- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Election with Hunter
by R.A. Hettinga 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

Last blue-baiting post, I swear. Gotta love HST, especially after the ether kicks in... Cheers, RAH ------- <http://www.aspendailynews.com/Search_Articles/view_search_article.cfm?Order…> Aspen Daily News Friday, November 5, 2004 11/4/04 Election with Hunter By Troy Hooper/Aspen Daily News Staff Writer WOODY CREEK - It was Bailey's Irish Cream and Royal Salute Scotch Whiskey at the Thompson household on Election Night. A bottle of Cristal intended for a John Kerry victory remained uncorked, chilling on ice in a backroom. A hungry smell of anticipation hung in the kitchen at Owl Farm, which morphed into a makeshift Democratic headquarters as Hunter S. Thompson hunkered down with a small group of friends and manned what seemed like a global switchboard as calls came pouring in from some of the biggest names in modern American lore. Even a few pollsters dialed up The Good Doctor in search of the most up-to-minute score. Whether they were calling to ascertain Thompson's classified political knowledge or gauge his gambler's instinct was unclear. But without question, his phone was chiming more often than the Liberty Bell. "I don't mean to pop the bad news on you Bubba but John Kerry is getting beat just like George McGovern did in 1972 - or worse," Thompson proclaimed to his nephew well before the news networks gave any hint that Bush Nation was marching toward a second term. "The tide turned so quickly it was difficult to breathe." Actor Sean Penn, presidential historian Douglas Brinkley, Kerry press secretary David Wade and others checked in with Thompson who sat on a chair inhaling cigarettes and stiff drinks in between bites of breakfast, which wasn't served to the late-awakening writer until after the sun went down. Asked for a candid assessment of the election, Thompson put it plainly to Penn. "I've got the worst possible news. Colorado has gone to hell like all the other states," Thompson said into the speakerphone. "They must have all voted the same way they prayed." The way Thompson's neighbors voted was far removed from the national outcome. Bush mustered just 2,750 of Pitkin County's electorate while Kerry received 6,275. Nationally, Bush garnered the highest total number of votes ever, winning 51 percent of the record voter turnout, which preliminary estimates have put at roughly 117 million. He is the first president to win a majority of the vote since 1988 when his father beat another Democrat from Massachusetts: Michael Dukakis. "The news is getting logarithmically more horrible," Thompson told another caller as the night wore on. "They're all committing suicide up in Boston." Thompson has always had a keen eye for politics. His best-known work on the subject is "Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72" - an up-close study of South Dakota Senator George McGovern's effort to unseat President Richard Nixon. Over the weekend, McGovern and Thompson discussed the election: The two old friends suggested Bush might be more dangerous than Nixon. Kerry would make a fine president, they both agreed, as they noted the similarities between the two eras. This year's Democratic presidential candidate must have seen some similarities between now and then, too. When Kerry visited Aspen last June for a fund-raiser, he brought three hardcover copies of "Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72" to have them autographed. Thompson obliged and struck a friendship with Kerry, serving as his unofficial Aspen tour guide, meeting the candidate on a rain-soaked tarmac at Sardy Field and riding in a Secret Service procession up Red Mountain, showing Kerry the sights and conferring with him on national affairs. Now, five months later, Kerry has met the same fate as McGovern. "I feel like somebody's died," Thompson lamented as the sun was preparing to rise early Wednesday morning. "I'm just not sure who it was." He deemed the election "another failure of the youth vote." "Yeah, we rocked the vote all right. Those little bastards betrayed us again." But despite his disappointment, Thompson remained remarkably upbeat. "Their army is how much bigger than mine? Three percent? Well shucks, Bubba. Now is the time to establish a network and an attitude," he said. "You make friends in moments of defeat. People in defeat tend to bond because they need each other. We can't take the attitude that it's over and we give up. We're still here." Thompson added: "I'm proud to have known John Kerry." -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
by R.A. Hettinga 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

