When Margaret Thatcher died this past week, I was sincerely sad to see her pass. Not because of the political views that I hold for her, but because of my grandmother, who lived through the iron lady- and insists to this day that although she was tough and hard, and took away many factory jobs- She was successful at rallying British Morale, and creating unity among England during the war period. However, in her passing though she had questionable political policies- does not deserve to have to song played back in 1939 that was spread throughout the world as the anti-thatcher song. Lo and behold, the anti-thatcher song is widely know as “Ding Dong the Witch is Dead,” from Wizard of Oz…who knew, the song in the musical was emotionally charged towards its sentiments to Margaret thatcher. Fast forward to today, BBC and Itunes are debating whether to allow this song to be played during the memorial for thatcher, or and if Itunes should place a cap on the songs download- for it has skyrocketed in hits ever since her passing. The Chairman of the Culture, Media Committee told the Daily Mail; “It is an attempt to manipulate the charts by people trying to make a political point.” However, in her passing I think we can all agree that the political protesting, or agendas of the anti-thatcher movement can be put on hold, not resurrected the moment she passes. “Most people (whether her fans or not) find that offensive and deeply insensitive.”  The Conservative Party of Britain was absolutely astounded that the corporation in charge of her memorial would even consider playing it- it would upset more people than satisfy the few trouble makers. Lady Thatcher’s Biographer insists that in this case, thatcher is Dorothy and not the wicked witch….both point of views I’m sure came up during the her campaign in 1980. However, the debate was sparked because it has been top of the charts- and thus they have to play it whether or not BBC can define the basis of which something has reached the top if the charts. What is completely ridiculous is that BBC and the memorial corporation and itunes, are even having this debate in the first place- Broadcasters should be respecting the dead, and inappropriately playing songs that don’t have negative connotations attached to it even if its lighthearted.

The thing that strikes me as a bit odd, is Washington appears to be treating the threat of north Korea with the same policies they used back in the hammer and the sickle days. It doesn’t seem to the bother the White House in the slightest, that the intelligence disclaimer report enclosed that we are “moderately confident” Korea has the nuclear weapon… This is really excellent intelligence investigation, (but we all know the U.S has struggled with attempting to have clear foundation of policies that derive from unclear intelligence report; see 9/11.)

As such, CNN reports that pretty much, the US doesn’t exactly know whats going.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/12/politics/5-things-north-korea-nukes/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

“The U.S., the Korean peninsula and the rest of the world are on edge, worried about the possibility of an imminent missile launch.” Sounds, like reminisces of the communist scare….as such, the U.S plan to be treating it the same-  However, based on the following quote, yes North Korea will be classified as a nuclear state by the rate they are producing nuclear war heads- however, the U.S doesn’t like their territory to become infringed upon by a tiny communist state- it is a threat to the U.S’s potential to fully exert their power using the leverage of their many nuclear weapons…I don’t see any nation trying to stop the US from producing more nuclear war heads…

Still, with few than 10 functional nuclear devices compared to the more than 7,650 warheads in the U.S. arsenal — the tiny nation is at the dangerous infancy of becoming a nuclear state.

The intelligence report disclosed in the news articles using vocabulary, like “possibly” or maybe or we’re not sure…and attributes all their uncertainties that Kim Jung Un is a secretive guy…We knew more about Stalin and their plans with Cuba, and the later on in the space race, and Stalin “isolated himself much from the rest of the world.” just like Kim Jung Un. And yet, the US seems to have no answers, to plan for getting more answers and are acting pretty calm when they say “If North Korea launches a missile, how will we know if it is carrying a nuclear warhead? Basically, we won’t.”

This week in the U.S the Inter-American Reforms were halted, and is scheduled to continue.

This reform policy has been adopted in countries like Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Bolivia. The vote in the states of the OAS (organization of American States) was to “approve a series of reforms to the Inter-American human rights system, but stepped back from proposals that had caused the greatest concern among civil society groups” even though the vote was unanimous.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/03/controversial-inter-american-reforms-process-to-continue/

The reforms called to continue the dialogue regarding the core aspects for strengthening the Inter-American system, which includes the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and Court of Human Rights.- In a general sense they vote to strengthen the Inter-American system more broadly.

However, the article doesn’t clearly portray why some civil rights groups appose the series of reforms however, the article hints that the budget may have something to do with the uneasiness. There appears to be a funding discrepancy  and the organizations ensures that it will only cost citizens 2 cents a head. “On the other hand, for decades Washington (and Canada) has refused to sign on to the American Convention on Human Rights.” American has attempted to get funding from Nicaragua, Bolivia Venezuela, for the inter-Americas system however no one has obliged or donated except for the European Union- which has nothing to do with inter-American system.

As it concludes at the moment, full funding is attempting to be negotiated so that the countries and region eligible for the inter-american system. All regional countries agree funding needs to be incurred- however no country except for the U.S will help fund the program.

