Whatsthatsmell?

Tell me, Why aren't they supposed to do profiling, now?

"May we dance with your dates?"

I've Been Tagged! Page 123

Cobb has tagged me with the following instructions:

1. Pick up the nearest book ( of at least 123 pages).
2. Open the book to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people.

So, here goes...

I've just started reading The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Middle East by Martin Sieff.  I have read all, save two, of the books in the Politically Incorrect Guide series from Regnery and have found them veritable fonts of useless trivia which helps win political pub debates with your opponent going "I'm sorry, I don't know enough about that subject to comment on that aspect.  But if it's true, you may be right."  (Okay, I made up that last sentence, because there are very few political pub debates that end up with such magnanimous statements.  Or if it does, it's usually followed by "You fill in appropriate expletive, you!")

I don't take the facts presented in each book with a grain of salt, but I do take the opinions of the authors with a slight grain.  Many of them seem to have a specific axe to grind, which, using the BS detectors, leaves me usually about half-way between the authors' views and the views from which I began the book.

Anyway, this part of the book is in a chapter entitled "The Israeli-Arab Wars" under a sub-section entitled Results of the Six-Day War...This passage speaks of Nasser:

He rapidly rebuilt his army and air force with his Soviet backers.  By 1969, he felt strong enough to start bombarding the defenses the Israelis had built to hold the eastern bank of the Suez Canal.  In so doing, he launched the War of Attrition.

Anyway...whom to tag...whom to tag....

1.  Robert, the Expat Yank
2.  Steve, the Pub Philosopher
3.  The Gorse Fox
4.  Laban Tall at UK Commentators
5.  Cllr. Gavin Ayling

For a good curry in Worthing...

UPDATE 06/09/2008:  I completely take this back.  After last night, I don't think I'll be going back.  Got a minty yoghurt sauce which had stuff growing on the surface and smelled completely rotten.  When I called to complain, I think culture and language may have got in the way, as I was informed that that's what normally happens when yoghurt is left out for four or five days.  That I had been a loyal customer, with no previous issues, so I should be happy to continue.

Not even an offer of my money back for the sauce.  Cheez...

Original Post:

I highly recommend Jafran in Broadwater. 

Out of most of the curry houses I have tried thus far in the area, they consistently bring in the best taste, with the most obviously fresh ingredients.  And unlike most other curry houses that I have sampled out here in the provinces, their curries do not appear to have any fire engine red food colouring in them.  Just the dull reddish brown (or brownish red) of what happens when you combine the ingredients to the right degree to make the perfect taste.

Also, they have a heightened sense of how to retain regular customers.  I always say you can judge the quality of a company by the way they handle things when they go wrong.  And whenever I have had problems with deliveries, they have been more than accommodating in the subsequent customer service moments (where one would normally expect to be disappointed.)  And if we ever find ourselves actually coming in for the sit-down service, the staff are excellent to us.

Give them a try if you ever find yourself in the area.

The Economic elephant in the room

It is funny listening to commentators on the BBC whistling in the dark regarding the economy.

I saw that chick on Newsnight who worked in the Clinton Administration talk about how it would be impossible for Brown to lower taxes because he's borrowed so much.  I don't know what it is, but is there some sort of magic curtain that sits in British TV economists brains that keeps them from comprehending the Laffer Curve?  Can't they see that perhaps lower taxes (in the heaviest taxed European economy) might just increase revenues because people and corporations will be spending less time avoiding paying high taxes?

Last year, the US government had three or four quarters of revenues greater than expenditure (in "war" time and with no concomitant spending cuts) thanks to Bush's tax cuts.  I wonder what something like that would do for the British economy.  I don't think we will ever know, because every proposed tax cut seems to mean less nurses and policemen, rather than less management consultants and outreach officers, in this country.

But anyway, back to the elephant in the room...I was listening to Bill Bennett yesterday and a woman who works on the Street called in and named it...The markets are spooked by a potential Hillary or Obama presidency.  As the so-called front runner McCain has already pleaded ignorance to economics, and it is obvious what Hillary or Obama would do as president with regard to the economy, the markets are spooked.