Here ya go, John and Bill, Knock yourselves out... :-) Cheers, RAH ------- <http://slate.msn.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2109218> Slate politics Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue The unteachable ignorance of the red states. By Jane Smiley Updated Thursday, Nov. 4, 2004, at 3:24 PM PT The day after the election, Slate's political writers tackled the question of why the Democratic Party-which has now lost five of the past seven presidential elections and solidified its minority status in Congress-keeps losing elections. Chris Suellentrop says that John Kerry was too nuanced and technocratic, while George W. Bush offered a vision of expanding freedom around the world. William Saletan argues that Democratic candidates won't win until they again cast their policies the way Bill Clinton did, in terms of values and moral responsibility. Timothy Noah contends that none of the familiar advice to the party-move right, move left, or sit tight-seems likely to help. Slate asked a number of wise liberals to take up the question of why Americans won't vote for the Democrats. Click here to read previous entries. I say forget introspection. It's time to be honest about our antagonists. My predecessors in this conversation are thoughtful men, and I honor their ideas, but let's try something else. I grew up in Missouri and most of my family voted for Bush, so I am going to be the one to say it: The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry. I suppose the good news is that 55 million Americans have evaded the ignorance-inducing machine. But 58 million have not. (Well, almost 58 million-my relatives are not ignorant, they are just greedy and full of classic Republican feelings of superiority.) Ignorance and bloodlust have a long tradition in the United States, especially in the red states. There used to be a kind of hand-to-hand fight on the frontier called a "knock-down-drag-out," where any kind of gouging, biting, or maiming was considered fair. The ancestors of today's red-state voters used to stand around cheering and betting on these fights. When the forces of red and blue encountered one another head-on for the first time in Kansas Territory in 1856, the red forces from Missouri, who had been coveting Indian land across the Missouri River since 1820, entered Kansas and stole the territorial election. The red news media of the day made a practice of inflammatory lying-declaring that the blue folks had shot and killed red folks whom everyone knew were walking around. The worst civilian massacre in American history took place in Lawrence, Kan., in 1862-Quantrill's raid. The red forces, known then as the slave-power, pulled 265 unarmed men from their beds on a Sunday morning and slaughtered them in front of their wives and children. The error that progressives have consistently committed over the years is to underestimate the vitality of ignorance in America. Listen to what the red state citizens say about themselves, the songs they write, and the sermons they flock to. They know who they are-they are full of original sin and they have a taste for violence. The blue state citizens make the Rousseauvian mistake of thinking humans are essentially good, and so they never realize when they are about to be slugged from behind. Here is how ignorance works: First, they put the fear of God into you-if you don't believe in the literal word of the Bible, you will burn in hell. Of course, the literal word of the Bible is tremendously contradictory, and so you must abdicate all critical thinking, and accept a simple but logical system of belief that is dangerous to question. A corollary to this point is that they make sure you understand that Satan resides in the toils and snares of complex thought and so it is best not try it. Next, they tell you that you are the best of a bad lot (humans, that is) and that as bad as you are, if you stick with them, you are among the chosen. This is flattering and reassuring, and also encourages you to imagine the terrible fates of those you envy and resent. American politicians ALWAYS operate by a similar sort of flattery, and so Americans are never induced to question themselves. That's what happened to Jimmy Carter-he asked Americans to take responsibility for their profligate ways, and promptly lost to Ronald Reagan, who told them once again that they could do anything they wanted. The history of the last four years shows that red state types, above all, do not want to be told what to do-they prefer to be ignorant. As a result, they are virtually unteachable. Third, and most important, when life grows difficult or fearsome, they (politicians, preachers, pundits) encourage you to cling to your ignorance with even more fervor. But by this time you don't need much encouragement-you've put all your eggs into the ignorance basket, and really, some kind of miraculous fruition (preferably accompanied by the torment of your enemies, and the ignorant always have plenty of enemies) is your only hope. If you are sufficiently ignorant, you won't even know how dangerous your policies are until they have destroyed you, and then you can always blame others. The reason the Democrats have lost five of the last seven presidential elections is simple: A generation ago, the big capitalists, who have no morals, as we know, decided to make use of the religious right in their class war against the middle class and against the regulations that were protecting those whom they considered to be their rightful prey-workers and consumers. The architects of this strategy knew perfectly well that they were exploiting, among other unsavory qualities, a long American habit of virulent racism, but they did it anyway, and we see the outcome now-Cheney is the capitalist arm and Bush is the religious arm. They know no boundaries or rules. They are predatory and resentful, amoral, avaricious, and arrogant. Lots of Americans like and admire them because lots of Americans, even those who don't share those same qualities, don't know which end is up. Can the Democrats appeal to such voters? Do they want to? The Republicans have sold their souls for power. Must everyone? Progressives have only one course of action now: React quickly to every outrage-red state types love to cheat and intimidate, so we have to assume the worst and call them on it every time. We have to give them more to think about than they can handle-to always appeal to reason and common sense, and the law, even when they can't understand it and don't respond. They cannot be allowed to keep any secrets. Tens of millions of people didn't vote-they are watching, too, and have to be shown that we are ready and willing to fight, and that the battle is worth fighting. And in addition, we have to remember that threats to democracy from the right always collapse. Whatever their short-term appeal, they are borne of hubris and hatred, and will destroy their purveyors in the end. Jane Smiley is the author of many novels and essays. She lives in California. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

