Afrikaners

In today's NYT is a very interesting article about the future direction of Afrikaners, the Dutch-descended people of South Africa who brought apartheid with them and profited from it for decades. On surface the story is about a song and the feelings it produced. Under that is a more important story about Afrikaners trying to find their place in a new South Africa.

What's interesting is that they're asking this question so soon after the end of apartheid. Nelson Mandela was freed in 1990, so even using that early date as an end of sorts, it's been 17 years. (Apartheid ended in 1994.) By contrast, Germany has been asking questions of itself and trying to make sense of its history for the last 60-odd years.

What does this mean? Does it mean Afrikaners were more willing more quickly to come to terms with their past? Is it an indication of how speeded-up the world is today? It's true that questions in Germany were not raised for quite some time after the end of WWII but even considering that time lag, it's still a long time to come to terms. Is it a different outcome when there are many different ethnicities living in the country? My white wealthy South African friends seemed to think it was all much ado about nothing, in the late 1980s, and that has me wondering whether this quick understanding has to do with a lacking sense of the depth of the damage created, something German people who struggle with the issue have no trouble understanding.

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/world/africa/27safrica.html?hp

Intelligence

Why is it newsworthy that this woman shaved off her hair?

I get my hair cut all the time. No cameras ever flash in my face as a result. She's not the only shaver. Plenty of women just like it, and there is also a large group who can't take clumps of hair falling out due to chemotherapy and feel like they're exerting control over their suddenly chaotic lives by shaving it off. No one follows them around taking pictures.

All this leads me to believe that the argument on the appropriate spot of the political spectrum for American media completely misses the point. The question is not whether media are liberal or regressive. It's that American media are largely so unintelligent. Given whether Brittany Spears cut her hair off or whether we're going to war with Iran real soon and why, I choose the latter. I need the latter. So if it's really just a response to customer demand, I say: give us a real choice, and see what we choose.

To wit: bars in Philly were quite concerned that they'd lose money when smoking was banned. It's been a little while now and people are realizing it's nice to come home from a night out and not reek of smoke. Now when I have a choice b/w bars that don't have smoke and bars in the county right next door, where smoking is still allowed, I'm not likely to go to the smoker bars.

Hey, here's a thought: how about if we just stop assuming everyone is a complete cretin and start treating consumers as if they're intelligent people?

Anna Nicole *shakes head*

I have heard that Anna Nicole Smith was interesting to watch in the same way that watching a train wreck was interesting. You're ashamed of yourself for watching but you can't tear your eyes away. I had no actual interest in Anna Nicole Smith. I bumped into stories about her from time to time in connection with various litigation in which she was involved. But in her death, she has become interesting to me, because her will is a hellacious mess.

The point of a will is to dispense with the dead person's assets, and figure out what to do with stuff or people they cared for based on their intent, which, it is presumed, will be laid out neatly and clearly in a will. However, I read cases all the time in which this ideal simply has not panned out. Either it's the testator's misunderstanding of the law or poor writing, or the lawyer's ambiguity or whatever, but it isn't clear what the testator wanted, yet that intent is what the court looks to for clarity.

Miss Smith, whose boyfriend was an attorney (who is in fact named as executor of her will), has a will from 2001. In 2006 she had another child (possibly by said attorney) but apparently never updated her will to include said child. Far from it, her 2001 will actually clearly indicates her intent that the will only be construed to include her then-living (now dead) son and no future issue.

I'm not going to speculate on whether or not her attorney/possible co-parent will wind up in the next edition of Trusts & Estates over this. But it speaks to just what was distasteful to me about Smith in the first place. Maybe she wasn't well educated and came from a hard-scrabble life. That's no reason not to take care of her own, and at least in the five months since her baby was born, she should have done just that.

I found her sort of amusing in life. I find her unforgiveable in death.