I think the only thing that will stop the spooking is for Romney to position himself as the "businessman", take advantage of people's economic fears to reassure everyone how much of a  steady economic hand he would be, and emerge as the front runner after Florida.  It just might reverse  a bit of the  correction we are experiencing right now.  The only other candidate who might be able to allay economic fears is Giuliani.  I don't think any of the other Republicans in the running can approach economics with gravitas.  And this year may see a re-run of "It's the economy, stupid."

So McCain wins South Carolina...

by three percent more than Huckabee...And everyone declares him the frontrunner?

Strikes me that in order to be the front runner on the Republican side you have to have the most delegates.  Let's see...McCain has...let's see...38 delegates...and Romney has...hmmm...72 delegates.  So that obviously makes McCain the clear front runner.

I guess they don't cover basic arithmetic in J-School, do they?  I suppose this is what the dumbing down of the curriculum does.

I think I know what is going on.  The media is definitely trying to tilt it toward McCain because they can skewer him in a general election.  They don't like Mitt because they can't really touch him.  If the guy can survive a 1994 senatorial election against the Kennedy machine with his personal reputation in tact, my bet is that there are no skeletons to be found, and hence no ammunition, to use against him when he faces off with Obama or Hillary.

If McCain gets the nomination, here is how the press will cover him: old, cranky, obnoxious, maybe a bit touched by his time in the Hanoi Hilton.

If Huckabee gets the nomination: Hick Baptist who wants us all to convert or die.

Giuiliani: philanderer who consorts with corrupt policemen.

Thompson: old actor-trial lawyer who marries jail bait to make himself feel better about being over the hill

Romney:  Heck, I can't think of how they'll spin it other than, "aren't Mormons a little bit weird?"

There is no real mud they can make stick to Romney.

And Huckabee and Thompson should both drop out now.  If Thompson is only getting a distant 3rd in a Southern state (contrary to my previous prediction), then I don't see him doing much better anywhere else, except Tennessee.  Huckabee probably won't go anywhere, though.

But a vote for Huck or Thompson is now a vote for McCain.  They are clearly splitting the conservative vote.  (And as conservative a record as McCain holds, he is definitely sounding very liberal on issues such as climate change and immigration.)

Anyway, that's what I have to say on the Republicans...

Hillary is ahead of Obama, and if Obama closes that gap, expect the Clinton machine to go into full-smear mode against him...

A History of the English-Speaking Peoples - Churchill

When it rains it pours...Blog while the sun shines, as they say...

So, anyway, I am almost finished reading Winston Churchill's A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, Volume 1: The Birth of Britain.  (My project is to read all four of Churchill's volumes and then finish reading Andrew Roberts's follow-up of history since 1900 over the coming year.)

It has been a real pleasure to read so far.  I've encountered a lot of the subject matter before, but Churchill reaches across the decades and speaks of history with a unique voice to all of us.  I keep thinking, though, of what a rarity and treasure Churchill was, and how I cannot think of any one individual with the same level of achievements mixed with intellect in the past 100 years.  Maybe Teddy Roosevelt...But even that's stretching it.

Churchill originally began writing this series in the 1930s in order to stress the culture that the British and Americans shared.  For obvious reasons, he had to put it down in 1939.  He finally published it in 1956.

And as I read it I am also reminded of how things have changed and stayed the same since he originally wrote it:

And another funny thing happened to me...

Today...

One of the people who is affiliated with the project management organisation for which I am the PMO Manager (but not the ultimate guy in charge) sent me an instant message asking me if there was anywhere she could pray a couple of times a day.

Faster than you could shake a stick, I replied...Don't think so...Ask the building manager.

There are times where I am truly grateful that I am not responsible for making some decisions.

I showed it to my boss and told him I was glad that that wasn't my call...He said: "yeah, I know what you'd say!"

It would have to be a conflicted decision if I had to make it, that's for sure.  I often see things like this happening elsewhere and tut-tut over the outcomes of whatever controversy gets raised.  But I'm not sure how I would react if it really was up to me.

Went down to see the MP in Westminster...

The other day.  We had a great chat on politics and all the issues I brought up in my series of e-mails to him regarding taxpayer-funding of political parties. (Throughout December of last year.)

