I was reading up a bit on the Soviet-Afghan war of the 80's when I came across a picture of the Afghanistan flag circa 1980-1987.
It struck me that the flag's seal looked a lot like Professor Chaos (Butters from South Park).

Anyway, according to the Wikipedia entry, here's what the seal actually represented:
"...a rising sun (a reference to the former name, Khorasan, meaning "Land of the Rising Sun"), a pulpit and the Qur'an for Islam, ribbons with the national colors, a cogwheel for industry, and a red star for communism"

Because I'm quite sure that everyone wants to know what I have been reading (I'm like Oprah in this way), here's a brief update.

It had been a good long while since I read anything noteworthy. I ran into a string of disappointing books and struggled to find anything I liked. Among the disappointments was "Martin Chuzzlewit." I guess I am just not a Dickens fan, but once in a while I give him another try.
Finally I took up the Stieg Larsson trilogy upon a recommendation from my parents. I was impressed. All three books were very entertaining. Two thumbs up.
Yesterday I bought a few used books, including a couple by P.G. Wodehouse. I've heard lots of good things about him over the years and finally decided to check him out. I've made a decent start on the first and I am impressed again.
I expected the humor to be a little dated. It is that, but still he's quite funny. In lots of ways the stories remind me of very old sit coms- the humor is along the lines of Burns and Allen or I Love Lucy. And those were good shows. Plus, since Wodehouse predates them by a couple of decades maybe they were actually stealing his style and material.

The Mad Procrastinating Handicapper Makes His Pick

I'll pick Blame in the Breeders Cup Classic.

Wow. That was easy. I wish I'd thought of making picks after the race a long time ago.

It was a great two days of racing. I don't know who came up with the Breeders Cup idea, but it was a good one. It's a great event every year.

I ended up just a few dollars down for the weekend.

While at work Friday I was a little perturbed because for some reason I couldn't bet by phone. I was even angrier when I lost out on a winner the 2nd race because of it. But it turns out I would have ended up at almost exactly even overall on the bets I didn't get to make, so no harm done.

Then today I lost big for a while, then made a steady rally for the last 3 races to almost break even again. Almost, but not quite.

It's that time of year. The days are getting chillier, kids are eating their Halloween candy, thoughts are turning to turkey, and the endless stream of pundits explaining what will happen in the election has morphed into an endless stream of pundits explaining what just happened in the election.

A popular topic among the pundits has to do with the packaging of respective messages. Apparently- and not surprisingly, considering the intelligence and attention span of the average person- it's important to have a unified, very simple message and express it all day, every day so that this very simple message sinks in.

It's finally occurring to me that the "conservatives" have a distinct advantage in this regard not because of better political gamesmanship but because of their actual beliefs about these issues. Almost across the board, their message is simpler because their belief is simpler.
I don't mean to imply (at least not in every case) that their belief is stupider. Just simpler. I tend to vote for the "liberals," of course, but I agree with the other side on some issues. And more often than not I believe both sides are completely full of shit.

But on almost every major issue, the so-called conservative stance is much, much easier to translate into an advertisement- whether on a commercial or a bumper sticker.

Just try to argue from each side as briefly and succinctly as possible while still being accurate. It is impossible in every case to express the "liberal" view in fewer words.

Here are some examples.

Abortion
Conservative: I'm pro-life.
Liberal: We are against abortions but in some cases have to consider what is best for all concerned.

Capital punishment:
Conservative: An eye for an eye.
Liberal: Uncomfortable moral implications and an imperfect judicial system have to be considered.

Taxes:
Conservative: Taxes should be lower.
Liberal: I'd like to lower taxes if possible but government serves an essential role and has to be paid for in some way.

Global warming:
Conservative: Global warming is a hoax.
Liberal: The great preponderance of scientific evidence is that global warming is real, that man is contributing to it, and that if something is not done there will be terrible consequences.

Gun control:
Conservative: Gun ownership is our right.
Liberal: We have a right to own guns for hunting, sports, and self-protection but must do something to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

That was just a few. I've thought of lots more. In every cae, I think I the "conservative" side is presented quite accurately. The "liberal" view is relatively accurate for each, but I would probably require more words than I actually used if I wanted to be as accurate as I was when stating the "conservative" argument.