terrorists responded by detonating a bomb that partly destroyed the roof of the school.

Shoot at kids? So what do we hold sacred?