BP Kills Twitter Fail Whale (click to visit and pay respects)

Twitter has been having a hard time for weeks and weeks. I think I’ve figured out why. Instead of Twitter’s ‘fail whale’ not surfacing because everything’s A-Ok (which it’s most certainly not), Twitter’s ‘fail whale’ is surfacing because of too much oil!

BP’s catastrophe in the Gulf is so monumental that it’s even affecting on-line wildlife! Even the little [ more . . . ]]]>

BP Kills Twitter Fail Whale (click to visit and pay respects)

Twitter has been having a hard time for weeks and weeks. I think I’ve figured out why. Instead of Twitter’s ‘fail whale’ not surfacing because everything’s A-Ok (which it’s most certainly not), Twitter’s ‘fail whale’ is surfacing because of too much oil!

BP’s catastrophe in the Gulf is so monumental that it’s even affecting on-line wildlife! Even the little red birds gagged on tar balls and had to be replaced by the feel-good BP logos to help cart off the ‘fail whale’ carcass. (BP — it’s rumored — is working extra hard as of latest report to dispose of dead birds, fish, and other sea animals as quickly as possible before they’re photographed, cataloged, autopsied, et cetera.)

Just generally speaking? What’s happened — and happening — is disgusting. It’s Capitalism run amok. It’s not only a travesty but a sick look into the lesser angels that drive the inner-workings of human nature.

And government isn’t to be excused in the equation, either. Though not as a Democrat, I fault the George Bush Administration, and only to a degree the Barack Obama Administration for not having been able to reverse quickly enough the absolute gutting of oversight and regulation that government can and should do. That said, the eight years Dick Cheney spent greasing the wheels of government, all for the sake of Big Oil, must be called into account . . . and correcting eight years of heading full speed in the wrong direction can not be corrected by one-plus years of trying to turn the boat around.

It’s said each President fights their wars with the last President’s armed forces. The very same could be said with the situation in the Gulf.

Would anyone knowingly perpetrate such an act? Of course not, except for the most absolute of outliers in our society. Would an absolutely massive multi-national corporation develop, repeat, and perpetuate an institutional behavior that seeks to both maximize profit and reduce expense? Absolutely.

So what is the role of Capitalism verses Government? Seems that everyone is talking about it these days, even people who would be advised not to (yes, that includes you, Rand Paul). Well, oddly enough, I tried my hand at penning that exact thought a number of months ago and would appreciate your thoughts and comments.

LittleDEM article published November 27, 2009: Defining Capitalism and Government vis-a-vis Each Other

If there’s one thing I think we can all agree on, it’s that in times like these we need help, big help, and more help that we can most likely individually contribute — It’s a desperate situation for a collective solution.

. . . We’ve brought the economy back from the brink of the worst economic condition since the Great Depression.  Heck, we’ve even already been paid back some of the bailout money so many people, including myself, are generally upset over.

. . . We’ve articulated a plan to withdraw from Iraq.

. . . Our standing in the world has dramatically improved.

. . . We have plans for Afghanistan that help focus [ more . . . ]]]> Let’s not overlook what’s been accomplished over the past year.  Yeah, it’s not sexy.  Yeah, it’s not the kind of thing you want to work on.  But it’s progress nonetheless.

. . . We’ve brought the economy back from the brink of the worst economic condition since the Great Depression.  Heck, we’ve even already been paid back some of the bailout money so many people, including myself, are generally upset over.

. . . We’ve articulated a plan to withdraw from Iraq.

. . . Our standing in the world has dramatically improved.

. . . We have plans for Afghanistan that help focus the tip of the spear on eliminating the real threat of future terrorism (hopefully).

. . . We’ve responded to a near pandemic with regard to Swine Flu (granted, it has not been as bad as it could have been, but we marshalled our resources to be as prepared as possible).

. . . We’ve kept teachers and police officers and firemen and others in their jobs when states were about to effect (sizeable) cuts last year.

. . . We’re helping the people of Haiti.

. . . We’ve done a lot of work toward actual Healthcare Reform.

Don’t be surprised if part of President Obama’s State of the Union speech is framed as having ‘taken care of some (very) serious business’ and that we’ve now ’set the stage’ for a great year of getting the People’s business done.

For more in-depth perspective on Afghanistan, here’s a recent article, “Outside Thinking on the Inside of Afghanistan . . . What To Do?”, that tries to get to the nitty-gritty details of formulating a strategy that works.

