Gene Patents? Can This Possibly Be Right?

Michael Crichton, the sci-fi author who brought you such science-gone-wild pot boilers as Coma and Jurassic Park had an op-ed piece in today's NYT entitled "Patenting Life. If the article is to be believed, it is possible for compnaies, universities, etc. to obtain patents on genes. In fact, not only is it possible, Crichton claims that some 20% of the genes in human DNA have already been patented.

The fact that it is Michael Crichton writing this makes me skeptical. But if he's right, I would really like to understand what possible bases there could be for granting patents on human genes.

The End Of An Era

There is a club in downtown Toledo (aptly named The Toledo Club) that was founded well over a century ago by the glass barons and other industrialists and luminaries that served as Toledo's founding fathers: Edward Drummond Libbey and Michael J Ownes (Libbey Glass, Libbey Owens Ford and Owens Illinois), John North Willys (Willys Overland), Morrison R Waite (7th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court), and David Ross Locke (newspaper publisher and abolitionist essayist). As with clubs like this in other cities, The Toledo Club was, for most of its existence, an exclusive bastion of old, rich, mostly white, men. Today, women are allowed to become members, and a few intrepid souls have done so, but for the most part the Club remains what it has always been: a place for men to get together in comfortable surroundings and do what men love to do -- talk, tell stories, share gossip, make contacts and deals, and indulge their taste for fine cigars and good liquor, all in an milieu free from the constraints (whether real or perceived) imposed on such activities by the "fairer sex."

Over the years, the Club has not escaped the campaign against second-hand smoke, and large portions of the Club are off-limits to smoking now. But there is one room -- The Oak Room -- where smoking continues to be allowed and where a simpatico bartender pours "three-fingers-in-a-rain-barrel" drinks of fine Scotch, Gin, Vodka, Bourbon or whatever else might suit the a man's fancy. Because of this, the Oak Room has become, for many, both the avatar and conservator of a great tradition.

The Toledo Club is not unique in all of this, of course, even in Toledo. The Country Clubs, originally founded by the same types of people who founded the Toledo Club for essentially the same kinds of purposes, have been through similar transitions. Yet there remains in each of these an "inner-sanctum" where the traditions are observed and defended from the seeming relentless forces of temperance.

All of the people who frequent such places have long shared one belief: that, having been driven so far underground, they were safe; that the smoking abolitionists would simply not be able to stamp out these last few islands of freedom. After all, we are talking about a single room in a private club! Surely they can't reach there without making smoking illegal per se!

Alas, how wrong they were.

Tomorrow, December 7, what is probably the most comprehensive smoking ban ever enacted goes into effect, state-wide, in Ohio. Passed by citizen initiative in the November elections, the ban technically extends only to places to which the public has access (bars and bowling alleys included). Private clubs are nominally exempted. However, there's a catch: to be a "private club,"you can have no employees.

There are creative lawyers (some in my own firm) working diligently on behalf of paying clients to find loopholes in this prohibition. They may do so, although I think it will be hard to find any that are likely to withstand scrutiny. But in reality the war is over. The abolitionists have breached the wall between the public and the private. Efforts to preserve that distinction will continue for some time, I think, but those will simply be the final skirmishes in a war that has already been lost. There is no place the smoking nazis cannot reach.

The tactical stroke of genius that made this possible was a shift of focus from patrons to employees. As long as the battle was being fought to protect "patrons" of establishments, there was considerable force to the argument that no person had an absolute right to enter privately owned places. If a person objected to or was concerned about the second-hand smoke, he or she could go to places that didn't allow it. In the end, the market would sort things out, with each business having to decide whether it would be better off with or without smoking. But, when the focus turned to employees, who have far less of an ability to choose where they work, that argument lost much, maybe all of its force. It is a common-place that business owners have a duty to protect their workers from work-place injury, and imposing an obligation to protect them from second hand smoke is a small step from the existing obligation to protect them from repetitive motion injury or other workplace ills.

Yes, I am a smoker, but that is not really the reason I find this sort of thing repugnant. I am always looking for a reason to quit, and now I have another one. My wife won't let me smoke in my house (indeed, even I don't like the smell) and my state will not let me smoke indoors anywhere else. So, maybe, finally, the lack of places to do it will make me quit. And, if it does, I will feel a twinge of gratitude.