2 3

Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
by Tyler Durden 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

I dunno...a lot of it made sense to me. You don't have to be a Commie in order to believe that someone ELSE believes there's a "class war", and that they gotta keep us black folks po', or else we'll soon be having sex with their wives and daughters and competing with their sons for decent jobs. And as long as that somebody else believes there's a class war, they're probably going to vote like there's one, and try to dupe as many others as they can into voting like there's one, and that they're in the in-crowd. And then of course they'll open a military base everynow and then to demonstrate their largesse. -TD >From: "R.A. Hettinga" <rah(a)shipwright.com> >To: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com>, cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net >Subject: Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue >Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 13:15:48 -0500 > >At 1:05 PM -0800 11/5/04, John Young wrote: > >Bob, you know this is against list rules, everybody knows > >what's right, stop blue-baiting, you fucking nazi. > >:-) > >Cheers, >RAH > >-- >----------------- >R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> >The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> >44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA >"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, >[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to >experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

1 0

RE: Your source code, for sale
by hal＠finney.org 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

Michael_Heyman writes: > Finney, Hal (CR): > > The problem is that if the source code you are purchasing is > > bogus, or if the other side doesn't come through, you're > > screwed because you've lost the value of the torn cash. The > > other side doesn't gain anything by this fraud, but they harm > > you, and if they are malicious that might be enough. > > > Quick fix for seller incentive: the seller rips some amount of their own > cash in such a way that they cannot recover it unless the buyer provides > the remainder of the buyer's ripped cash. Yes, I'm looking at ideas like this for ecash gambling, but you have a who-goes-first problem. One side or the other has to "rip" their own cash first, and then the other side can just go away and leave the first side screwed. The act of ripping cash is relatively atomic and involves a transaction with the ecash mint, so they can't both do it at the same time. I guess the best fix is for each side to rip a little bit of cash at a time, so that the guy who goes first only loses a trivial amount if the other side aborts. Then after a few rounds both sides are sunk pretty deep and both have a strong incentive to complete the transaction. Hal

2 1

When A Pencil And Paper Makes Sense
by R.A. Hettinga 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

<http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/05/cx_ah_1105tentech_print.html> Forbes Ten O'Clock Tech When A Pencil And Paper Makes Sense Arik Hesseldahl, 11.05.04, 10:00 AM ET Thank goodness, it's over. Sometime around 4:30 A.M. Wednesday I went to bed, not the least bit uncertain that George W. Bush had been re-elected. But the one thing during this election cycle about which I have been uncertain is electronic voting. Florida in 2000 was a mess, and in reaction, some states and counties have turned to newfangled electronic voting machines, thinking that computer technology is the answer to a voting system that has started to creak under pressure. It seems that despite much worry about a repeat of Florida in other states, voting has gone pretty smoothly. Electronic voting methods are getting high marks. Of the 27,500 voting problems reported to the Verified Voting Project, a San Francisco-based group that monitored the election for voting problems, less than 6% of the issues reported stemmed from electronic voting machines. Election officials in states like Nevada, Georgia and Hawaii gave electronic voting systems a try. There were some problems: a memory card on an electronic voting machine in Florida failed; five machines in Reno, Nev., malfunctioned, causing lines to back up. Overall voter turnout was high. The Committee for the Study of the American Electorate, a nonprofit, nonpartisan outfit based in Washington, D.C., estimated that 120.2 million people, or 59.6% of those eligible to vote, cast ballots in this election, which would be an improvement of 5% and 15 million people, compared with the 2000 elections, and would make 2004's turnout the highest since 1968. Still, that's not as high as voter participation in my home state of Oregon, where 1.7 million people, or nearly 82% of those eligible, voted. In Oregon, voters cast their votes from home rather than going to a polling place. They submit their ballots by mail. The state abolished polling places in 1998 and has been voting entirely by mail ever since. Voters get their ballots roughly two weeks before election day. This year some were delayed because of an unexpectedly high number of voter registrations. Ballots must be received by county elections offices by 8 P.M. on the day of the election. Drop boxes are located throughout the state, as well. Voting should indeed take time and effort. It's undoubtedly important. But I like Oregon's common-sense approach. Voting from the comfort of your own home eliminates the inherent disincentive that comes from having to stand on a long line, for example. It's pretty simple. Oregon voters fill out their ballots using a pencil, just like those standardized tests everyone took in high school. If they want to write in a candidate, the ballot allows for that, too. I thought of this as I stood for about 45 minutes in a long, cold line at 6:30 A.M. to vote in my neighborhood in New York's Upper East Side. Throughout the day I heard reports from around the country of people who had to stand in line for as long as eight hours so they could vote, and I wondered how many others just threw up their hands in frustration because they had someplace else to be. The mail-in ballot also gives the voter a little time to consider his or her choice. Too often, voters will enter a voting booth knowing a few of the people they intend to vote for, but read about some ballot initiative or amendment for the first time. Rather than having to make a snap decision in the voting booth, having a ballot handy at home can give voters time to educate themselves and make a more informed decision. Sometimes, the best solution isn't a computer at all, but a good old-fashioned pencil and paper. Click here for more Ten O'Clock Tech Columns -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

