Allo?

On July 1, 2008, California will join most of Europe in banning cellular phone handsets in cars. This is one of many areas of the law where California has become more European. The move comes at a time when communication gizmos are multiplying faster than the Jolie-Pitt family and tech-savvy consumers are working overtime to keep up with the innovations. Now we'll have to leave those fancy innovations in the glove compartment and install the cyborg earpieces over our pinnas.

I'm upset about the ban because I won't be able to use my new handset in my car. I got this nifty little communication gadget from the phone company a few weeks ago and have completely fallen in love with it. It's a flexible wire designed to drape over your hand with a microphone attachment for your pinky finger and a speaker over the thumb. You can purchase the wires in different lengths for smaller or larger hands so that the attachment fits snugly against your skin. As the salesman at the phone shop told me, there is nothing worse than a loosely moored phone.

The wire for the mic and speaker attach to a hub, which is about an inch thick and has a five line LCD screen with a green backlight reminiscent of early DOS computers. Most users like to keep the phone on their left hand, but I prefer the model oriented for the right, since it lets me look like the guy in the promotional material. The phone is almost impossible to misplace because as long as you have your hand, you'll have your phone.


Cingular is in talks with Hwang Woo-Suk, a South Korean biomedical scientist, to develop a microchip which can house all the phone's information. A keypad will be placed on the back of the user's hand, but no other changes will be made. I have volunteered for an experimental installation with Woo-Suk and could be experiencing the bliss of total connectivity as soon as next year.

I'm really happy with my flex phone and was looking forward to using it in my car this summer. Instead I'll have to pull it off quickly when I'm pulled over and tell the patrolman that I was just faking a phone with a hang loose symbol. Honest, officer, who talks into their hand? If only Tatum O'Neal had such creativity.

Lineage Index

As you may know the underprivileged are very important to me. Those who have a rougher lot in life or just can't make it for themselves need others to step up for them and I have devoted great swathes of satirical and song writing toward victim's advocacy. The victims of persecution need to be comforted and protected by society. The descendants of victims should receive similar compensation, to make them whole again and repay the ancestral debt their fathers incurred.

One of the policy objectives that, if enacted, might help achieve lineage equality is the Lineage Index. The Lineage Index allows society to determine the victim-hood of particular individuals (while including calculations of parental suffering) and deliver compensation in the most American way possible: hard cash.

An index should have a way to punish (or give a disincentive for particular behavior) and reward (give reparations). But more on that later...

We can divide up the world's current population and the history of human beings into four broad categories, broken down below for your convenience:

1. Those who have contributed mightily to the advancement of their species.

Examples: Thomas Edison, Gertrude Stein, Moses, John Hancock, Alfred Kinsey, Isaac Newton and Ludwig van Beethoven.

Rule of Thumb: They are “good guys” who can be described accurately with one name (Edison, Newton, Beethoven, etc).

Verdict: The descendants of these men can be proud of their heritage and may bear their name proudly.

2. Those who have proven themselves utter scoundrels, undeserving of societal recognition and praise.

Examples: Adolf Hitler, Hissène Habré, Charles Taylor, Charles Manson and Michael “Cosmo Kramer” Richards.

Rule of Thumb: They are “bad guys” who can be described accurately with one name (Hitler, Mansen, Kramer, etc).

Verdict: The descendants of these people deserve to live, but the law should recognize the total social depravity of their ancestors and make life hard for them.

3. Those who have shown their virtue in the midst of adversity and have endured persecution from some of the mightiest oppressors.

Examples: Oliver Brown, Dred Scott, Rosa Parks, Oliver Twist, Martin Luther King Jr. and Tupac Shakur.

Rule of Thumb: “Good guys” whose deeds are even more amazing in light of the circumstances in which they were performed.

Verdict: This category is highly subjective and its determination is best left to the experts.

4. Life was too easy

Examples: John D. Rockefeller, Bill Gates, George Soros, Warren Buffet and Martha Stewart.

Rule of Thumb: CEOs of the biggest companies and those who inherited their wealth.

