Windy

Some thoughts on a windy Sunday afternoon.

While I was looking at our camera this morning, comparing it to the one we gave our daughter (not quite as powerful, but substantially the same), I noticed a button on the switch that turns the camera on. I'd never noticed the button before, so I went looking through the relatively thick users manual, all full of tiny print and pointing arrows. I could not find it. So, my thought on that is: why can't I have an interactive file on the camera that is invoked by and displayed on my PC, so I can walk through what I'm looking for? It's got to be possible. Okay, at least the storage part -- the 'invoked by', maybe not so much. (Turns out that the button unlocks the Mode Lever, which I'd have called the Mode Dial, so that you can select either Shooting or Playback. I must have been pressing it all the time with my big fingers and never realized it.)

Articles continue to laugh at Daschle and his withdrawal. Some says that Americans are tired of a dual standard, which I think is true. The articles tend to give the impression of a mighty unrest in the country relative to the concept of the idea of separate rules for the powerful and for the rest of us. I don't think that exists. I suspect that though most people don't care for the idea of such duality, they don't usually care so long as they're reasonably content about their future. I think it's the general feeling of uncertainty with their future prospects that leads to the sense of discontent , and when (!) the economy recovers, I suspect the general feeling of discontent will abate. Not disappear, but become much less noticeable. At which point, the lobbyists and their ilk will feel freer to raise their heads up over the horizon again.

An article in the Washington Post says that the President intends to expand the functions of the National Security Council, which will be headed by a retired Marine general, James Jones. That worthy is quoted as saying that 'he will run the process and be the primary conduit of national security advice to Obama, eliminating the "back channels" that at times in the Bush administration allowed Cabinet secretaries and the vice president's office to unilaterally influence and make policy out of view of the others'. Eliminating, huh? That'll be a neat trick. But it did make me wonder. Other than open and frequent multi-participant communication, how do you eliminate back channel maneuvering? I'm thinking it's got to come from the President -- he's got to ensure that information coming to him comes only -- or substantially -- from the approved channels, and everything knows what those are. Oh, god, do I HAVE to talk to Rahm the Destroyer?

In about three weeks, I go see the ortho surgeon again. I'm hoping he'll say I can do without the brace. He'll likely say I need to go to therapy, though, which - eh. I'm not thrilled, but, okay. And I went to church this morning for the first time in a month. That wasn't particularly moving, but the brief discussion on the way back with my daughter on the subject of belief and religion, that was pretty neat.