But there is something inestimably sad about the outlawing of places like the Oak Room. (The same is no doubt true about the corner bar; I just don't go there too often). It is a reduction in the diversity of our society; another step in its homogenization. Hell, we do LOTS of things that are bad for our health. Driving being the poster child. But in our terror of "adverse health effects" and our insistence that the "majority rules" not just in most places but in all places, we are gradually eliminating the variation that makes life interesting.

Or so it seems to me.

The SEC (Seriously Effusive Crybabies) Gets What It Wants

Well, Florida and it's coach Urban Meyer whined their way into the national championship game on the theory that the SEC is by far the toughest conference in the country. That is just the silliest claim I've ever heard. These guys are simply incestuous. They play no one but themselves. The only teams in the SEC with a winning record were Florida, Auburn, LSU, Tennessee, and Arkansas. The non-conference games these team played were:

Florida, the SEC East Champion: So. Miss (8-4 in Conference USA), Central Fla (4-8 in Conference USA), W. Caorlina (2-9 in Southern Conf -- Div 1-AA BTW) and Fla St (6-6 in the ACC).

Arkansas, the SEC West champion: Utah St (1-11 in the WAC), SE Missouri St (4-7 in the Ohio Valley - IAA again), and la. Monroe (6-6 in the Sun Belt). Oh yes, they also played USC -- and got thumped, 50-14!

LSU (now ranked # 5 in the nation): La. Lafayette (6-6 in the Sun Belt), Arizona (6-6 in the Pac 10), Tulane (4-8 in Conf USA), and Fresno St (4-8 in the WAC).

Auburn (supposedly the best starting out): Wash St (6-6 in the PAC 10), Buffalo (2-10 in the Mid-Am), Tulane (4-8 in Conf USA) and Ark. St (6-6 in the Sun Belt).

And then there is Tennessee, the team Urban Meyer is so proud of having beaten at Tennessee: Cal(9-3 in the Pac 10, which lost to USC which thumped Arkansas which thumped Arkansas BTW), Air Force (winning by 1 point against a team that was 4-8 in the Mountain West), Marshall (5-7 in Conf USA), and Memphis (2-10 in Conf USA).

The only teams in the SEC top five who beat a non-conference team with a winning record were Tennessee, who beat Cal, and Florida, who beat So. Mississippi. The idea that the SEC is the toughest conference in the country is simply a myth.

But, for all of that, I am glad Michigan didn't get into the national championship game. It will play USC in the Rose Bowl. So that is no big loss for the Big Ten. But the really sweet part of it is that the Big Ten will get a chance to thump the top two teams in the SEC: OSU vs Florida and Wisconsin vs. Arkansas. Moreover, if Notre Dame can beat LSU and Wake Forest can beat Louisville, then Big Ten Teams shouild end the season 1, 2 and 3: OSU, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Maybe THAT will finally shut up America's great conferenence of crybabies: the SEC.

Oh, and as an added delicacy: Penn State beats Tennessee?

An Advertisement For "The Economist"

I have been subscribing to "The Economist" for the last few months, and I would strongly encourage anyone who is interested in good journalism to start reading it as well. It is fairly conservative on economic issues, but for all of that it is by far the best weekly news magazine I know of. It is what Time used to be before it decided to become a cross between People and USA Today.

Who Will Play Ohio State?

Let the arguments begin!

In a great game, OSU beat Michigan by 3 points at home despite giving up 10 points on three trunovers. If you believe the talking heads on the sports shows, everyone agrees that these are the two best teams in the country, so by that standard, Michigan should shjow up as no. 2 in the BCS on Monday, which would essentially assure them a spot in the National Championship game. (They probably will stay at number 2 in the computer polls, since Michigan was rated no. 1 in 4 of the 5 computer rankings last week and nothing about the games today will cuase them to drop to no. 3 there). But my guess is that the "people polls" will probably drop Michigan to at least 4th behind USC & Florida and maybe even to 5th behind Notre Dame despite the fact that Michigan beat Notre Dame handily early in the season.

Oh, and Rutgers lost to Cincinnati, so that nightmare is over.

The Bucs are in, and there are only 4 teams that have any chance of joining them: USC, Florida, Notre Dame, and Arkansas. But, USC plays ND and Arkansas plays Florida. Oh, and Michigan beat ND handily.

