By Dawn's Early Light

No Wonder Why I Drove So Crazy

A new study, as reported in the Washington Post, by the National Institute for Health indicates that adolescent brains do not fully form their risk aversion until age 25.

This is especially a problem with teen driving.  The study reveals young adults will take on risky behavior especially when accompanied by their peers.

Participants took the test alone and with their friends in the room. Researchers found that those in the two younger groups consistently took more chances with friends present. Those 24 and older behaved equally cautiously, regardless of whether friends were watching.

The results help show why teenagers are more likely to drink, take drugs or commit crimes in groups, he said. They're also reflected in auto crash statistics.

According to the Arlington-based Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the chances of a crash by a 16- or 17-year-old driver are doubled with two peers in the vehicle and quadrupled with three or more. "Every passenger you add increases the risk," said Alan Williams, chief scientist at the institute. The brain and behavior studies, he said, "certainly tie in with what we know."

It will be interesting to see if this leads to lawsuits from the pre-25 crowd that wants to exit contracts such as military service or early marriage.  Several states are considering laws banning mobile phone conversations while driving for drivers under 18.  More studies will be planned and follow-up research done. 

From personal experience, my friends and I were very prone to reckless driving in our youth, especially from age 16 to 18. Looking back, my friends and I have realized how we felt little fear of our own or others' mortality.  As I grew older and wiser, these fears increased while driving.  Now I know a bit more of the science behind the teenage risky group think that drove us to dangerous driving.

The Oscars - Sideways

My wife and I saw our third Oscar contender for Best Picture on Sunday, "Sideways".  This smaller, independent film is loved by the critics.  If you love wine, wine tasting, wineries and mid life crises, you will love Sideways.  The premise is a bachelor party week tasting wines outside of Santa Barbara for two former college buddies, one a failed writer and the other a mostly failed actor. 

While there is plenty of wit and good dialog and great information for wine connoisseurs, we found it difficult to care for the plight of either of the characters.  The lead is brooding, and the supporting actor (played very well by Thomas Hayden Church) is a philandering, self-centered groom-to-be.

I think this is receiving positive press from Academy members because many of them may be boorish males in their mid-lives going through problems finding meaning.  That is obviously overly harsh, but we were at pains to see what the critics love in this film.  I like Million Dollar Baby and The Aviator, in that order, over Sideways.  I must see Ray, though. I hear it is a wonderful and powerful performance.

Spinning with Your Head in the Sand

Daily Kos is probably the most often read liberal blog.  Here is another example of why the Democratic Party is in the political wilderness (for a long time to come by the looks of it).  Kos writes:

The administration, press, and wingnut blogosphere is all atwitter over the "successful" Iraqi elections.

But the fact that 8 million Iraqis voted is not the measure of success. Just like catching Saddam wasn't, or occupying Baghdad or transfering "sovereignty". Those events are miletones toward the ultimate outcome, but unpredictive whether that outcome is victory or defeat. And elections, historically, aren't the end-all be-all for defeating insurgencies. There was Vietnam, 1967:

United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.And nations with vicious civil wars, like Guatemala, El Salvador, Colombia, Sri Lanka, Peru, and so on staged elections (of various legitimacy) even while facing down insurgencies.

January was the third bloodiest month for US and allied troops. Will that cease now that Iraqis have voted? Nope. Will economic sabotage of Iraq stop? Nope. Will the terrorists lay down arms? Nope. Will the insurgents? Nope.

The war will continue unabated.

For the good of American democracy, I hope Democrats do not implode the way the Tories have in the UK after Margret Thatcher's era.  Good democracy works with a strong opposition party.  As James Madison said in the Federalist Papers (#10):

Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires.

Statements like the above will further alienate voters and will leave the Republicans as an unchecked majority.  Many voices are needed; however, let's hope they are reasonable.

UPDATE: Christopher Hitchens (a pro war liberal) has an excellent piece in Slate on why Iraq is no Vietnam.  Kos should read it.

UDPATE 2: Dean Barnett of SoxBlog has an excellent article in the Weekly Standard about Kos and his influence on the Democractic Party (2.2.05)

Democracy

Orange is now the color of the Ukrainian democracy.  Purple must be the color of the newly minted Iraqi democracy.  Is nothing sweeter than the color of Purple?  All of those pictures of Iraqi men and women holding up their finger stained purple by ink to register their vote. The purple ink was used to keep people from voting multiple times, but it became a far more powerful symbol of Iraqi freedom and courage to risk their lives for a better future.

