[all souls day] unique day of unity

Which day can unite Catholics, Protestants and Pagans? All Souls Day, of course:

It is a Roman Catholic day of remembrance for friends and loved ones who have left for their heavenly abode. All Soul's Day has its roots in the ancient Pagan Festival of the Dead, based on the pagan belief that the souls of the dead would return for a meal with the family.

Catholics believe that those who die are not immediately eligible for the Beatific vision (the reality and goodness of G-d and heaven) and need to be purged of their sins. This purification of the elect [is called] "purgatory," maintain[ing] that:

(a) there will be a purification of the believers prior to entering heaven and,
(b) the prayers and masses of the faithful benefit those in the state of purification.

Another site says:

It is practically universal folk belief that the souls in Purgatory are allowed to return to earth on All Souls Day. In Austria, they are said to wander the forests, praying for release. In Poland, they are said to visit their parish churches at midnight, where a light can be seen because of their presence. Afterward, they visit their families, and to make them welcome, a door or window is left open. In many places, a place is set for the dead at supper, or food is otherwise left out for them.

I'm not a Roman Catholic and yet the notion of Purgatory is a compelling one. The idea of being able to expiate the wrongdoing we might have been too stubborn to concede during our life, the idea of that "final chance" is one many of us would surely endorse.

Protestants say that the very moment of forgiveness through faith obviates the need for a Purgatory and they might have a point. I don't know. I just know that this day is a day for remembering departed family and friends, a day when you might, just possibly might, be able to intercede for them.

I'm certainly going to and this is what I meant by it being a day which can unite all faiths and non-faith as well. Think of it as a possibility. Think of your grandparents and anyone else close who has departed.

Your thoughts might have no effect at all if there is no creation, no G-d. But what if you let the chance go by and what if it did eventually turn out to be so? Could you forgive yourself?

So I'd urge everyone today to spare a thought for the souls departed. Remember, if you miss this day today, don't worry. It might just be efficacious tomorrow as well:

When NOV-2 is a Sunday, as it was for the year 2003, the celebration is held on the following Monday.

[presidential election] state by state guide and candidates

Clicking on the map above will take you to an interactive map on the election site and is the most comprehensive and succinct guide I've seen on the net so far. When you are in there, hover your cursor over the state and it will do the rest.

Karl Denninger, through whom I found this map, says:

The count for McCain (all red-shaded states) is 185. To win he must flip all of the blue-bordered and light blue states. If he misses any of them - any - he loses. Flipping all of them gets McCain 274 EVs, but the lowest-count state in the game here is worth 5 EVs (Nevada), which means there are no losses that can be sustained. Further, if he loses just one of the "barely republican" states other than Montana or North Dakota, nothing else matters.

The game is over John. While technically this race is winnable, were I a bookmaker I'd give you 20:1 odds against.

For a complete rundown of the candidates, you can't go past Wiki.

Karl Denninger is an astute American economist and all indicators are that he is right. However, there are so many unknowns, such as the anti-black factor, for example. Who is going to publicly say he won't vote for Obama because of race but what he does in the ballot booth is between the voter and that bit of paper.

People might also vote for John McCain for Sarah Palin - I imagine she'll soak up a lot of the women's votes, which are unrepresented really. There might also be a last minute gut reaction to Obama's inexperience, the too-slick way he's been railroaded through, slickness being an out of fashion idea just now in the light of Wall Street and the mortgage crisis.

I really feel that this one is down to the wire. I could well have egg on my face Wednesday morning after an Obama landslide and so I'll issue a pre-emptive apology now.

The two party system

Political commentators have long had concerns about the system:

Although the system has declined into a two-party system, the Constitution does not mandate a two-party system, nor does it limit political parties. In fact, it doesn't say anything about political parties at all. During the ratification, the Federalists and Republicans did debate and argue, but these two "parties" were not opposition parties, nor were they to truly develop into such until 1814.

James Madison, in Federalist Paper #10 argues against "factions," claiming that to ensure a fair democratic process such factions (politically parties) should be limited. Of course the anti-federalist's Clay reacted vehemently in Federalist Paper #11, claiming that limiting the liberty of citizens to form political factions violated the sprit of democracy, a point that Madison had already conceded.

The current dysfunctional, partisan, two-party system essentially creates an "either or fallacy" [and] has little to do with the Constitution, and everything to do with ideologues. Until a serious third party develops, the current false dilemma will be perpetuated, and the win-at-any-costs mantra will remain the common political strategy.

... and:

Most third parties also recommend taking back the public airways and granting media supported access to the public by all qualifying parties during an election cycle. That is the goal; giving the American people real choices at the voting booth. A government that is made up of multiple parties will diminish the concentration of power in the hands of a few political bosses over all the diverse people of this great land.