Verdict: If they make Fortune's list of richest people, they are so filthy rich anyway that their children won't need any help from the Lineage Index.

Lineage experts will, no doubt, create many smaller, more specific, divisions that better represent the complexity of human decision making. Some probable categories include “should have known better, but didn't,” “welfare king/queen,” “tried hard,” “didn't try hard,” “rough draw,” “single mother,” and “wanted to do better, really tried to do better, but freak circumstances turned person into total victim.”

The Lineage Index will be calculated by social, economic, religious, historical and cultural experts who will be charged with evaluating the merit of individual candidates. These experts will be placed on a committee where they can work full-time conducting historical research and making value judgments of others. These factors will all contribute to a person's Legacy Rating.

Rather than making toothless decisions, the committee's index will be linked to national tax rates and those with greater redeeming social value (a higher number on the index) will be given preferential treatment. For example, a single black mother of fifteen who is a direct descendant of Rosa Parks and who watches Oprah on TV will not only not pay taxes, but will probably be eligible for an Earned Tax Credit (ETC), which will compliment her income. By the same token, a married white male with an SEB goatee and shaved head who a distant cousin of Stalin and whose grandfather is was a Klan member will not only pay the normal tax rate, but have to pay the taxes of the single mother in the first example as well.

The ETC would function as a great social equalizer, providing an incentive for appropriate behavior. Not only will an offender's descendants be taxed heavily if the patriarch misbehaves, but they will lose the opportunity to access a wealth of funding in the ETC. This system has the added benefit of promoting morality. People would need to think of the impact of their actions because their decisions will impact not only on themselves, but all of posterity. Imagine: If Adolf Hitler had had children and he knew that the invasion of Poland would have turned his offspring into social outcasts, would he have signed the secret Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? Would Hissène Habré have committed the atrocities against the Hadjerai and the Zaghawa? I thought not.

Punishments for ancestral sins will become less severe as the generations propagate and the impact of misdeeds will be lessoned as more time goes on, if those that follow can demonstrate a change. For example, Cosmo Kramer's children will be hurt more by his racist rant than his grandchildren.

The Lineage Index would be exclusively responsible for determining tax and subsidy rates. No political tinkering or kickback allowances would be permitted and the system would be based solely on ancestral, family and personal benefits to society.

This balanced system could even be used in personal interactions between people. Boyfriend and girlfriend could analyze the socio-economic and moral implications of their union prior to marriage and thereby choose only the mate that is best for society as a whole. Business dealings could be simplified by having all parties announce their lineage rating prior to a major deal to reduce the risk of anything underhanded. Even law enforcement could be made more effective if, instead of profiling suspects based on race and economic demographics, a more holistic measure were deployed. By weighing their interactions with others by the lineage rating, true social homeostasis would be maintained.

Another key benefit to the lineage index is the assurance that people with moral genes will have money. Rather than depending on derelicts for financial donations, charities will be ensured of financial stability as philanthropic humans who give generously will probably have a better lineage rating. The system could even be set up to encourage donations, by allowing for rating improvement through charity giving. The scale would, of course, have to be adjusted to give greater preference to minorities, but that's a problem for the lineage committee.

If effective on the national level, the index might even be implemented globally. New experts with diverse opinions could be invited to the lineage committee and the entire index could be updated to reflect world-wide standards of ethics and decency.

The Lineage Index has the potential to radically change the way governments and societies function. Rather than assuming all rich are socially destructive miscreants whose very financial existence must be punished, the Index taxes and rewards based on meaningful factors like parental morality. And, if implemented fairly, it has the potential to significantly reduce the number of victims worldwide.

Unhealthy Campaign

I am starting a new campaign. Over the next few days, I plan to call every phone number in the residence listings and knock on a few hundred doors in my vicinity to pass out the four color fliers I recently had printed up. The campaign's scope will be local and grassroots based at first, but I have a plan to expand it to include national political candidates, talk shows and television ads (keep your eyes open during the Super Bowl).