Watching the millions on television come out to vote in Iraq was an answer to prayer.  It was a truly beautiful sight.  With voter turnout higher than most Western countries, it is impossible for foes to decry them as illegitimate.  Several Iraqi bloggers captured their thoughts and shared them along with pictures.  It is a good reminder of how much people covet freedom and democracy.  Visit Healing Iraq, Iraq the Model, or Hammorabi for good local coverage, pictures, and democratic pride.

It was painful to listen to the BBC and CNN on XM radio in the first hour of the voting.  Hearing the English accented reporters who claimed the turnout was a "disaster" was grating and so untrue.  Both the New York Times and Washington Post ate a little crow about the turnout (from Real Clear Politics) and the clear desire of Iraqis to have freedom.  The liberal line of democracy being only a Western concept or that it cannot be "imposed" on people of different "cultures or religions" will now give way (though only for a time) to the new party line.  Top contenders to watch out for: 1) the Shias, Kurds and Sunnis will not come together for a constitution; 2) the insurgents (should read terrorists) will undermine and kill the new parliament; 3) the US is not providing adequate forces to protect the new government, and various other memes.

President Bush has shown tremendous leadership in the midst of worldwide criticism.  Now the tables turn a bit.  How can France, Germany, Russia and China not accept the results of an overwhelming democratic election?  How can our "European allies" (ie., France, Germany, Belgium etc.) now not give assistance?  More hypocrisy I am sure will follow.  Secretary Rice's visit to Europe will be very interesting to follow as she will be in the position of power with our nay-saying "allies".  I am very proud of our country's support for Iraq, as well as our British, Polish and other Coalition partners. 

But the larger issue of our European allies and their response is the effect democracy in the heart of the Middle East will have on neighbors.  Now that Egyptians, Syrians, Saudis and Iranians see democracy, how long will they wait before demanding reform of their own regimes? 

Democracy vs. American Exceptionalism

I am reading Samuel P. Huntington's "Who Are We?".  He casually makes the observation:

If American identity is defined by a set of universal principles of liberty and democracy, then presumably the promotion of those principles in other countries should be the primary goal of American foreign policy.  If, however, the United States is "exceptional", the rationale for promoting human rights and democracy elsewhere disappears.

I am a believer in "American Exceptionalism", that the United States is a unique and special country with a special destiny.  Or, put another way by Jonathan Winthrop, America is a "City on the Hill".

Huntington's words are challenging to me, for if he is right that each idea is mutually exclusive, then we cannot have both democracy in the Middle East by the hand of America and believe that America is a unique country because of its democracy.  However, I firmly believe, as stated here in this blog, that democracy throughout the world is fundamental to preserving American democracy in the long term.  I also firmly believe in American exceptionalism.  How else to describe the continued desire for millions to come to our land, for other nations to look to our lead, and the Providence that seems to have been shown upon our land?

Cannot we have a world where liberty is the desire of all people and that the United States is blessed with the virtue and calling of promoting it?  American exceptionalism runs beyond our democratic institutions but includes the core of our history and national identity.  The United States stands for liberty, opportunity, equality, prosperity, religious freedom and the right to dissent.  Based on our country's Protestant roots, there is an evangelical quality to our desire to spread democracy. 

While I believe the United States to be exceptional, I do not believe that this will always necessarily be the case.  As long as our nation is true to its core values and the ideas rooted in the wisdom of its founding, America will continue to be exceptional.  A secular America will lose its evangelical passion to promote democracy and would slip into the abyss of relativism, and that would, frankly, leave America a second version of Europe. 

Election Predictions

Here are some quick election predictions for Iraq:

• Overall voter turnout over 50%, possibly as high as 55%.
• After the 3 insurgent, top lieutenant arrests in the past several days, violence will not be as bad as the media has predicted for voting.
• Voter turnout in the 4 difficult provinces (majority of terrorist attacks) will be around 40%.
• The elections will be accepted by the majority of the Iraqi people.

I hope the above comes true.  I pray for the brave and courageous Iraqis who will take their future in their hands as they go to the polls today.  Will democracy work in the Middle East?  Afghanistan and Iraq are the big examples.  The Palestinians, in a post-Arafat world, will be the other example.  I believe, as does the President, that all people wish to have freedom and that democracy is not only a Western ideal.

The Oscars

My wife and I enjoy films.  We have not seen as many in the past several years, but we have seen the two main contenders for best picture (if Drudge's link can be believed).  Here are some comments on "The Aviator" and "Million Dollar Baby":

The Aviator

This film gives the viewer a window into Howard Hughes' life from the time of his early 20s, filming his extremely expensive "Hell's Angels" film about WWI pilots, to his Senate battles and successfully flying the famous "Spruce Goose" for the only time.  Leonardo DiCaprio is excellent in the film, and I am a person who despised Titanic.  Cate Blanchett, as a young Katherine Hepburn, is dynamic in the role and convincing. 