Re: Your source code, for sale
by Tyler Durden 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

Ben Laurie made a lot of useful points. However,... >Simultaneous release is (provably?) impossible without a trusted third >party. I don't think I believe this. Or at least, I don't think it's true to the extent necessary to make the original application impossible. Consider: I send you money for naked photos of Geri Ryan (that Borg chick with the ASS-KICKING hips). The money is "encapsulated"...you can its there, but you can't get at it. You send me encapsulated photos, perhaps with thumbnails on the outside. I see the thumbnails and click to send the pre-release. You see the pre-release arrive and click the release for the photos. My photo-bundle receives the releases and opens, and then shoots off a message that activates the pre-release on your end, giving you the cash. Is a 3rd party necessary here? I don't see it, but then again I could be wrong. -TD _________________________________________________________________ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

2 1

Corporate governance goals impossible - RSA
by R.A. Hettinga 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/04/rsa_redux/print.html> The Register Biting the hand that feeds IT The Register ; Business ; Management ; Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/04/rsa_redux/ Corporate governance goals impossible - RSA By John Leyden (john.leyden at theregister.co.uk) Published Thursday 4th November 2004 16:43 GMT Companies are struggling to cope with tighter corporate governance regimes, which might even work against the goal of achieving improved IT security they are partly designed to promote. The need to comply with requirements such as data protection, Sarbanes-Oxley, Basel II and other corporate governance reforms is tying up IT managers in red tape, according to a banking security expert. "Recent legislation is having a negative impact on risk management," said Michael Colao, director of Information Management at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein. In some cases, the law has made IT managers legally responsible for adherence to corporate governance rules. Colao says that this may not necessarily be a good thing. "CIOs are now relying on convoluted processes rather than using sound business judgement based on years of experience. A process is easier to defend in court than personal judgement. This means that in many cases unnecessarily cautious decisions are being taken because the CIO is focusing on their own personal liability, rather than what is best for the business," he said.? Different implementations of the European Data Protection Directive in different countries are creating a headache for multinational firms, according to Colao. "This legislation was brought in as part of the EU common market and was supposed to provide clarity and harmony across Europe. Because each country implements legislation in very different ways, the result is a very fragmented and disjointed approach which causes all sorts of problems, particularly for global organisations," he said. Colao made his comments at the Axis Action Forum, a meeting of IT directors sponsored by RSA Security, in Barcelona this week. RSA Security said differences in European legislation highlighted by Colao were a real problem for its clients. Tim Pickard, strategic marketing director at RSA Security EMEA, said: "The nature of implementation of EU directives in member states means that it is almost impossible for today's global CIO to be fully compliant and is therefore likely to be breaking the law in at least one member state." Business managers becoming fed up with FUD In a separate study, more than a third of the 30 delegates to the Axis Action Forum admitted that their Board had never asked for an update on security or implications of security breaches. The finding suggests widespread boardroom indifference to security issues despite the high profile security has been given in the media and by numerous industry initiatives. Firms only take security seriously in the aftermath of attacks, according to one delegate. Part of the reason could be that business managers are becoming inured to alarmist security pitches. Simon Linsley, head of consultancy and development, Philips said: "For years we have had to go to the Board with messages that create the Fear of God. We can no longer rely on these doom and gloom messages - we have to go to the Board with solutions that add value to the business." The Axis Action Forum attended by more than 30 CIOs, IT directors and heads of security from a range of medium to large businesses. . Related stories UK corporate governance bill to cost millions (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/08/companies_bill_it_costs/) Hackers cost UK.biz billions (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/28/dti_security_survey/) IT voices drowned in corporate governance rush (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/22/it_in_corporate_governance/) Big.biz struggles against security threats (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/27/netsec_security_survey/) ) Copyright 2004 -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

