One of the things I do in the Real World is try and manage “problem” projects – projects that are failing or otherwise in trouble – in technology and some other areas. (Editor’s note: I’m looking for a project in Southern California right now, and if anyone hears of one, drop me a note at armed-at-armedliberal.com) One thing I tell my team members at the beginning is this:

The only thing I want to hear when you’re messed up is this: “I messed up. Here’s what I did, here’s what happened, here’s how we need to fix it.” I don’t want to hear how the SA caused it, or you had bad docs, or anything else except in the context of how you messed up and what we need to do to a) fix it right now; and b) make sure it doesn’t happen again.

I do this, because on thing that always happens in troubled projects is blamestorming, in which everyone spends all their time figuring out how it wasn’t really their fault.
I find admitting fault a liberating experience, and when I learned to admit my own faults in projects it was a major step in my maturation professionally and personally.
That’s why the current furor over the Time Magazine article on the current and last Administration’s terrible track record on terror is making me mental.
As long as the Democratic and Republican (I’m looking for a link, will have one in a bit) operatives spend all their energy spinning this so that it looks like the other side caused it, we’ll never get out of this. As far as I’m concerned, every one of these fools ought to be flipping burgers as far away from the levers of power as possible, right now.
Let’s make it clear: The Clinton administration had a chance to do something about Al-Quieda, and failed to take the opportunity. The Bush Administration had a chance before 9/11 and failed to take the opportunity. All I want to hear from these people and their handlers is this: “I messed up. Here’s what I did, here’s what happened, here’s how we need to fix it.”
Otherwise, shut the f**k up. I’m not interested in hearing it.

It’s nice to see a clear instance where government can be so cleanly bought and sold, and where our interests as citizens can be shelved by those with the cash and clout to buy better access. Check out Last week’s L.A. Times story: Free Tax E-Filing System Defeated. See, the government can’t offer a useful service for free, because it would compete with people who make money offering that service. So instead of differentiating or improving their service, or acknowledging that certain things change (buggy whips, typewriters, travel agencies), you hire lobbyists; Joseph Schumpeter is grinning hugely.

In California, where Intuit Inc. has led the industry’s effort by hiring lobbyists and making targeted campaign contributions, the private companies have successfully scuttled the Franchise Tax Board’s plans to offer a free, state-run Web site in which a computer does a taxpayer’s arithmetic.
An industry-supported bill that would ban an interactive state-sponsored electronic tax filing system is scheduled to be heard before a Senate committee Wednesday.
At both the federal and state levels, the tax agencies say they are simply trying to give people a quicker, easier way to file with the government and eliminate long lines at the post office before midnight on April 15.
Makers of tax preparation software call the government effort unwarranted competition.

If I get time later today, I’ll look up Intuit and H & R Block’s donations to CA politicians and put them up here.

Everyone on my Blogroll seems all put out by Bill Simon’s latest bout of idiocy.
Ann Salisbury is waiting to see me and go “I told you so!”
Bob Morris is digging up jokes.
Look, it’s simple.
It’s Daddy’s Money. Why be careful with it? He never has been before.
I just have one key question. If I vote Green, do I have to buy Birkenstocks?