In the view of this blog, there is no true democracy any more in America, no real debate immediately prior to the ballot box - it's been a three card trick foisted on the voters for many generations. Americans need to get back to their constitution, the only document separating them from third world countries, politically. It is a fabulous document, for all its flaws and it is one which Americans will need to cling to tightly in the coming troubles, 2009-12.

[bird of prey] richard griffiths and early computers

My first computer was bought sometime around 1984 - it was a Macintosh 512KED, with 0.5Mb RAM. I only mention it because that was about the year when PCs really took off and the paranoia set in about big time hacking and embezzlement. Various films and mini-series came out around the theme of the less than scrupulous computer whiz.

One was from 1982, when the excellent BBC serial in four parts, Bird of Prey, hit the small screen, starring Richard Griffiths and Carole Nimmons.

It was made into two series, each of four episodes, each series different to the other but including the same nucleus. Basically, Griffiths plays a computer operator who files a report which leads to complications and then to threats and frame-ups. Gradually, it emerges that there is widespread collusion going on with the EEC, Britain and criminal elements, attempting to corrupt and utilize the emerging technology.

Dated in many ways, especially in the technology and sets, it was nevertheless a gripping thriller with a nice twist at the end. If you can get the DVD, it could be worth it.

The Consultant [June, 1983] starring Hywel Bennett, was another serial tapping into the fear of what could happen to the computer world when clever hackers broke into it. Bennett and partner Jonathan Morris, also very strong as the computer whiz kid who tumbles to Bennett's game and wants in, are a backroom consultancy firm who decide to tender for a major bank job which sees Bennett commuting between London and Manchester.

It shows naive bank directors [in the database field], la less naive and therefore unscrupulous payrolled computer whiz who has a little embezzlement scheme going on within the bank and a savvy bank security chief who is not at all sure about Bennett being given free rein to test the system's defences. It was said in 2000:

In the 1970s and 1980s, the hacker was either a friendless loner or a super-cynical computer expert as played by Hywel Bennett in The Consultant. Today the hacker could be anybody. In fact, as the anti-fraud section of computer group Unisys warned last October, today's computer fraudster most closely fits the profile of someone a big computer company would most like to hire.

Bennett played the former type but when he realized the size of the stakes and that he was about to be sprung, stooped to murder - first one, then another, in a rivetting piece of tele-suspense.

As the IMDb reviewer said:

"I don't know if anyone will ever have a chance to see this again, but if you find it is showing on some obscure channel, it's worth the investment of time and attention."

[obama] in october, 2006, he was unsure

Ellee Seymour has written:

I believe I was the first political blogger in the UK to write about Barack Obama back in January 2007.

Sorry, Ellee, how about this one from October 23rd, 2006, which quotes Obama:

He told NBC's Meet the Press: I am still at the point where I have not made a decision to - to pursue higher office but it is true that I have thought about it over the last several months.

[statistics can lie] though the problem remains

The news was reported that:

[N]ew research shows that 40 percent of women report sexual problems, but only 12 percent are distressed about it.

Quite apart from these figures being highly suspect due to the research being conducted by a firm which markets products for women's sexual dysfucntion, I'm convinced that the majority of problems, such as they are, are caused by:

a. the unrealistic expectations on women imposed by society, advertising, journals and other media and peer pressure through discussion of this guff;

b. the onslaught of feminism which does create a "don't-you-oppress-me", "women-can-go-it-alone" mentality;

c. the natural desire of women to have everything perfect, "just so" and the way men are failing to live up to this ideal in today's society;

d. the phenomenon whereby the more women insist on their rights, the worse becomes the attitude, particularly of young men, towards them. As men are disempowered, so the dislike of women increases, manifesting itself in cavalier attitudes and refusal to "understand".

Women need to step back and think through what they're really trying to achieve, to work in with men in a complementary rather than confrontational or snide way. Then and only then can the decades of immense damage to inter-gender relations be reversed and healed. Otherwise, the current misandry and misogyny can only produce one bitter result.

One good start would be for the new generation of girls to learn the word "no".

[small business] the key to a resurgence

On the Tory initiatives for small-business relief, reactions included:

“It’s a good report and some very good ideas,” David Frost, director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said, “My plea would be that when some firm ideas come out of this, please make them long term and make them stick.”

Indeed. Restructuring the corporate environment to support small and medium business, the granting of tax breaks and start-up loans, the reining in of monopolies which threaten to snuff out competition in any given sector - these are the things the society should be supporting.

The other, social aspects will flow from that.