Earth Hour was earlier today, and according to Project Syndicate- earth hour is a colossal waste of time. Honestly, any reduction power is good, it can’t be harming the earth the shut off parts of the world at different time can it? 1.3 Billion already live without light and electricity when the sun goes down, however on march 23rd another 1 billion people of the world will participate in earth hour. (Why can’t it be earth day? Or have 1 day per month?) Apparently its quite a hoax according to P.S. Stating that its mainly so people can feel good about doing something active to save the world. “Earth Hour demonstrates one’s desire to “do something” about global warming. But the reality is that Earth Hour teaches all the wrong lessens, and it actually increases CO₂ emissions. Its vain symbolism reveals exactly what is wrong with today’s feel-good environmentalism.”

“Hypothetically, switching off the lights for an hour would cut CO₂ emissions from power plants around the world. But, even if everyone in the entire world cut all residential lighting, and this translated entirely into CO₂ reduction, it would be the equivalent of China pausing its CO₂ emissions for less than four minutes. In fact, Earth Hour will cause emissions to increase.Moreover, during Earth Hour, any significant drop in electricity demand will entail a reduction in CO₂ emissions during the hour, but it will be offset by the surge from firing up coal or gas stations to restore electricity supplies afterward.”

I found this quite shocking… Furthermore, P.S states that Earth Hour and their organizers teaches us to think that reducing CO2 emissions is easy and simple, and that Earth Hour is relatively pointless for the 60 mins it is and that all it is doing is making it harder to see in the dark…

So I recently posted about Obama’s pre-speech before hopping on a plane to Isreal. I read an article today on Global Issues.org that discusses how Obama has a plan to revitalize the ongoing peace talks….We all remember Jimmy Cater and the Camp David accord of 1978 or 1980 was it? Moreover, how many times are is American going to “revisit” “review” or “restate” the peace agreements in the Middle East. Secondly, I wouldn’t outwardly call America imperialist, but America’s investment in the Middle East (oil) I would argue hinders on their democratic political structure.

http://www.globalissues.org/news/2013/03/23/16165

Moreover, Obama states, “The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.” His call was a first for a sitting U.S. president, and a low-point in Israel-U.S. relations. Furthermore Obama states America’s plan that “the Palestinian people deserve an end to the occupation.” And a Palestinian state as “the homeland of the Palestinian people alongside the Jewish State of Israel,” How do we do this though? This question has been in debate for decades, the conflict and the fighting has been going on forever, but no matter Obama has the solution! He says: “How do we get sovereignty for the Palestinian people, and how do we assure security for the Israeli people? That’s the essence of this negotiation,”

This is truly foreign policy at its finest…if only Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Cater had thought of the art of negotiation as a platform for peace…Obama reassures the world in his plan that he doesn’t want to put the cart before the horse…Meaning when he solves the two problems the settlement issue will work itself out…

In Paxton’s article on “Women’s Suffrage in the Measurement of Democracy,” I found it fascinating that Paxton finds a casual factor or variable that causes past empirical research on democracy to be less reliable and valid in terms of measuring democracies. Paxton argues that if we factor in this variable, past emprical measurements on democracy could have less statistical significant. Women’s Suffrage variable compared with democracies can one, the measurements can affect the dates of transitions to democracies. Secondly, it can effect how the description of democracy is measured and third, can effect measurements on how democracies would be caused.

Paxton does assure her audience that this new found research is not original to herself, and that integration of women has been included in measuring political theories in the past.      “I demonstrated that changing an author’s measurement to include women also changes his dating of democratic transitions, sometimes by more than 50 years.” (pg 105) As such, Paxton’s main argument driving her hypothesis comes from analyzes authors such as Muller, and Huntington. She stresses that the critical problem with this kind of research is that “this paper has shown, however, in practice that criterion translates into male suffrage. The issue is that dichotomous categorizations ignore degree–a crucial issue if we wish to incorporate women.”

Paxton shows through her measurements and research that
“our current understanding of democratization may be underspecified
due to our focus on an exclusionary form of democracy,” meaning focusing on how male suffrage has correlated to transitions, causes, emergence’s of democracies. As such she also argues that past research from her study case have failed to place time, or transition dates of democracies in degrees- therefore Paxton claims if one were to measure democracy transitions in degrees-“would help resolve ambiguous transition dates.” Moreover, if measured in degrees it would make the women research more well rounded because “The factors affecting later degrees of democratization might be different than those operating earlier, because women gained suffrage during different historical time periods.” (pg. 106)

Arguably, I find the main empirical issue with measuring democracy is each study conducted factors a countries democracy adoption date differently which can cause a great deal of error when dealing with unanimous transition dates.

I’m not sure if many of you are aware that it is the Persian New Year, I don’t celebrate it. I only know from my grandfather who lived in Israel when he escaped WWII. The american position of Persians, is one of tension due to the tensions that have existed between the States and the middle east for many decades. President Obama released an address on the Persian new year on March 19th. He salutes and acknowledges the Persian new year (Nowruz) and then quickly uses the attention of the new year, to address the severity of the nuclear weapon problem in Iran- which is plaguing the U.S and the President’s administration. Obama after his address hopped on a plane to Isreal to convince citizens of the severity of Iran’s nuclear weapons and pleas to the citizens to convince Iran to prevent any further production of nuclear weapons unless they follow the US’s or global standards of nuclear production. It is interesting that Obama (almost appalling  that Obama chose Nowruz to harness support for the States nuclear plan for Iran.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/on-persian-new-year-obama-tells-iranians-citizens-pay-high-price-for-nuclear-defiance-1.510328

“Obama stated that the world is united in that goal, and said there’s a practical solution that would let Iran access nuclear energy – but that Iran’s government hasn’t shown its nuclear program is peaceful.” Obama then candy coats a threat by stating that if Iranians do not follow a peaceful nuclear weapon plan, then the US and supporting countries will be “denied opportunities that citizens from other nations enjoy, and  added that it will take a sustained effort to overcome decades of mistrust.”