The oldest fraud
by R.A. Hettinga 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

<http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/printts20041105.shtml> Townhall.com The oldest fraud Thomas Sowell (back to web version) | Send November 5, 2004 Election frauds are nothing new and neither are political frauds in general. The oldest fraud is the belief that the political left is the party of the poor and the downtrodden. The election results in California are only the latest evidence to give the lie to that belief. While the state as a whole went for Kerry, 55 percent versus 44 percent for Bush, the various counties ranged from 71 percent Bush to 83 percent Kerry. The most affluent counties were where Kerry had his strongest support. In Marin County, where the average home price is $750,000, 73 percent of the votes went for Kerry. In Alameda County, where Berkeley is located, it was 74 percent Kerry. San Francisco, with the highest rents of any major city in the country, gave 83 percent of its votes to Kerry. Out where ordinary people live, it was a different story. Thirty-six counties went for Bush versus 22 counties for Kerry, and usually by more balanced vote totals, though Bush went over 70 percent in less fashionable places like Lassen County and Modoc County. If you have never heard of them, there's a reason. It was much the same story on the votes for Proposition 66, which would have limited the "three strikes" law that puts career criminals away for life. Affluent voters living insulated lives in places well removed from high-crime neighborhoods have the luxury of worrying about whether we are not being nice enough to hoodlums, criminals and terrorists. They don't like the "three strikes" law and want it weakened. While most California voters opposed any weakening of that law, a majority of the voters in the affluent and heavily pro-Kerry counties mentioned wanted us to stop being so mean to criminals. This pattern is not confined to California and it is not new. There were limousine liberals before there were limousines. The same pattern applies when you go even further left on the political spectrum, to socialists and communists. The British Labor Party's leader in the heyday of its socialist zealotry was Clement Attlee, who grew up in a large home with servants -- and this was not the only home his family owned. Meanwhile, Margaret Thatcher's family ran a grocery store and lived upstairs over it. While the British Labor Party was affiliated with labor unions, it was the affluent and the intellectuals in the party who had the most left-wing ideologies and the most unrealistic policies. In the years leading up to World War II, the Labor Party was for disarmament while Hitler was arming Germany to the teeth across the Channel. Eventually, it was the labor union component of the party that insisted on some sanity, so that Britain could begin preparing to defend itself militarily -- not a moment too soon. When Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote the Communist Manifesto, they were a couple of spoiled young men from rich families. All their talk about the working class was just talk, but it appealed to other such young men who liked heady talk. As Engels himself put it, when the Communist group for whom the Manifesto was written was choosing delegates, "a working man was proposed for appearances sake, but those who proposed him voted for me." This may have been the first rigged election of the Communist movement but it was certainly not the last. All sorts of modern extremist movements, such as the Weathermen in the United States or the Bader-Meinhof gang in Germany, have attracted a disproportionate number of the affluent in general and the intellectuals in particular. Such people may speak in the name of the downtrodden but they themselves are often people who have time on their hands to nurse their pet notions about the world and their fancies about themselves as leaders of the poor, saviors of the environment or whatever happens to be the Big Deal du jour. Osama bin Laden is not someone embittered by poverty. He is from a very rich family and has had both the time to nurse his resentments of the West and the money to organize terrorists to lash out in the only way that can give them any significance. The belief that liberal, left-wing or extremist movements are for the poor may or may not be the biggest fraud but it is certainly the oldest. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -- Thomas Sowell

1 0

Blue Democrats Lost Red America
by R.A. Hettinga 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