So (assuming there are no more significant upsets) ,OSU's opponent will be:

• USC, unless it loses to ND; or
• If USC loses ro ND, then the winner of the Florida-Arkansas game, unless LSU beats Arkansas and Arkansas beats Florida; or
• Michigan

But who knows. The OSU-ND match-up is so attractive (Smith v Qiuinn; ND fan base v Big 10 fan base, etc.) that ND could get the nod over Michigan so long a ND beats USC.

This is fun!

Update (Monday Morning): Well, the BCS came out with Michigan still at no. 2 a hair ahead of of USC. If USC beats Notre Dame next week and UCLA the week after, my guess is that it will edge into second place and play OSU in the National Championship game. But, if Notre Dame beats USC, it's anyone's guess. It will be very hard for the polls to put ND ahead of Michigan given that Michigan thumped them. So, if ND beats USC, it will come down to a choice between Michigan and the winner of the Florida and Arkansas game (assuming Florida beats Flarida State and Arkansas beats LSU). Ironically, Arkansas probably has a better chance than Florida of jumping over Michigan in the polls becuase for it to win out it has to beat two top tean teams.

As a Big Ten fan, my dream scenario is this: ND beats USC, LSU beats Arkansas, Arkansas beats Florida, and Rutgers beats West Virginia. If all of that happens there would be Big Ten teams ranked 1, 2 and 4 at the end of the season becuase Wisconsin would move up to no. 4.

I can't quite believe I am so deep into the details of all of this. I'm getting goofy in my old age.

Big Ten Rules

The college football game of the year is coming up next weekend: OSU v Michigan. They are without question the two best teams in the nation this year. Neither one has even had a close game. The rest of the top ten keeps losing. Auburn lost. Louisville lost. Cal lost. Texas is getting killed. Florida managed to win by one point at home against a 4-5 S Carolina team, but did so only by blocking two field goals and an extra point. Who's left? Rutgers and Boise State??

Either Michigan or OSU will lose next weekend. But who could argue that there is another team that better desrves to play for the natioanl championship?

Whoever wins next weekend, viva the rematch!

UPDATE (Sunday Morning): Well, Texas did lose. Which means that 4 of the teams ranked 3-7 last week lost and the fifth's (Florida's) win at home against a 4-5 team was so narrow as to hardly count as a win. There is going to be a big shake-up in the rankings tomorrow. Pigskin Bill's predictions:

Given its solid win over a ranked Oregon, and the poor performance of those ahead of it, USC will jump to 3rd. Arkansas, whose only loss was it's opener to USC and who thumped Tennessee will move up to 5. Floridas will drop to 6, and Rutgers, Louisville, West Virginia and LSU will round out the rest of the top ten, with Rutgers higher that Loisuville, which it beat, and Louisville higher than West Virginia, which it beat. The only uncertainty is where in this mix LSU will fall. I tend to think it will bring up the rear, since alone out of these teams it has 2 losses. So, here is my projection for tomorrow's BCS rankings:

1. Ohio State
2. Michigan
3. USC
4. Notre Dame
5. Arkansas
6. Florida
7. Rutgers
8. Louisville
9. West Virginia
10. LSU

Now, the interesting thing is to try to figure out who will be the other team in the National Championship Game. I think it will come down to 4 teams: USC, Notre Dame, Rutgers and the loser of the OSU-Michigan Game. The other possibility of course is Florida, but it's hard to see how they could end up being ranked ahead of the loser of the OSU-Michigan game after their performenace at home against a 4-5 S Carolina team and with no ranked opponents remaining on their schedule. So, I rule out Florida.

Of the remianing 4 teams, USC has by far the toughest schedule, since it still has to play both Cal and Notre Dame. Thus, if USC wins out, it will probably get the nod. However, if USC loses to either Cal or Notre Dame, they will be out of it. Notre Dame must beat USC to have a chance, but even if it does, it would be hard to pick ND over Michigan, since Michigan beat them. I think Notre Dame needs two things to have a chance: a victory over USC and a victory by Michigan over OSU. Then there is Rutgers. If USC and Notre Dame both lose another game and Rutgers beats West Virginia and remains undefeated, it will be hard to deny Rutgers a shot. But if USC, Notre Dame and Rutgers all lose a game (or if USC and Rutgers lose a game and OSU beats Michigan), I can't see how a rematch between OSU and Michigan can be avoided, especially if the OSU-Michigan game is close.

Nez-Pas?