I don’t like having troops there, either.  I wish the Bush Administration had not dropped the ball by utterly ignoring its responsibilities in Afghanistan.  But it’s the situation we find ourselves in, and [ more . . . ]]]> Remember, and listen carefully tonight, it’s what the hell we’re doing there in Afghanistan, i.e. the Mission, that’s what’s important, not necessarily whether we pull troops out or put more in.

For more in-depth perspective on Afghanistan, here’s a recent article, “Outside Thinking on the Inside of Afghanistan . . . What To Do?”, that tries to get to the nitty-gritty details of formulating a strategy that works.

I don’t like having troops there, either.  I wish the Bush Administration had not dropped the ball by utterly ignoring its responsibilities in Afghanistan.  But it’s the situation we find ourselves in, and we either have absolutely NO mission in Afghanistan (and / or the immediate region) . . . or we do.  Forced to say one way or the other, I’d fall on the side that we DO have a mission there, no matter how confused, overdue, and largely ignored for years it may be.

But if that yet fails to convince, let’s look at it another way . . .

The reason more troops don’t seem to make sense — even to me — is because we don’t know what strategic objective we’ve been trying to accomplish for years.  (Thank You, George Bush and Dick Cheney . . . You jerks.)  Just like a fever is a symptom of something more serious, it’s the missing objective driving whether more or fewer troops make sense, not the level of troops in and of itself.  Less (or no) troops make sense in the absence of any achievable mission.  But more troops are absolutely worthwhile for an objective worth achieving.

If you’ve already made up your mind — even before hearing the President’s speech — then you’re not giving the matter the time and attention it deserves.  I’m interested in listening to what President Obama has to say.  What are you doing at 8PM?

It’s also in large part why I’ve stayed away from commenting much on Afghanistan here at LittleDEM.  Simply put, it’s too important a problem to be at all casual about.

But now is the time to put forth all ideas, suggestions, and observations to get Afghanistan right (or at least as right as we can make the situation).  It’s [ more . . . ]]]> I don’t know, at least not for certain anyway — And it’s likely no else does for sure, either.  In math-speak, Afghanistan is fairly intractable, meaning very difficult to solve . . . and for a problem of this magnitude, that’s an understatement.

It’s also in large part why I’ve stayed away from commenting much on Afghanistan here at LittleDEM.  Simply put, it’s too important a problem to be at all casual about.

But now is the time to put forth all ideas, suggestions, and observations to get Afghanistan right (or at least as right as we can make the situation).  It’s clear from what’s been reported the past day+ that President Obama may be preparing to (radically) change course.  If that’s at all the case, then the game is not nearly so much about troops, how few or how many, or — writ larger — pure military might as the challenge of Afghanistan may perhaps be recast in a much different and / or broader perspective.

And that spells ‘opportunity’ — And that’s where you and me, your friends, and your family and colleagues come into play.

So here’s some thoughts, observations, and ideas of my own, if just to help get the ball rolling — What are your thoughts?  What ideas do you have?

• Thought: We’re not trying to win a ground war, but ground troops, especially more of them, are only making it look moreso (and putting more American troops at actual risk in contrast to uncertain gains).
• Thought: In 9 years, Soviet forces lost 14,453 personnel with 53,753 wounded or otherwise injured (many, many more — in excess of 400,000 — fell sicks from such illnesses as infectious hepatitis, typhoid fever, and other diseases).  Granted, we’re in a different era, and we’re a very different fighting force.  But are we possibly ahead of the curve, a perspective that might explain why we’re loosing more and more troops, instead of fewer and fewer?
• Observation: When it costs approximately $10 to pay an Afghan to plant an IED that then kills US & NATO troops, how can you defeat that?
• Observation: Don’t forget that it actually has been 8 years and that using the excuse of a ‘Reset’ is to assert false hope that the past 8 years hasn’t existed — They have, and we shouldn’t deny it, not for a second.  In fact, accepting that fact is what will most likely help us best see and built the right strategy.
• Observation: And if you’re not quite convinced on the previous observation . . . Don’t you think the Afghans know we’ve been there 8 years!?!  I mean, how many years past 8 are they going to accept possibly continued protraction of the current situation?
• Idea: Conduct a test.  Seriously — Set the objectives and design two or more approaches . . . and try them.  See what works.  We do it in business all the time, and it’s proven to validate understandings, generate knowledge, and — in the short, medium, and long-term — achieve results.
• Idea: Give the smallest, the most rural, the most isolated communities electricity.  I’m not talking about Kabul, the capital — I’m talking about the places that only the people who actually live there know the names of, let alone how to pronounce.  Accordingly to a quick Google search, only about 7% of the country’s population had access to electricity as of 2007.  If that’s anywhere near the case today, changing that to even 50% would be a tremendous improvement.  And I’m not talking about dams and large-scale power stations here — I’m talking about small to medium generators all over the place and building the infrastructure to deliver fuel.  (Much of Afghanistan is so remote as to make power distribution nearly impractical.)  Rather, use diesel or other forms of power generation . . . and give the generators away.  And here’s why I think it might work — They’ll, meaning Afghans themselves, will want to protect those fuel supply lines knowing what they have to loose . . . and that they have something to fight to keep.  The modus operandi? “Disruptions aren’t our problems — They’re theirs.”  (We deliver generators and supply the fuel — They keep it safe to do so.)