My issue: Health. Americans are just too healthy. They walk around like Muscle and Fitness models sporting unnaturally large biceps and thighs that would raise steroid suspicions if sported by professional athletes. They spend excessive amounts of time pumping iron and burning fat in their gyms, country clubs and golf resorts and it shows. Americans look better today than they have in years and no one feels worse about the situation than me.

When I pass good looking people on the street, I feel self conscious about my own soft folds, soda gut, limp arms and balloon tush. I don't look like Ryan Seacrest, in fact I don't look anything like Ryan Seacrest, so when I pass the square jawed, tight bodied specimens, I feel woefully inadequate. I could grow a beard to cover the double chin, wear baggy clothing to hide by belly bulge or slip shoulder pads under my T-shirt to make my shoulders look stronger, but all of these solutions are temporary and superficial fixes that do little to solve the health problem. They're also really tacky.

There are probably a handful of people who feel just like me; social outcasts who can't make it into the “beautiful people” clubs or start hyperventilating after five seconds on the Stair Master. We are human beings too and deserve the respect of healthy people. It's not our fault were fat, slovenly, scurrilous (yes, scurrilous) pigs who rusticate our days away watching reruns of inappropriate (yes, inappropriate) TV shows.

My campaign hits the heart of the health concern. The problem is, after all, health and not clothing or some other aesthetic element. People are just too healthy and that makes us insalubrious folks feel terrible. We're not flagitious, but we are fat. And we want respect.

By bringing everyone to the same physical and health level we can ensure than no one succeeds based on looks alone. We know that God looks at the heart while man looks on the outside. After my campaign, everyone will have to look at the heart for any beauty. The arrogant buff folks who currently populate our country will be reduced to crying over the scales and watching their bodies loosen. Can you imagine a more vindicating feeling?

If you want to join the unhealthy campaign, call your local politicians and radio stations to argue against the creation of new public swimming pools, parks, tracks, hospitals or anything that could conceivably promote health. Consider asking your city counsel to create tax incentives for fatty foods and high carb beverages. Have soda machines installed in your elementary school and host Twinkie sales for pre-schoolers. The younger we can hook kids on unhealthiness, the more likely they will end up looking like personified GoodYear blimps.

Finally, believe in this campaign. We can promote unhealthy lifestyles and encourage obesity across this great land. This strategy can work. You and I don't have to feel self conscious at the public pool or worry about the snide comments our neighbors will make when we go for a walk (or waddle as the case may be). We can beat this health epidemic and, with your help, bring all America's bodies to the lowest common denominator.

State of the Union 2007

The following is a transcript of President Bush's State of the Union Address as delivered on January 23rd, 2006, The Most Depressing Day of the Year:

Mrs. Pelosi, loyal members of the GOP party, Zillary Clinton, Baruch Obama, and You, Time’s Person of the Year:

Bill Clinton, when he was president, set the time record for the longest State of the Union Address ever. He clocked in at just under six hours and forty minutes, a real feat given his heart condition. I always admired people like Clinton, Harry Truman and Jimmy Stewart who could chew the air for hours like that, so today I want to beat Clinton and enter the record books as the biggest windbag ever to sit in the Oval Office. [CHEERS]

Actually I’m just kidding. I’ll say a thing or two about the war and then we’ll all be out of here. [BOOS]

As is customary about this time of year, Karl prepared a speech for me to deliver outlining the last twelve months and road-mapping the next twelve. It is the year two double “o” seven and that brings new challenges and more burdens to our nation; challenges and burdens the newly empowered Democratic Party is just itching to handle. [APPLAUSE]

Congress has changed and so have our responsibilities. No longer will cost cutting and reducing wasteful spending be meaningful goals for this formerly august body. No longer will we hide our ties to special interest groups. No longer – [APPLAUSE] No longer will we hold back the incomes of the poor, disenfranchised, entitled and reparation worthy (that is to say, the minorities) of this great land. No – [SUSTAINED APPLAUSE]

Thank you. That’s probably enough on that point.