Ooops: Forgot about Arkansas. If USC and Notre Dame both lose another game, and Rutgers and Arkansas both win out, (with Rutgers beating W. Va. and Arkansas beating LSU), then the choice will between two one-loss Big Ten and SEC Teams (the loser of the OSU Michigan game and Arkansas) and an undefeated Big East Team (Rutgers). That will be a toughie.

Ouch!

Pre- and post-op x-rays of Barbaro's broken leg, courtesy of the University School of Veterinary Medicine where he is being treated:






Pretty guesome, but amazingly there is hope. From a CBS/AP Report:

Dr. Dean Richardson, the surgeon who repaired Barbaro's shattered bones after the colt broke down at the Preakness Stakes on May 20, said Tuesday the prized patient has had an "incredibly good week — far better than I would have ever hoped so far, so far, so far."

But as the same report indicates, he far from out of the woods:

Following Barbaro's five-hour-plus surgery May 21, Richardson had said the prospects of recovery were "50-50." That has changed slightly:

"I was going to call a news conference to say it's officially 51 percent," Richardson said, smiling. "Seriously, every day that goes by is a big day, and in terms of some of the complications, some of them were more likely to rear their head in the earlier stages in the convalescence (such as infection within 10-14 days) . . . . But it's still a long, long way from being discharged from the hospital."

I for one am rooting for him. After all, I liked Dreamer.

If You Can't Trust Grandma, . . . ?

When little old ladies make the news, it is usually becuase they are being defrauded, abused or worse.

But, from the Washington Post and the LA Times comes this story (quoting the WaPo version):

Two elderly women devised a complex plot in which they befriended homeless men, took out life insurance policies on them, and then killed the men in hit-and-run accidents in alleys around Los Angeles to collect $2.2 million in payments, police said Monday.

The LA Times article emphasizes the sophistication of the crime:

A pair of elderly women accused of fraudulently collecting more than $2 million in life insurance on two homeless men demonstrated a remarkable knowledge of the intricacies of life insurance policies, officials said, and aggressively used this expertise in pressing their claims.

Insurance industry experts familiar with the prosecution's case said that Helen Golay and Olga Rutterschmidt took advantage of a provision that makes a policy valid after two years even if it was obtained using fraudulent information on the application.

"They were bullying the insurance companies into making sure they paid off, threatening a lot of lawsuits," said Marty Gonzalez, chief investigator for the fraud division of the California Department of Insurance. "In one instance, they filed a complaint with the Department of Insurance, saying their claims were not being handled properly. They knew how to deal with these companies. They were very comfortable trying to collect on the money they felt they had coming to them."

I'm not sure why I find this story amusing, becuase certainly it is not funny in fact, but these women are so far out of stereotype that you alomost have to laugh. Can you imagine some poor schmuck flim flam artist trying to run an insurance con -- or any kind of a con -- on these two? It would be a little like snatching a backpack off a suicide bomber.

Good Books -- Supposedly

I say "supposedly" becuase I wouldn't know. I have read an embarassingly small number of these.

The NYT asked "a couple of hundred prominent writers, critics, editors and other literary sages, . . . to identify 'the single best work of American fiction published in the last 25 years.' " The results appeared in the Books section of yesterday's paper.

The winner was Tony Morrison's "Beloved." Interestingly, though, the rest of the list was dominated by only three authors: Philip Roth, Don DeLillo and Cormac McCarthy, who together wrote 10 of the 22 books reciving more than one vote (12 of 24 if you count McCarthy's "Border Trilogy" as 3 books rather than 1). Regardless of how you count, Roth takes the "quantity cup" with 5.

The runners up to "Beloved" were:

"Underworld" by Don DeLilo;

"Blood Meridian" by Cormac McCarthy;

The "Rabbit" quadrilogy by John Updike (not really fair since this is really four novels the first three of which all appeared more than 25 years ago); and

"American Pastoral" by Philip Roth

Others that "recived multiple votes" were:

"A Confederacy of Dunces" by John Kennedy Toole

"Housekeeping" by Marilynne Robinson

"Winter's Tale" by Mark Helprin

"White Noise" by Don DeLillo

"The Counterlife" by Philip Roth

"Libra" by Don DeLillo

"Where I'm Calling From" by Raymond Carver

"The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien

"Mating" by Norman Rush

"Jesus' Son" by Denis Johnson

"Operation Shylock" by Philip Roth

"Independence Day" by Richard Ford

"Sabbath's Theater" by Philip Roth

"Border Trilogy" by Cormac McCarthy

"The Human Stain" by Philip Roth

"The Known World" by Edward P. Jones

"The Plot Against America" by Philip Roth

I am chastened to admit that I have read only 3 of these -- "The Plot Against America," "The Human Stain," and "The Things They Carried." (I also read the first of the Updike quadrilogy -- "Rabbit Run," -- but that hardly counts since it was published in 1960.) I am downright embarassed to admit that I have never even heard of Cormac McCarthy or a lot of the other writers listed.