…..happy new year…??

We were discussing this briefly today in class. During March Madness, office productivity is debated at great extent to decrease significantly. Arguably it is the most exciting or large scale sports event in the states. Furthermore, I think it is a step more emotional than regular association league sports because for many supporters are rooting for their own college. I found an article that says “while some experts say the office pools and chatter around the NCAA’s basketball tournament is a morale booster, just as many insist that it’s a productivity drain.” Warning: there’s a statistic ahead…(I attempted to use caution when I analyzed the validity or ‘realness’ of this study) “Challenger, Gray & Christmas, employees spend an average of three hours a day watching the basketball tournament during March Madness. CEO John Challenger estimates the goofing off costs employers $134 million in “lost” work.”

Moreover, IT workers in companies are the most effected during March Madness, espeically this year for ABC is live streaming all devices, pluse constant social feeds, and replays more so than the coverage in 2012.
“There will be game replays, video highlights and social alerts. The IT workers — [are] not pleased, fearing WiFi and office networks could slow to a crawl.” Slow internet and WIFI can be a real issue for company’s through the ‘madness’

Some IT workers are creating solutions to this problem, allowing exemptions for the CEO’s and senior exec’s of the company’s to watch live streams- 66% of a survey states they would only allow CEO’s to allow live stream- IT could ban the rest of the employees and already half of the IT workers surveyed have blocked work unrelated websites blackout the ‘madness’

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/03/20/march-madness-office-it-hate/

Since the recent rise in gun consumption following the more lenient gun control rules adopted by the state of washington…I’ve have been thinking about it more and more (since I literally sleep a stones throw  away from washington) I’d like to bring up the gun control argument. I realize its a never ending spiraling topic- much like democracy ..perhaps because gun control depends and can be affected by several different variables making a conclusion solution rather cloudy. Now the gun control issue is focused on Colorado. http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/20/headlines#3200

Right now all eyes are on Colorado who just recently passed through the senate the “most toughest gun control laws in the country. Colorado’s new gun law limits ammunition magazines to 15 rounds, expands background checks, requires domestic abusers to surrender their guns, and bans concealed-carry permits online.” One main argument for colorado was the attacks that happened in Aurora Colorado last year. However, if we look at Washington, if there was a recent shooting there that shattered the state- would tougher laws been established rather than the lenient ones?

Colorado passed this bill with barely any republican votes, but was able to achieve victory due to their democratic majority in the legislature. Colorado made history: “The bills signal a historic change for Democrats in a state where owning a gun is as common as owning a car in some rural areas.” Washington state failed to pass a background check clause to the gun control laws but colorado successfully succeeded. “New legislation makes background checks mandatory for private and online gun sales and bans sale of large magazine rounds.” This means that now, there will be greater controversy between republicans and democrats.

Republican think the decrease in magazines allowed for consumers will diminish the market and jobs in the state of Colorado. Being the state with one of the largest gun and ammunition manufactures (as we all know from 1999 Columbine) Republicans are outraged at the ban on large quantities of magazines being sold. Manufactures are threatening to relocate- while the Republicans threaten the Democrats that the (Republican) voters will take it out on the Democrats in the next election…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/21/colorado-gun-control-legislation

As I said, this is one part of the argument of gun control, one tiny part of the complex issues surrounding the nations gun control dilemma’s.

I was unaware of this (probably because I am so immersed in school work) But today, or march 21st for those of you who are reading this later; CBC reported a car driving off the B.C Ferries….with a female body recovered in it.

It would be interesting to measure and see in the last 20 year the likelihoods or number of cases a car has purposefully or accidently driven off a B.C ferry and see what the rate is- because to hear this is absolutely ridiculous. B.C Ferries is supposed to be one of our provinces big tourist gimmicks the “look how west coast we are” hype. This really puts a damper on this notion in my opinion. We could probably compare ferry boat accident in correlation to motor boat accidents or even car crashes? what is the probability of having a ferry boat accident or something “out of odds” happen on a large boat. I’m sure we haven’t forgotten the cruise that accidently caught fire and stranded its passengers… and now this!! The article doesn’t say much, expect the car sped through the car deck and out the other side of the chain link fence. It seems like there is some sort of accident or potential suicide (apparently) on a ferry boat every year now. I still remember in 2011 having my show be interrupted when  a BC ferry collided into the Horseshoe Bay Terminal…Ship accidents I understand, but what is the likelihood of a individual speeding through the deck to plunge to the sea on the opposite side…must be randomness.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/03/21/bc-ferries-gabriola-crash.html