The long and short of it is that, despite the suggestions for taxpayer funding, the Conservative Party did come up with some eminently sensible suggestions the other day. 

Our conversation ranged over most of the topics I brought up.  Particularly on the EU.  His thoughts are that the parliamentary party is more Euroskeptic than ever, including himself.

It gave me pause for thought on the Conservative Party, and even on David Cameron.  Who is an operator, if nothing else.  He's good at politics.  And in fairness, it is true, for the first time in a long time, Cameron's presentation does smooth the way for the introduction of small-c conservative ideas without getting skewered every time.  There are some solid policies and research coming out from the Conservatives which are beginning to look more and more conservative.

Who knows, maybe I'll come back...Depends what this lot get up to...

What a strange election this is turning out to be...

Romney came in first in Michigan, and not by a whisker as many people were saying...He got 9% more of the vote than McCain.  The Republican race is open even further, and it puts Mitt back in play for sure.

Saturday has Nevada and South Carolina.  Romney will take Nevada mostly (which has,I believe, 34 delegates) - and you may be able to credit that to the big Mormon population there, too - and he may come in 3rd in South Carolina (which I believe has 24 delegates).

But a lot of people are now taking a look at him.  I predict Thompson comes in first in SC.  Which gives us 4 frontrunners.  Then Rudy Giuliani takes Florida, thanks to all the ex-New Yorkers there.  5 Frontrunners.

Wow!  I think this is great.

UPDATE:  Welcome to all you visitors from CNN.  As you see, I was wrong about Thompson in SC.  But I think we should be judicious when we hear people declare McCain as the "clear" front runner.  He has 38 delegates to Romney's 72.  Last I checked, 72 is greater than 38.

Slightly disappointing result in NH last night...

McCain won thanks to independents.  Which commends his ability to get the swing vote.  And bits of his speech last night were inspiring.  But so was Romney's, too.

Once again, my man did not win, but it is making this race that much more exciting.  I like this...It is wide open and people seem to be talking more about things that need to be talked about.

Anyway, as long as the Republicans don't tear themselves apart, it will be good for a lot of this stuff to get an airing early.

Now, Hilary beating Obama?

Same reason McCain beat Romney...Independents chose to vote in the Republican rather than the Democratic primary.

And I think once people get to know Obama, there will either be something scandalous emerging (which Hilary is keeping in her back pocket), or they will discover there is no "there" there, or the ex-Muslim thing will pop up (either making him a target of Jihadis or a Manchurian candidate for the Islamists), or the Kenyan situation heats up and the followers of that bloke he endorsed will start using those machetes they've been stocking up on.

I think Clinton will get the Democratic nomination.  But the ride will be interesting.

As for the Republicans?  A lot of people have a lot of opinions.  It ain't looking good for my guy, but then there is something about each of the Republican nominees to commend them to me.  And each one has something that I'd have a slight problem with:

• McCain - Chooses the wrong time to be bi-partisan, but staunch Defense Conservative.  Could he beat Hilary?  Yes.  Obama?  Maybe, but it would be "youth" against age.  And that's Obama's strength.
• Giuilani - Almost a Democrat on the social side, but he has stated categorically that he would be, erm...judicious in his selections of Supreme Court nominees.  (And we could see two or three new justices in the next presidential term.)  Giuliani has universal appeal.  I think he could beat both Hilary and Obama, but it would be a tough fight.
• Thompson - Looks old and tired, and people will mistake his Southern accent for ignorance (much like Bush's cowboy vernacular).  However, staunch conservative across the board.  Could he beat Hilary?  Maybe.  Obama? I don't think so.  Youth vs. Age would play heavily into it.
• Huckabee - Socially liberal, very big on clemency.  Great tax approach - the Fair Tax - though.  Could he beat either Hilary or Obama?  Not a chance in hell.
• Romney (my guy) - Perceived flip-flopper, not as strong on gun rights as I'd prefer, also a bit stiff.  But looks damn Presidential, is extremely capable, and may just have the organisational skills to sort out those departments of the executive that need it (State, CIA), by the way, Rudy could do this, too.

And as it stands, almost all of those guys (with Thompson as a dark horse) could get the nomination.

I love this stuff.