You all came out here today, not to vote more money for your districts or find a way to criticize our hardworking troops abroad (although you’ll probably find a way to do that when the party really gets started when I step down), but to listen to my analysis of the state of global affairs.

There is a common misconception that this speech is constitutionally mandated. It’s not. I could faint right now and my duties as President would still be fulfilled. That’s just an important thought to keep in mind as we get into the controversial content.

We have a duty as politicians to step forward, to make flowery speeches in disaster regions, to hawk our nation’s posterity for a couple cheap votes and to generate quick fixes for America’s most pressing problems, fixes that won’t come undone until the next Party is in office. Those are our duties. Sometimes we come short, but we always try.

Next week I’ll have a full report on the state of our economy. Our trillion dollar government machine couldn’t get it done before the deadline and so nobody really knows what’s going on in the financial world right now. When I do, I’ll sit down with Jack Abramoff, Speaker Pelosi, the two Clintons and Reverend Jesse Jackson to iron out some meaningful economic solutions.

I have a few ideas that I’ll bring to this culturally, ethnically and ethically diverse group.

First, it's high time we balanced the budget. There's been a lot of talk in this chamber about the budget, and most of it has been a waste of time. The fact is, almost all of government spending is pretty much essential, and many programs are underfunded, like research grants to make cars run on grass and money grow on trees. Cutting funding to the arteries of America's success is not the answer. [APPLAUSE]

Cutting taxes is also not the answer. We ... [APPLAUSE] Well, apparently you get the idea. So, I urge Congress to balance the budget without reducing spending or increasing taxes. It is only in this way that we can hope to keep America fiscally and economically strong. [APPLAUSE]

Before I talk about my other proposals, I want to take a moment to recognize my darling wife, Laura Bush, who spends her time every day doing the kinds of things the rest of us only do on the campaign trail. Her hard work and dedication will pay off when she runs for president in 2016, by which time she will be the second most battle-hardened politician in the country, right after Chelsea.

Now about that second idea. Money has a way of seeping through our government like water through a strainer. It can't be stopped. Just can't. [PAUSE] One thing we can do to make us feel better about the situation is earmark that money so everyone knows who it was wasted on. That's right, instead of just dumping tax dollars down the sink or leaving it out in the sun for buzzards, so to speak, we'll assign it to specific money-wasting projects so at least we'll know where your retirement money ended up.

Third, I want to talk about Social Security. The idea of forcing younger people to pay for you gets more and more attractive every day, which is a big reason I supported old people benefits from day one. And that's also why I want to make sure it's still around when I get old. That is, older than I already am.

I warned you people last year that Social Security was a mess, and I worked hard to get it fixed, but some of the people in this chamber were too obstinate to work with me, and the ones that tried to help got kicked out of office a few months ago. [APPLAUSE] Last year, I warned you that unless something changed, we'd be faced with three foul-smelling options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Well, nothing changed, and I'm here today to break some sad news. We'll have to pretty much do all three, after which Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security will probably die out anyway. [APPLAUSE]

The public education system is all about imparting knowledge and character to America's youngest. Decades of testing have demonstrated the only real source of knowledge and character is what people? Say it with me: taxpayer dollars! That's right, one more time! Hear that echo?

It's come to my attention that some people in this great nation - mainly the ones that arrogantly hire and support thousands of workers - aren't paying their fair share. Which is why I'd like to encourage Congress to continue to support the No Taxpayer Left Behind Act, which closes the economic achievement gap by bringing the rich back to the level of the little people. And where does that leave us here at Capital Hill? [SUSTAINED APPLAUSE]

Health care is a big weakness here in America. Some of you here in this chamber believe we should socialize it - make it all free. We are inexorably moving in that direction. [APPLAUSE] I'm a conservative, which means I need to have different ideas about health care. I have no illusions, however, about where any of this is headed. So here's a way we can all be happy. We'll make all kinds of complicated tax breaks and schemes for poor people. This will have many effects: everyone will think their taxes are being lowered, the IRS will take on more employees, and best of all, the arrogant rich will get fleeced to pay for the ever-needy poor. [APPLAUSE]

As you can tell, health care is a sore spot for me. I guess the more time I spend with Dick, the more bitter I become. It's terrible what the doctors have done to that guy. He's practically half-machine by now. Almost inhuman. Imagine. Our Vice-President, a cyborg. Kind of blows your mind just thinking about it.