I am going to keep this list and try to work through it over the next year. I'll probably start with "White Noise" and "Libra", since I own both of those (gifts from people with better literay taste and awareness than I have, obvioulsy). Any suggestions on where I should go after that?

I'm Gonna Try To Lighten Up

The discussions here over the past couple weeks have been so damn depressing that I have promised myself to make a concerted effort to lighten things up. This idea springs partly from the Ray Bradbury poem linked here and partly from a comment Left Coast Rob made in response to my rantings on Iran. In an as yet not entirely successful effort to bring me back to my senses, Rob wrote one of the most eloquent testimonies to the essential goodness of the American people that I have read in a long while, a quote that has been banging around in may head ever since:

I don't think we have it in us as a people to drive an enemy to its knees, then simply walk away with the promise to do it again if they don't get it right next time. That is partly driven by a genuine kindness that I'm convinced is an aspect of the American character. The rest is driven by the sincere belief that we simply know how to it better (being it governing, or building refineries, or saving women from their abusive, fundementalist husbands/fathers/uncles/whatever. We can't help ourselves in that regard...we simply have to do it.

He's right. And, while that "kindness-mixed-with-confidence" may yet be our undoing, I for one admire both attributes.

But the idea of trying to find some thing happy to write about actually crystallized yesterday. After a spectacular April, we have had an incredibly cold and rainy May (where is global warming when you need it?), but yesterday dawnwed absolutely beautiful, just in time for the wedding Judy and I were (more or less) obligated to attend. It was a wedding of the daughter of some friends we know primarily through a professional association between Judy and the bride's mother, so for me at least, it was boring as only a wedding where you know almost none of the attendees can be. But the day was so beautiful, and the people so gay that it tuned out to be fun in a quiet sort of way: dressier ceratinly that your average large family picnic, but with the same sort of relaxed, carefree atmosphere. I met some interesting people at dinner, and we talked for about an hour or so without once mentioning any of the topics on which I have been so obsessed here. The whole thing reminded me that despite its outrage and polarization, life in America is pretty damn good, and that a large part of our problems stem from a failure to keep that in mind. As Ray Bradubry said, "We are the dream that others dream."

So, when I sat down with the papers this morning, I decieded to try to find something to write about that was happy or funny or at least not depressing.

I failed.

Iraq? Some potentially good news there, but as always, it is accompanied by so much bad news that you find it hard to be hopeful, much less happy about anything going on in that poor country.

Iran? No good news of any sort there.

Isreal/Palestine? Ditto.

The US? It is a little like Iraq. Sure there are tidbits of good news, but they are overwhelmed by the seeminbg endless number of ideological struggles in which we are currently involved. Even this -- Religious Liberals Gain New Visibility: A Different List Of Moral Issues -- which I initially took as good news, gains its newsworthiness only from the fact (or hope) that is countervailing voice in America's kulturkampf.

Sports? Well there is this: The Detroit Tigers(!) have ths best record in baseball: 28-14 (.667)! (Ok, Ok. They're tied by the Chisox, but it's still the best record in baseball). But for those who have suffered with the Tigers for the last decde or so, even that is tinged with the conviction that it is a fluke and can't last. And besides, the sports news today is dominated by Barbaro's broken leg (an unmitigated tragedy) and Barry Bonds' 714th home run (a source of very mixed emotions).

Movies? There are some good ones around. I saw one the other night -- Paradise Now -- that I would recommend, but it is hardly a "good news" sort of movie. Perhaps the best news in movies this summer is that both MI3 and Da Vinci code are bombing. There is little I would like more than to see a lot less of Tom Cruise and hear a lot less about the Da Vinci code. So, perhaps that is good news. But it is good only in a pervers sort of way: I like it only becuase it discomfits things/people I have grown to despise.

