DEBRIS.COMgood for a laugh, or possibly an aneurysm

On a recent daytrip to Bodega Head, we hiked down a steep trail to the beach to spend an hour exploring the tidepools. And to occasionally get chased out of them by a big incoming wave.

The official trails runs along the ridgetop in the right third of the panorama. The descent is easier than it looks from above, which probably explains why we so rarely see people at the bottom.

President Bush’s approval ratings have been steadily declining since the day he took office. There have been three exceptions to that trend:

• the 9/11 terrorist attacks
• the US invasion of Iraq
• the capture of Hussein

Graphically, Bush’s numbers tell a compelling story of a failing administration.

I made this graph after wondering what Bush’s chances of re-election are. I thought they were much better than this. If the election were held today, according to Gallup’s approval ratings, Bush would get about 49% of the vote — which in the opinion of the US Supreme Court is a majority. I meant that to be a joke, but it’s actually not funny.

Anyway, as I studied this graph I realized that the President’s staffmembers must be studying it too. The Bush administration is known for being media-savvy; get the full scoop on the president’s “advance team” of choreographers, lighting designers, and staging experts in this NYT article, Keepers of Bush Image Lift Stagecraft to New Heights. If Bush has a personal lighting designer, he’s certain to have someone who reads the polls every day.

Which means Bush knows the only thing that can rescue his declining approval ratings is an act of aggression. Look at the graph — war is the only thing Bush ever got respect for.

Where does that leave us, in these nine months before the election? Due for conflict, I’m afraid.

And it’s worse even than that. The capture of Hussein was a small blip on the graph. The invasion of Iraq was slightly larger. The one thing that really sent Bush’s approval ratings through the ceiling was his macho-aggressive speech after the WTC bombing.

So, in terms of approval ratings, the best thing that could happen to the Bush administration would be for the US to be attacked again. That’s a pretty ugly conflict of interest.

(The data in the graph was collected by the Gallup Organization and reported at PollingReport.com. For those of you who doubt my graph is real, feel free to download the source data I used. Dump it into Excel and see for yourselves.)

In search of a band to join, I traded several emails with a guy whose band seeks a new drummer. I was impressed by the guy’s ability to articulate what he was looking for. He drew extended comparisons to various drummers and bands I respect, citing as influences numerous artists I like.

At one point he wrote of his band’s original music, “it’s almost a perfect blend of the Police and Rush.” This had an impact. I like both those bands, and I think both Stewart Copeland and Neil Peart are amazingly talented at the drum kit. (I bought the Oysterhead disc just to hear Stewart Copeland play.)

So I went to the band’s next gig to check them out before committing to an audition. I didn’t really know what to expect, but my anticipation level was high.

Here’s the first clue that I might be in for a surprise. The gig was part of a local Heavy Metal Wednesday show. I noticed, but drew no useful conclusions.

Here’s the second clue that I might be in for a surprise. There was a smoke machine onstage. I began to wonder what I’d gotten myself into.

Here’s the final clue that I was definitely in for a surprise: the lights come up, a huge power-chord sounds through the PA, and the four guys standing on stage begin head-banging in unison. With smoke. And then the singer started barking.

I heard no Police. I heard no Rush. Actually I heard no melody either. I mean no disrespect to the band; each one of the guys had plenty of talent. The music was very much not my style though… too little dynamic change, too few hooks, too much distortion, too much straight time. Part of the problem was the mix; it wasn’t bad per se, but I couldn’t discern much music through the wall of noise.

I laughed at how surprised I had been. I really hadn’t asked the right questions. But now I’ve got a good checklist for next time. (“You guys don’t do any unison head-banging, do you? Will I be expected to do unison head-banging? What about studded collars and wristbands, are those actually required?”)

“26 members of Congress criticized CBS for rejecting the [MoveOn.org commercial].”

“Apparently, [CBS] is more comfortable with dirty old men than innocent kids.”

Four statistics describe how often this site is updated:

• number of days this week
• number of days this month
• number of days this year
• number of days since the site was launched

All are shown as percentages. For example, if I post something to the site on Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday, my posting rate for the week as of Friday would be 3/6 or 50%.

I put these counters together so site visitors can get a sense of how frequently the site is updated. There are four counters of decreasing recency so that when taken as a group they would reflect trends. For example, as I write this, my overall (site-to-date) post rate is 55%, but this month I’ve been writing much more than that. So far this month (and this year), I’ve posted on 87% of days.

By subtracting these values from 100, the reader can calculate a related measure, which I call the “Flake Rate” — the percentage of days I’ve flaked by not writing. I chose not to display these counts because I don’t want to tempt Fate. She is tempting enough already.

Current values appear elsewhere on this page, under the calendar.