Source:
http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/gen/ap/Anna_Nicole_Smith_Optional.html

Mighty Stones

Milton "It's not for sure I live in Philadelphia and yes I'm up against fraud charges" Street has announced he is running for mayor. You gotta give props for chutzpah. But that's all you have to do.


Source:
http://kyw1060.com/pages/235113.php?contentType=4&contentId=326704

See me, feel me, touch me, heal me

The Trog almost never discusses her personal life and with good reason. But today is different. Today I had an experience that I feel I should advocate your having too. Having turned 40, it's time for me to have a mammogram. Or Ma'am-o-gram, as I think of it. As my hero Molly Ivins said, Get. The. Damn. Test. Here's what I know: a machine is going to feel me up sometime soon, and it's going to hurt.

So here is a transcript of the conversation today as I went to sign up for this thing:
Me: Hi my name is Miss Trog and I'm here for my very first mammogram.
Schedule Lady: Uh-huh.
Me: (looking around) So where's my tiara?
SL: (smiles) What?
Me: The tiara, where's the tiara?
SL: (somewhat apologetic) No tiara.
Me: What? What kind of second-rate shoddy outfit is this?
SL: (giggles)

Ladies, get it going on. Sign up. The people in your life love you and depend on you and rely on your ongoing presence. Go get squeezed by a machine that apparently hasn't dated much. It could save you.

But I'm thinking you best bring your own tiara.

And like a good neighbor...

State Farm has decided not to issue any more policies in Mississippi, due to the litigation it faced re: Katrina. The reason for the litigation was that State Farm didn't pay on the policies of its customers, yet continued to take their money. The thing about insurers is, they're trying to manage risk. But "managing" risk really means making decisions as to profitability.

One could argue that based on risk alone, a place like California is simply uninsurable, given its four seasons of: mudslides, earthquakes, fire and, I don't know, pestilence. The insurance costs for living there are very high, particularly on the coast. One could argue that FEMA should stop ministering to California altogether. That if you want to live there, you can. But it's inherently unsafe and so no one is going to help you when some natural deadly phenomenon occurs. The same could be said of coastal Florida, or any number of other non-coastal areas, like Colorado, where people want to live next to nature and thus run a risk.

And yet, we don't make that argument to them. We insure them. We may make them pay more, but we insure them. The Mississippi issue is different. Here, State Farm is saying, "While it was our business to know that levees were incompetent and that a massive flood was likely, we nevertheless took your money and then refused to pay up. Then when you rightfully sued us every which way, we were forced to pay up and now we refuse to insure you further." The actual quote from State Farm's VP of public affairs was "We're just not in a position to accept any additional risk in this homeowners' market."

So the question here is: at what point does it become unprofitable to insure an unsafe place? Is it the point at which you know it's dangerous but keep taking money (while charging high prices)? I don't think so. Or is it at the point where your money-grubbing tendency comes back to bite you in the ass? It makes me wonder how State Farm defines risk. Is it insuring people who live in a flood plain? Or is it getting busted trying to keep from having to pay out?

If State Farm isn't in a position to accept any additional risk b/c of crappy management decisions that involved ripping off thousands of policy-holders at arguably the worst time in their lives, it's probably better for the citizens of Mississippi to no longer have to deal with it. I would love to know what the Mississippi Insurance Department is doing about it.

Sources:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/insurance/2007-02-14-state-farm-katrina_x.htm?csp=24

Fight: Update

Sorry to be slow on the uptake. The Trog has been busy writing French to people who can't read it.

Watada got a mistrial.

Source:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/302733_courtmartial07ww.html

Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

The Speaker of the House is Nancy Pelosi. That's the #3 power position in this country. Harvard is about to hire Drew Gilpin Faust, the first female president in its 371-year history. That will make four Ivy League institutions (of 8) that have women presidents (Penn, Princeton, Brown and now Harvard).

I want to celebrate that women are getting over on that damn glass ceiling. Which is why it's such a kick in the collective ass (assii? Call Safire.) to hear that Donatella Versace is dissing Hilary Clinton for wearing pantsuits. Here's why this is lame on several levels.