So, I for now will take solace in the little things. It's another speactacularly beautiful day. Judy is busily planting fowers. I am about the start watching the 7th game of the Detroit/Cleveland NBA playoff game. So far as I know, everyone I care about is well and reasonably happy. And, despite it all, I really do remian pretty optimistic about the future both for myself and my family and friends.

Hope that is not too mawkish.

Realizing What What Have

The WSJ Opinion Journal published a poem today by Ray Bradbury, (Something Wicked This Way Comes, The Martian Chronicles, Fahrenheit 451, etc.) entitled "America." It is subtitled "An Ode To Immigrants," but it really is not. Its' really a lament that Americans, so caught up with what is wrong with America, seem to lose sight of what is right with it. As poetry, I can't give it much but as a sentiment it seems right on. Especially the first and last lines:

We are the dream that other people dream.
The land where other people land
When late at night
They think on flight
And, flying, here arrive
Where we fools dumbly thrive ourselves.

Refuse to see
We be what all the world would like to be.
Because we hive within this scheme
The obvious dream is blind to us.
We do not mind the miracle we are,
So stop our mouths with curses.
While all the world rehearses
Coming here to stay.
We busily make plans to go away.

How dumb! newcomers cry, arrived from Chad.
You're mad! Iraqis shout,
We'd sell our souls if we could be you.
How come you cannot see the way we see you?
You tread a freedom forest as you please.
But, damn! you miss the forest for the trees.
Ten thousand wanderers a week
Engulf your shore,
You wonder what their shouting's for,
And why so glad?

Run warm those souls: America is bad?
Sit down, stare in their faces, see!
You be the hoped-for thing a hopeless world would be.
In tides of immigrants that this year flow
You still remain the beckoning hearth they'd know.
In midnight beds with blueprint, plan and scheme
You are the dream that other people dream.

None of this is any reason, of course, to ignore what needs to be changed or to resist changes that seems likely to make us less "the dream that others dream." But, it is, I think, a reason leaven the outrage with a sense of proportion.

GM Kills the H1 (Thank God)

From the SF Chronicle:

The Hummer H1 -- the biggest, toughest sport utility vehicle on the road --has run out of gas. Cheering just about every other driver on the road, General Motors Corp. said Friday that it is ditching the H1 by June.

One can only wish it had been sooner. Or that this affront had never been concieved in the first place. What a ridiculous vehicle.

The vehicle, which delivered a shot of in-your-face masculinity, has a price tag of $140,000, weighs 5 tons and gets less than 10 miles to the gallon.

What will the dickless will do to compensate now? Back to .44 magnums, assault rifles and grenade lauchers I suppose.

Indian Ocean Catastrophe

One of the more telling indicators of the magnitude of the catastrophe in the Indian Ocean is how consistently the New York Times has been "wrong" on the death toll. In this morning's edition, for instance, the NYT reported the death toll at 80,000. That was probably an accurate report of the count at their deadline. But, by the time I picked got the paper this morning, NPR was already reporting a death toll of well over 100,000, and tonight, as I wrote this, CNN was reporting that the toll has climbed above 118,000. That was as of 9:01 ET. Who knows where it is now. It has been like this every day this week. By the time the paper edition of the NYT gets to the street, their report of the death toll is obscenely low.

In the "a picture is worth a thousand words" department, look at the picture that accompanies this story. Closely. Save it to your desk top and blow it up in Photoshop or whatever, if you can, because all is not what it appears at first glance.

I went looking for videos of the disaster last night and ended up a Cheese and Crackers, which has links to just about everything available, I think, so I'll give JL credit, although these videos are now available on a host of blogs. Kudos and thanks to all of you guys. The videos, though, are absolutely horrifying. If you go surfing for these, seriously consider making a donation. Given the size of the videos and the demand for viewing them, the bandwidth requirements for posting these are apparently prodigious. Also, most are promising to send some or all of any excess donations to relief organizations. JL at Cheese and Crackers says he has collected $6.5 million so far! Given that, I'm sending my donation to Pundit Guy, who seems particularly desperate in this regard. Hope you don't mind JL.

Blogging and the Tsunami Catastrophe

Interesting NYT Article here on the blogospehere's reponse to the tsunami catastrophe. The extent to which the world has already become connected -- and the pace at which that is increasing -- never ceases to amaze me. As with all things, this is not an unmitigated blessing, of course. But, I think that the power to do good via this connectedness (as in this case) overwhelms the drawbacks.