Okay, I guess we should address the elephant in the room now. You know, the little thing we have going on in the Middle East. That is to say, Saddam Hussein's former country? That really spells it out, doesn't it? You know, so much has been said already about this politically charged topic that I don't see anything to add to the dialogue. You know where I stand; I know where you stand. So let's move on. [APPLAUSE]

Dick and I have been through a lot. We have met challenges and faced dangers, and we know that more lie ahead. Yet we can go forward with confidence - because the State of our Union is strong ... our cause in the world is right ... and tonight that cause goes on. [APPLAUSE]

Ski Stunt Extreme

After my adventures on the frozen slopes, I discovered a Javascript application that simulates the motions of a real skier called Ski Stunt Extreme. The skier can be manipulated by pushing buttons on the computer keyboard and by moving the mouse. Tricks can be performed and high speeds can be attained. The game looks like a lot of fun.

Before going further, it is imperative that the faithful FCN few understand my gaming habits. Whilst some of the FCN writers are veritable aficionados of the computer gaming industry, my needs are very well satisfied by Jetpack and Microsoft Hearts. This adherence to games that were made over a decade ago is partially due to personal preference (the dizzying colors boasted by modern games give me an equally dizzying headache) and partially due to necessity.

You see, my computer, affectionately called “Steve,” suffered a violent crash a few months ago that destroyed his drivers, which, I am given to understand, are important in the operation of a game. (Not that poor Steve could ever run a very fancy game on his economy CPU, poor thing). I could take the time to browse the Internet and locate his lost drivers (especially the video card driver which, in its absence, gives the screen a blurry quality), but I am beginning to like Steve's austerity and am falling in love with suddenness of his system noises.

(To all potential future wives in the reading audience, note that this attitude extends only to the computer world and would never be applied to a spouse. Never.)

Jetpack barely runs on my computer and Microsoft Hearts fares little better. Such advanced games as Halo for PC or Unreal Tournament are out of the question entirely. I was perfectly happy with this arrangement until I discovered the aforementioned Ski Stunt Extreme.

The game is a beauty to behold. In order to help describe it, I was able to locate a YouTube video that portrays some of its characteristics. While the visuals are decent, I am afraid I cannot endorse the music that accompanies it. Please mute your sound and watch this:

“Addictive” doesn't scratch the surface of this game's impact. It is the liaison between the gaming gods and teens with too much time on their hands. It is the ultimate representation of arcade beauty. As soon as I watched this video, I knew I could spend hours making the little character do face plants in the snow and that I would laugh for hours as he bonked his noggin against sharp boulders.

Unfortunately, as I went to download Ski Stunt Extreme (executable file here and Javascript demo here, if you are interested), Steve informed me very loudly, with a series of disruptive system sounds, that he would be unable to run the program. Errors popped up saying that my drivers (or lack thereof) were incompatible with the game and that in order to enjoy the fun I would have to leave my rigid stringency behind.

I was crushed. To think that such an amazing game, the ultimate in time wasting technology, was so close to my mouse yet so far from my motherboard.

I took the news with controlled emotion; I would not sacrifice Steve's innocence to play a game.

Today, Steve lives on without his drivers and I survive without Ski Stunt Extreme.

Politics is like show business

This is a class note contributed by a female fan. Obviously, we at FCN are very excited about this because it is the first conclusive proof we've encountered that females read this blog (besides our moms).

Its theatre is packed with patrons who eagerly await temporary pleasure, caring not about long-term consequences. They have riches, and will spend them indiscriminately. They have morals, but will cast them aside without discernment. Perhaps there is somewhere else they should be going, but in their ignorance, they have forgotten where.