Let’s apply some Blue Ocean strategy to a landlocked mess — Join, Think, Add.

First, FANTASTIC speech.  And when I say FANTASTIC, I mean F-A-N-T-A-S-T-I-C.

President Obama came out, started with some lead-in on the State of the Union, and then dug right in on Healthcare Reform.  Once he got going, he spoke with passion and determination, beginning with explaining the problem, then moving into the tenets behind the plan, covering on the back-end some of the very important and necessary points of how Healthcare Reform will be paid for (and other important details) before wrapping up with an [ more . . . ]]]> Ok, I have a day job so-to-speak so, I’m going to be quick and to the point.

First, FANTASTIC speech.  And when I say FANTASTIC, I mean F-A-N-T-A-S-T-I-C.

President Obama came out, started with some lead-in on the State of the Union, and then dug right in on Healthcare Reform.  Once he got going, he spoke with passion and determination, beginning with explaining the problem, then moving into the tenets behind the plan, covering on the back-end some of the very important and necessary points of how Healthcare Reform will be paid for (and other important details) before wrapping up with an impassioned appeal that could only be bettered conveyed with a ‘Yes We Can!’ if only he were able to utter those words.

One sad note is, according to early reports, Congressman Joe Wilson’s shout out, “You lie!”  There appears to be some disagreement on exactly what he said, but it was an interruption of the President of the United States during an address to Congress, incredibly disrespectful . . . and stupid.  You should be ass-shamed of yourself, Congressman.

But beyond that, again, FANTASTIC.  On the three points I offered in my pre-speech notes, he hit solidly on all three.  He explained an awesomely complex problem in human terms.  He made clear he wanted competition and the ability to offer the American people an alternative plan.  And he talked very specifically about how this will / should move forward.

And he was TOUGH.  He commandingly called out the lies of ‘Death Panels’, those who find it politically opportunistic to oppose reform, and the irresponsible spending of the past administration and largely Republican-controlled Congress (vis-a-vis his commitment to pay for Reform).

To me, Republicans have a hard choice — They can either dig in their heels and try to defeat Reform.  Or they can ‘tuck tail’ and participate (and by ‘tuck tail’ I don’t mean kowtow — I mean actually participate in solving this very real and pressing challenge).

On what I wrote before the President’s speech, I believe President Obama made fantastic strides on all three important points and that he may have succeeded in forcing the argument toward actual progress, not persistent do-nothing.

Great, spirited speech, Mr. President!

That said, I think President Obama will make great strides tonight if he [ more . . . ]]]> Let’s get something straight right off the bat, Healthcare Reform is a B-I-G issue.  It goes without saying that ahead of actually making a decision on any big issue that people naturally get cautious, worried, and more emotional (than objective).  It’s impossible to know with certainty what the future will bring, and it’s especially true for big, important decisions, which naturally leads to more angst than is typically warranted.  (For example, think about how much you worry about doing your taxes verses the effort of actually doing them.)

That said, I think President Obama will make great strides tonight if he can do the following:

1. Does he explain / clarify the problem facing America?  And Americans?
2. Does he explain his goals / expectations?
3. Does he explain his thoughts and plans on what must be done to correct / solve the problem?

If he can succeed on educating, clarifying, and leading on what — beyond National Security and the Economy as a whole — is perhaps the most complicated issue facing America today, don’t be surprised to see a much more favorable turn in the tide of public opinion (despite the fact a great many people actually favor the Public Option when it’s explained to them).

If ‘Death Panels’ still make the headlines after the speech, it could be a long haul — It does not take a lot of friction to reduce momentum.  But if ‘Death Panels’ tip toward being perceived as the nonsensical scare tactic it is, then a renewed sense of purpose might win the day over the coming weeks.

And a renewed sense of purpose might appear even if President Obama makes strides on just two of the above (any two), thereby succeeding in forcing the argument toward actual progress, not persistent do-nothing.