<http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB109962033700165749,00.html> The Wall Street Journal November 5, 2004 WONDER LAND By DANIEL HENNINGER Blue Democrats Lost Red America Back in 1965 November 5, 2004; Page A12 "And you tell me over, and over, and over again my friend Ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction." --Vietnam War Protest Song, 1965 How did the 2004 election map of the United States come to look like a color-field painting by Barnett Newman? In fact, if you adjust the map's colors for votes by county (as at the Web sites for CNN and USA Today), even the blue states turn mostly red. Pennsylvania is blue, but between blue Philadelphia and Pittsburgh every county in the state is red. California, except for the coastline, is almost entirely red. This didn't happen last Tuesday. The color-coding of the 2004 election began around 1965 in the politics of the Vietnam era. The Democratic Party today is the product of a generational shift that began in those years. The formative years of the northern wing of the Democratic Old Guard go back to World War II. It included political figures like Tip O'Neill, Pat Moynihan and Lane Kirkland. It was men such as these whose experiences, both political and personal, informed and shaped the Democrats before the mid-'60s. Over time the party passed into the hands of a generation, now in their 50s and early 60s, whose broad view of America and its politics was formed as young men and women opposing the Vietnam War. That would include the party's current leading lights -- John Kerry, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi. And its most influential strategists, such as Bob Shrum, Mary Beth Cahill and James Carville. The old industrial unions, whose members went over to Ronald Reagan, gave way to the more dependable public-employee unions run by John Sweeney and Gerald McEntee. These Baby Boomers -- the generation of John Kerry, Al Gore and Bill and Hillary Clinton -- transformed the world view of the Democrats, on everything from foreign policy to cultural issues. This new ethos -- instinctively oppositional, aggressively secular -- sank its roots deep on the East and West coasts, but it never really spread into the rest of the country, then or now. Early on, the military became a focus. Democrats belonging to the World War II generation believed that one "served." There was a nonpartisan pact of reverence for the services. After Vietnam, Democratic partisans worked hard, and successfully, to eradicate ROTC from elite, coastal campuses and to adopt an ethos that no longer revered the services, but held them suspect of doing harm. Bill Clinton's relations with the military were strained. John Kerry tried to use his service biography to erase the Vietnam-era legacy of Democratic opposition to things military. It didn't work. Expressed emotion matters greatly for this generation. The most notable phenomenon of the 2004 election was widespread liberal "hatred" of George Bush. Many wondered what sleeping volcano brought this lava to the surface. It came from the style of protest politics born in the 1960s. A famous liberal political phrase then was "the personal is political." Letting oneself become emotionally unhinged during a protest, as at Columbia, Harvard and Berkeley, became a litmus of authenticity. It became the norm, and it still is. But again, only for people who scream themselves blue. Another phrase heard often in the campaign just ended was, "I'm frightened." Admiration for childlike fears in politics received approval in 1970 from Charles Reich's bestseller "The Greening of America," a paean to youth and "a new and liberated individual." Reich's book, by the way, also popularized the notion then that something called the "Corporate State" was blotting out the Aquarian sunshine. This is the mindset that just produced the Democrats' weird obsession with "Halliburton," as if anyone would care beyond the people who were long ago baptized into the blue faith. But the politics of the Vietnam generation wasn't just about Vietnam. It was about changing everything, most notably the culture. This generation really opened up the culture. The old pre-Vietnam strictures on behavior and comportment -- Tip O'Neill's old Boston Catholic world of Mass on Sunday and at least a working if not functioning knowledge of the Baltimore catechism -- got hammered down till the moral landscape became flat and fast. Now you can drive anything at all into theaters, music or movies. This post-Vietnam culture of non-restraint, now almost 40 years old, produced Whoopi Goldberg's double-entendre jokes about George Bush's name at Radio City Music Hall, the Massachusetts Supreme Court's sudden decision on gay marriage, and hard-to-defend support for partial-birth abortion. George Bush, age 58, was a reproach. He personifies everything they have fought since they drove LBJ and Richard Nixon out of politics. And this week they are trying to discover why most of the people who live between the Hudson River and Hollywood Freeway don't agree with them. Expect documentaries soon about Christian evangelicals on the Discovery Channel. There is no hope that the Vietnam generation braintrust who just lost this election will ever understand Red America. Until someone in the party recognizes this, the tides of demography will inexorably erode the blue islands that remain on the map. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

2 1

RE: Your source code, for sale
by Michael_Heyman＠McAfee.com 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

> From: owner-cryptography(a)metzdowd.com > [mailto:owner-cryptography@metzdowd.com] On Behalf Of Finney, Hal (CR) > > [SNIP discussion on ripping cash] > > The problem is that if the source code you are purchasing is > bogus, or if the other side doesn't come through, you're > screwed because you've lost the value of the torn cash. The > other side doesn't gain anything by this fraud, but they harm > you, and if they are malicious that might be enough. > Quick fix for seller incentive: the seller rips some amount of their own cash in such a way that they cannot recover it unless the buyer provides the remainder of the buyer's ripped cash. -Michael Heyman

1 0