Dawson (why, dammit, why do I always think of ‘Jay and Silent Bob’ when I hear that name?? Actually, why do I think of ‘Jay and Silent Bob’ when I hear most things?) throws a little chin music my way over my Ann Coulter comment.
His points, as I read them early this morning:
1. She probably said what she said, and there’s nothing new here. I’m pretty new to this whole Ann Coulter thing – remember that we don’t have TV – so the comments are new to me, anyway.
2. He dings me for printing my email to her website. I intended to do two things in doing so, and I probably should have said something about them when I put them up: a) having hammered her for saying something, at least do her the courtesy of asking if she really said it in the only way I know how; and b) try in my own tiny 200-unique-visitor-a-day manner to put some pressure on someone to either have her back or repudiate the clear meaning of the quote.
3. He justifiably dings me for sending it to the webmaster, and expecting some kind of response. OK, where else should I have sent it? I mean, again, at least I’m trying to confirm it!
4. He dings me for not knowing her oevre. He’s right. At some point I’ll try and read her book…it’s just that what with moving, unpacking, looking for work, getting a kid off to college, etc. etc. time is a little thin. I promise that by the end of the year, I’ll have read the book and commented.
5. He appears to support her in what she appears to have said. Here we go pretty far off the rails, and I’ll enlarge below.
My personal position on abortion is pretty complex. Up to my late 20’s, I was firmly on the ‘women’s right to choose/get the oppressive state out of my uterus’ side of things. I’d paid for one or two abortions, and had a mild twinge about it, but it wasn’t a big deal to me. The moral stance was clear.
Then we (ex and I) decided to have a kid, and soon were pregnant. I clearly remember walking into the doctor’s office and seeing the first sonogram (we have the video somewhere) of Biggest Guy in utero. It was a transcendent moment, second only to the moment he crowned and I saw him for the first time.
As we walked out of the office, we were both contemplative. I turned to her and said, “You know, this whole abortion thing is far more complex than I ever thought.” And to this day I agree that it is.
I’m still on the side of some limited right to choose on the part of women. I agree that it should be secure, safe, and most of all, rare. I’m less dogmatic about it.
I am dogmatic, however, about threatening and shooting people.
It’s real simple: the right to personally take up arms and act violently toward another person has to be reserved for a case where you are personally under threat of harm, or when any reasonable person would agree it is appropriate.
If I were armed, and a 7-11 was being violently held up as I drove into the lot, I’d retreat to a position of safety, get on the phone, and be a good witness. If the robber(s) saw and attacked me, we’d have a different kind of discussion.
No one is personally threatening the clinic killers. There exists a spectrum of opinion on whether abortion is murder; this suggests that they need to work the process, not rifle bolts.
John Brown was a psychotic nutjob. His impact on history was questionable, regardless of his place in song. Clinic murderers are nutjobs as well, and the right-to-life movement tarnishes itself by harboring, aiding, and tolerating people like that.
Is my position on that clear?
On a more conciliatory note, I also enjoy Dawson’s site, and I’m flattered as hell that he said this about me: Armed Liberal, who I honestly enjoy reading and find to be, not only a good writer, as in a damn fine wordsmith but also a rational, articulate person….
Let’s find some stuff we can agree on and go do it. Meanwhile, let’s go eat some BBQ…

Our own L.A. Times. The quote:
Outside Nablus, in the village of Salem, troops surrounded the home of Hamas activist Amjad Jubur, and shot and killed him when he tried to escape, Israeli officials said.
Charles Johnson has a little detail on the kinds of “activities” Hamas is up to.
Folks, just because I want to be nice to some Palestinians doesn’t mean I want to be nice to all Palestinians. I’m looking for a way to minimalize the control nutjobs like Amjad can control. I’m for a combination bribery and threats; we knowwhat the threats are, let’s start talking about the bribes.

I’ve discussed it here and here. Now, via Instapundit (thanks for the link!! How ’bout something permanent, hey?), we find Toren Smith, at The Safety Valve (great graphics): Dems get bigger gun, shoot selves in foot.
The Dems are Wylie Coyote, “suuupah genius”, and the weapon was made by Acme…