In the film, Hughes is a brilliant man, a clear visionary and patriot, but mentally conflicted with an obsessive-compulsive disorder that practically destroys him.  My wife did a good amount of research online after seeing the film to find out more about Hughes.  The film does not address his childhood, his parents, or his sad end in a Las Vegas hotel.  However, the performances are rich and the story compelling. 

The Million Dollar Baby

If you loved "Unforgiven," then you will love "Million Dollar Baby."  It almost seems as a modern day version of "Unforgiven," with Clint Eastwood and Morgan Freeman playing similar roles as before.  Instead of an old retired gunslinger out to fight one last battle with his willing sidekick, played by Morgan Freeman, Mr. Eastwood plays a boxing trainer agreeing to train his last boxer, Hillary Swank.  Mr. Freeman narrates the film and pushes Clint's character to train a "girl".  The film, like Unforgiven, has a morality tale focus, though it does the best job of any film I have seen explaining boxing.

I disagree strongly with the moral conclusions that Mr. Eastwood's character and Hillary Swank's character choose.  However, it does deal honestly with the struggle they face.  Hillary Swank deserves a best actress Oscar for her role.  She is extremely believable as an aspiring boxer. 

I lean towards "Million Dollar Baby" even though I disagree with its ultimate moral reasoning.  There is more to this film to digest and reflect on, and I believe it will be the more enduring picture. 

If I could nominate a film that I enjoyed the most, with a great family story and wonderful character development and action, it would go to Pixar's "The Incredibles".  As Roger L. Simon says (who actually voted):

To be fair, I should have voted for The Incredibles number one for Best Picture, because I am sure in future years it will be the most watched movie of 2004.

I agree wholeheartedly. 

Text Messaging Saving Lives in Iraq

While we all hear and read many depressing stories about Iraq, and most of the reporting is overwhelmingly negative (see Arthur Chrenkoff's statistical analysis), here is a good story of Iraqis using cell phone technology to help the Americans capture the terrorists and rebels killing Iraqis in their cities.

Iraqis are text messaging warnings to American soldiers about possible attacks, bombs and insurgents in their neighborhoods. 

"U.S. and Iraqi officials insist they are getting more tips from Iraqis about insurgent activity since the Americans transferred sovereignty to an interim government last June. Interior Minister Falah Hassan al-Naqib said recently that calls to an insurgency hot line have produced a number of arrests, although officials refuse to give figures.... But few Iraqi civilians want to risk being seen as informants. That's where text messaging comes in. 'That way, they're not seen leaving their homes,' said Marine Sgt. Justin Walsh, of Cleveland."

These are good signs prior to the election. 

A Bold Vision

President Bush may not have the oratorical skills of FDR, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan or even Bill Clinton, but his speech contained a treasure trove of insight to where President Bush wishes to take this country.  And a bold vision it is!

What I believe the mainstream media missed with Dr. Rice's testimony I expect them to miss on Bush's speech.

The speech seemed more directed at an audience on foreign shores than it did for the domestic audience.  We become immune to hearing the words "democracy", "liberty", and "freedom" because they are used so often.  President Bush used them today, but instead of them being the usual color for a speech, they were policy points and deep-held convictions.

President Bush's charge and the heart of his message came early:

"We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

The speech brought to mind John F. Kennedy's inaugural address when he eloquently said:

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

While the United States did help promote democracy during the Cold War, it did not do so with the passion and energy our nation needs to now pursue it.  The Cold War was about pragmatic compromises, supporting unsavory dictators as well, especially in the Middle East, to keep countries in the US sphere rather than the Communist sphere. 

In a post Cold War world, where different ideologies dominate the world debate, the old paradigm of working with unsavory nations cannot continue to ensure US security. 

I believe President Bush was not just trying to hold ground and promote his democractic changes in Iraq and Afghanistan, but instead was laying down the gauntlet to totalitarian states:

"All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know:  The United States will not ignore your oppression or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.... The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know: To serve your people you must learn to trust them. Start on this journey of progress and justice, and America will walk at your side."

The next four years will bring about a major push to expand on the spreading of democracy in the world.  It is vital if we want to protect our liberty as well.

Comedy Break - JibJab is back!

If you didn't know already, the latest (3rd) JibJab web film is out.  With the traditional folk music and funny characters, this video is funny.  Maybe not as good as the first or second, but well worth watching.  Click here for a bit of political comedy.