The politician enters the stage. He is an entertainer playing to a captive audience. His face, painted brilliantly, conceals who he truly is. Through a delicate dance, he courts the majority of the crowd. He only needs the approval of half to make a buck. The rest are irrelevant to him.

This dance becomes inappropriate. For a split second, his fans wonder if something is not right. Weren’t there guidelines for behavior? A few walk out of the theatre. Others vocally protest and must be removed. Yet the entertainer’s presence is more powerful than ever- the majority cannot leave.

The guidelines don’t matter, the onlookers decide. They never did. The entertainer knows best.

In a moment, another character appears. Deliberately and slowly, he enters the stage. His face is ghastly for lack of paint. His voice is plain; his movements simple. He struggles to deliver a message, but it isn’t what the people want to hear. There was a time when entertainers were different? Ludicrous. Make the old-fashioned fellow go away. Perhaps he thinks he is an entertainer. But to the audience, he doesn’t compare.

And so the entertainer restarts his dance- hips swaying to the music, eyes full of flame. His opponent is gone; his fame is secure. Laughter and excitement resume again. He pleases the people, he notes proudly, that’s all that matters in the end.

The theatre reeks with the wine of democracy. But everyone is too drunk to care.

Minimum wage hike not big enough

As aspiring minimum wage earners, we here at FCN took the news of the House of Representative's approval of a wage hike very seriously. Yesterday the House passed a bill that would increase wage rates for the lowest earners in America. Over two years, pending approval by the Senate and a signature from Mr. Doesn't Veto Anything, the minimum wage in the United States will increase by just over two dollars.

Quite frankly, we oppose this measure, but not for the same reasons as our gun toting, tobacco chewing, "let them starve" brethren. While the yellow toothed of America make a compelling argument, we oppose the wage hike because it is yet another example of Congress tackling a problem with the effectiveness of J. Pierpont "Ponty" Finch and leaving a nasty predicament for the next guy.

The goal the wage hike is undoubtedly noble; ensuring that no member of society is left behind is as American as welfare checks and WIC coupons. But somehow this bill misses the point.

Why ensure partial wage equality when full egalitarianism is knocking at the door?

This bill ignores major wage discrepancies on the higher end of the earning bracket and also deprives middle class employees of a wage increase. In short, it leaves too many behind.

There are two ways Congress might have achieved the parity goal without compromising with mediocrity.

The first is to set a higher minimum and would be called the "No Worker Left Behind Act." If Americans can "survive" on $7.10 an hour, wouldn't they do "better" with 8.00 or 9.00? Heck, why even worry about the "living wage" and cost of living concerns? Wouldn't ten dollars an hour help the lower income families hoist themselves out of poverty? How about twelve? Fifteen would allow them to save and maybe invest in real estate. Sixteen, argue some experts is the ideal wage.

We here at FCN are of the opinion that an appropriate minimum is somewhere between fifteen and twenty bucks an hour. That covers the movie and girlfriend funds pretty well and would allow us to eat out at least five times a week. And wouldn't twenty dollars an hour be doable for the richest nation on earth?

Under the No Worker Left Behind Act, employers would have the freedom to set individual incomes based on the productivity of a particular worker. A successful employee could earn as much as he or she deserves, but they could take comfort in high floor from which they operate.

Who knows? If the wage is increased enough, all poverty might be eliminated!

The second strategy is to establish a flat national income and is called the "All Workers Left Behind Act." The income of everyone from George Soros and David Beckham to Kevin Federline and Isaac Cohen would be averaged and all Americans would make a decent wage. It wouldn't matter if you were an entertainer, physician, bedpan cleaner or floor sweeper; the wages would be the same for all.

This creates a uniform society where no one has any claim to greater success than anyone else. It would eliminate jealously, vehicular pride and thievery. Can you hear the happy sighs? They sure sound like utopia to me.

Unfortunately, the political wind isn't blowing the right direction and a complete evisceration of the capitalist system may take a few more years.