Bigwig has essentially proposed that we hold out immigration to the US as a bribe to the broader Palestinian community to a) stop the violence against the Israelis; and b) abandon the ‘Right of Return’ which is probably one of the key issues holding the two sides apart.
I’m attracted to the idea, but for different reasons than Bigwig sets out. I reserve the right to change my mind once I sleep on it, but restate my belief that right now two very stubborn and resilient people are playing Irish Sit-Down (a game I’ve seen played in which two thickheads take turns hitting each other until one of them can’t get up). Even if we don’t care about the players, all the furniture is getting broken. The solution to this problem is going to either come from exhaustion, which I doubt, or from outside the narrow band of negotiation both parties seem trapped in.
Comments and email have flowed, and they make two sensible points:
1) The Palestinian crisis is really a mask for a deeper crisis with Arab world, so ‘solving’ this problem will only deal with the symptom, not the problem;
2) Why would we let thousands or hundreds of thousands of virulently Anti-American folks into the country?
First, let me explain why I think this would be a brilliant move.
It seizes the moral high ground: No one can accuse the US of not extending a hand to the poor oppressed Palestinian population after we make an offer like this. I’m ignoring the fine details of Bigwig’s plan, like the ‘tax’, and simplifying the plan into: if you’ll stop bombing and accept a peace plan, we’ll let 100,000 Palestinians who pass security checks into the US per year.
It gives us a stick to hold over the Palestinian and Arab leadership: Play ball or we turn off the tap. I have to believe that the hope of immigrating to the US would be a strong enough lure for the average person that the PA would risk losing control if they messed with it.
It divides our opponents: I believe there is a ‘silent middle’ in the Palestinian world; people who just want to live their lives and raise their kids. Right now they are cowed by the thugs with guns, in large part because they have nothing to fight for. The thugs steal the aid dollars, kill political opponents, and will wind up with whatever wealth can be created. This is an appeal to them, an offer to them of a future both in Palestine, and possibly here in the U.S. What is needed is for the Arab and Palestinian middle-class to stand up; something that has been rare up until now because, in part, they haven’t had anything to stand up for. Suddenly the political spectrum there isn’t narrowed to IJ, Hamas, and Hezbollah, and while the PA might get away with ‘retail violence’ – the occasional murder of a political opponent, ‘wholesale violence’ against large crowds would not play well for them at all.
As to the issues raised, my responses are simple:
Yes, I deeply believe the Palestinians are a proxy used to mask a deeper conflict between the Arab/Islamist world and the West (and its beachhead, Israel). We keep getting stuck in the proxy argument and not being able to deal with the deeper one. Let’s get the proxy off the table so we can see what’s really going on.
No, I don’t think that the Palestinian immigrants will substantially place us at risk; we’re already at risk. The only reason Hamas hasn’t attacked on U.S. soil is that they don’t want to, and I don’t believe that Homeland Security could do a damn thing about it.
I don’t think that the average Palestinian is virulently anti-American. If that was the case, we’d have no choice except to kill them. I think they are trapped physically and economically and culturally, and the question is how can we help them out of the trap?

They’re smarter than we think.
Bigwig at Silflay Hraka actually presents a damn good idea that could make a difference in the Middle East.

According to best estimates, there are just over 5 million Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories. There are maybe 5 million more scattered throughout the Middle East. Let’s start with the ones in the occupied territories and let them emigrate; in small numbers at first, then more, then hundreds of thousands a year. Let them come to America. And in exchange, they give up the Right of Return for themselves and all their progeny, forever.

Maybe it’s the aftereffect of too much raw honey, but I’m suddenly hopeful. This idea may not work, but if Bigwig can come up with this, there are other ideas that get us out of the box we’re in.
Open the doors…

So my ex- lives about a block and a half from our new place (my SO is still working on that one), and wandered by with the Littlest Guy. They were headed to the park across the street, and I had his mitt and ball.
After they took off, I heard a siren, peeked out the window, and saw the paramedic truck pulling up. I’m out the door at this point, but see that they’re pulling up to and then working on a couple sitting on the ground next to a car, so assume it was an accident of some kind. The grownups (EMT) are there, I can’t be of any assistance, it’s not my son or ex-, so I head back to the office. At that point the doorbell rings, and they’ve come back…it appears that two people at the park were attacked by a bee swarm.
So his mom leaves, and LG hangs out with me for a bit, and then I decide to go talk to the apiarists who have shown up and see if we have Africanized bees living nearby. (we don’t)
LG walks with me and we go talk to the lady apiarist, who is cleaning out the remains of a hive from an empty wheelbarrow (there is a community garden across the street as well), and then she gives him a fist-sized chunk of comb, dripping with honey.
She explains that this part of the hive was where baby bees would have grown up, and we can see some larval bees in a couple of the cells. He and I have talked about bees and what they do…there are flowers in front of the house, and where we hike in Palos Verdes, there are chest-high flowers that always seem to have bees on them.
He starts licking the dripping honey off his hand, looks up and offers me some…and I take it and it is just amazingly good. A Platonic ideal of what the honey in the stores ought to taste like. A burst of sweetness then an incredible flavor that I find nowhere else.
Then I walked him back to his mom’s house.
Somehow, walking down the street with your kid, licking honey from a comb off your fingers, and watching him happily lick the comb, makes the day perfect. All you folks who don’t live in big cities may scoff and do this every day. But for me it just put a sweet glow on the day that I hope will last for a while.

From: Armed Liberal
To: tom@anncoulter.org
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 23:47:36 -0700
Subject: Is this true??
>http://students.washington.edu/right/12-4-01/coulter.htm