The Silvery Shiny Spinning Wheel of Lame:
1. We are still worried about what Hillary looks like, her pants, her butt, her wrinkles, whatever? Did anyone ever tell Kerry to fix those brows? Anyone tell Bill Clinton to go deal with those eyebags? No. Ni una palabra.
2. I think Hillary Clinton should be judged on her presidential ability alone. If every one of the flyover states hates her, that's fine, so long as it's not b/c she wears pants.
3. It's friggin 18 degrees, Donatella.
4. If Clinton did wear skirts, she'd likely garner attention for trying to play up the very thing she's dissed on for: being a woman. This is the woman who is damned whatever she does, so I think while she's busy getting reamed, she should at least be comfortable.
5. Has anyone taken a look at the utterer of the comment? Holy hell.






Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/09/business/08cnd-harvard.html?hp&ex=1171083600&en=d8e54ea3b5fb0fa1&ei=5094&partner=homepage
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2007-02-08T135217Z_01_L08322504_RTRUKOC_0_US-FASHION-CLINTON-VERSACE.xml

Booyeah

Yes, it's true that Wal-Mart was able to squid out of its Maryland requirement of the law by claiming it was the only company so affected. (See my very first entry.) But in truth, it wasn't the only company, there were three others. It was just the only company that refused to follow the law.

However, it's not all sweetness and halos for Wal-Mart today, because today a federal court ruled that Wal-Mart has to suck it up and deal with a massive class-action suit regarding sex discrimination. What great drama: the biggest corporation ever, an assault on mighty Title VII, and an order from easily the most pro-employee circuit in the land, the 9th. Can't wait, will keep you posted.

Source:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070206/ap_on_bi_ge/wal_mart_discrimination

Fight

Lt. Ehren Watada is being court-martialed for refusing to go fight in Iraq, believing it's an illegal war. Conduct unbecoming an officer is the charge, as well as refusing to ship out with his unit. He did ask if he could go to Afghanistan instead, and was refused.

I guess it's a significant problem when those in the military begin to think for themselves. I realize there's a certain efficiency to the herd mentality, but for my money (and it is my money, BTW, and yours), I'd really like to have someone with an IQ in the plus column in a combat situation.

The thing is, Watada is right. The war in Iraq has been an occupation in clear violation of international law since Day One. His lawyer has been banned from debating the legality of the war. Watada could get four years of jail and a dishonorable discharge if convicted.

Prosecutors are arguing that Watada's behavior was dangerous to the mission and morale of soldiers in Iraq. My understanding is that the morale of the soldiers is at an all-time low, whether Watada stays home or not. I can't imagine how it's dangerous to the mission or at least not more dangerous than this Administration's lack of plan, lack of decent protection of the soldiers who are on the ground, whose parents have to routinely send them armor and Silly String (which is used to detect trip wires that could be connected to bombs and are otherwise invisible to the naked eye) and other supplies.

If my choice were to go to a God-forgotten country with inadequate everything (including plan to get me the hell out of there), or face four years in an American prison system, I know I'd take the latter, due to the greater likelihood of coming home alive.

Sources:
http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/treaties.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070206/ap_on_re_us/war_objector
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/06/us/06deploy.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
http://cbs13.com/topstories/topstories_story_341070731.html

Language lesson

I didn't realize there are actually many languages spoken in Iraq, but primarily the three biggies are: Kurdish, Mesopotamian Arabic, and standard Arabic.

I would like to know how to say "cracker" in each of these languages. Is it at all possible that there is a single person living in Iraq who does not think my country is nothing but a nation of crackers? Is it a really big step, do you think, between being a white supremacist and being the world's superbully? Isn't the latter just the former on steroids?

So if you've got your Kurdish or Arabic on, help the Trog advance her skills. Thanks.


Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_%28pejorative%29
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_map.asp?name=IQ&seq=10