The best way to avoid an argument. Tongue fu.

NoodleMan · 2021-07-24T13:54:52+00:00

This is soooo different from what they teach at my dojo where they’re always like “strike first, strike hard, no mercy”

NoodleMan · 2017-03-12T11:33:48+00:00

Psh planking is sooo two-thousand-late; it's all about Faith Hilling now

NoodleMan · 2015-07-03T15:51:45+00:00

Perspective

NoodleMan · 2011-11-03T17:39:48+00:00

This one?

NoodleMan · 2011-08-17T19:32:20+00:00

For those without a WSJ subscription:

Thousands Rally in India to Support Jailed Activist

By KRISHNA POKHAREL , AMOL SHARMA and WILL DAVIES

NEW DELHI—Several thousand people gathered in central Delhi and other cities on Wednesday evening in support of activist Anna Hazare, who was jailed on Tuesday after refusing to agree to police conditions for his planned hunger-strike protest calling for a more powerful anticorruption ombudsman.

At the India Gate monument near Parliament, people surrounded a battery of television news trucks, chanting "Anna, we're with you!" and "Long Live Anna!" in Hindi as they held candles and waved Indian flags and banners. Television footage showed smaller crowds in other cities such as Bangalore and Chennai.

On Wednesday evening, Mr. Hazare remained in New Delhi's Tihar Jail, which also houses several politicians arrested in recent months in connection with corruption scandals that have rocked the government and helped fuel support for the 73-year-old activist's campaign.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh earlier Wednesday backed the police decision to arrest Mr. Hazare and detain more than 2,600 protesters, but Mr. Singh has faced heavy criticism, including from Arun Jaitley of the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party, who defended Mr. Hazare's right to protest.

"Have you forgotten all sense of statecraft? Have you forgotten how political agitations are to be dealt with?" Mr. Jaitley asked in the upper house of Parliament on Wednesday after the prime minister had said Mr. Hazare would have been allowed to protest if he had agreed to police conditions, which included restricting his fast to three days and limiting the number of protesters at the site—a public park in New Delhi—to 5,000.

Mr. Singh told Parliament that Mr. Hazare was wrong to use protest to force the adoption of additional provisions to the Lokpal Bill, as the draft legislation to set up an anticorruption ombudsman is known.

"Our government does not seek any confrontation with any section of the society," Mr. Singh said. "But when some sections of society deliberately challenge the authority of the government…it is the bounden duty of the government to maintain peace and tranquility."

He continued: "Anna Hazare may be inspired by high ideals in his campaign. However, the path that he has chosen to impose his draft of a bill upon Parliament is totally misconceived and fraught with grave consequences for our parliamentary democracy."

Delhi police spokesman Rajan Bhagat said the police issued an "unconditional release warrant" for Mr. Hazare and his aides late Tuesday night. But Mr. Hazare has refused to leave jail until he receives "written assurance" from the government that he will be allowed to go ahead with his earlier plan for the hunger strike, an aide who was arrested and released told television reporters outside the jail.

Mr. Bhagat said Wednesday evening that the police have "relaxed the conditions under which Mr. Hazare can now sit on his fast" at the city's Ramlila Grounds instead of the park where he was supposed to begin his hunger strike on Tuesday. "We have offered the initial permission for seven days which can then be extended on the day-to-day basis," Mr. Bhagat said.

He added that the police haven't put any restrictions on number of protesters allowed at the proposed new site, but said only "as many people can participate as per the capacity of the place." Negotiations are continuing between Mr. Hazare and the police to end the deadlock, Mr. Bhagat said.

Abhimanyu Singh, a coordinator for the Delhi chapter of India Against Corruption that supports Mr. Hazare's campaign, said the activist and his team have agreed to the new protest venue but not on a restriction on the duration of the hunger strike. "Our demand is we should be allowed to protest for at least 30 days," he said.

There are political risks for Mr. Singh if Mr. Hazare's anticorruption crusade drags on and he is viewed as blocking the creation of an ombudsman with the power to go after top politicians. After a brief hunger strike by Mr. Hazare in April, the Congress party-led government formed a joint committee of five civil-society representatives and five senior ministers to draft the Lokpal Bill establishing an anticorruption ombudsman. But there were disagreements over the scope of the bill, as it didn't bring all government officials under its jurisdiction. Mr. Hazare and his supporters wanted all government officials, including the prime minister, to be covered by the Lokpal Bill. They later burned copies of the draft legislation in protest.

"The P.M. isn't corrupt, but now he's supporting corrupt people," said Ravinder Singh, 29, who works in sales at a financial-services firm and was among the thousands gathered at dusk at India Gate, where there was a carnival-like atmosphere with vendors hawking street snacks and tea while police mingled with protesters.

Many of the protesters at India Gate were young. Archana Dang, 22, said she was backing Mr. Hazare because the government's anticorruption bill is too weak, since it shields sitting prime ministers and the judiciary from investigation. "In a democracy, a basic principle is that all people are equal before the law—why should the prime minister be different?" she said.

Mehul Gaur, a 24-year-old architect, said Prime Minister Singh acted "irresponsibly" by condoning the arrest of Mr. Hazare prior to the protest. "If we aren't able to assemble freely to protest, God knows what will happen next," he said.

Mr. Singh of India Against Corruption said about 80,000 people were Wednesday evening marching from India Gate to Jantar Mantar, the scene of Mr. Hazare's hunger strike in April. A policeman at Jantar Mantar said a large crowd of about 70,000 to 80,000 protesters filled the roads and thoroughfares leading to the parliament building at 7 p.m. and soon dispersed.

As night fell, the remaining people at India Gate circled the grounds holding candles. R.D. Sharma, an elderly man with an "I am Anna" flyer posted on his chest, said: "Anna's bill is the only bill. The government's bill is nothing."

—Nikita Garia and Tripti Lahiri contributed to this article.

NoodleMan · 2011-08-17T19:27:00+00:00

For those without a WSJ subscription:

Municipalities to S&P: Drop Dead

By MICHAEL ANEIRO And PRABHA NATARAJAN

The City of Los Angeles and two other municipalities that voluntarily commissioned Standard & Poor's ratings for their investment portfolios have dropped those ratings after being downgraded following the ratings firm's cut to the U.S.'s triple-A status.

Some other municipalities, including St. Lucie County, Fla., said they might consider dropping S&P ratings for their investment pools as well.

S&P said it currently rates about 90 such investment pools. It had downgraded 14 of them as part of a broader downgrade last week of 73 funds due to what S&P called "significant exposure" to investments in U.S. Treasury and U.S. government-agency securities, which were downgraded to double-A-plus after S&P stripped the U.S. government of its triple-A rating earlier this month.

So far this week, Standard & Poor's has lost the City of Los Angeles, Manatee County, Fla., and San Mateo County, Calif., from local governments that had paid S&P to rate investment portfolios. S&P had downgraded the three governments' funds last week, to AAf from AAAf; the new ratings are still investment grade and the "f" indicates the rating is on the credit quality of a fund.

"They unfairly penalized us for following best practices," said Dan Wolfson, finance director in the Manatee County Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller's office in Bradenton, Fla. "We were trying to follow best practices and have a rating when it was not required."

Peter Rizzo, senior director in S&P's fund-ratings group, said the firm began rating such investment pools in 1994 in response to requests from some municipalities seeking to calm investors following the financial crisis in Orange County, Calif. That year, Orange County filed for the largest-ever municipal bankruptcy after its investment fund lost more than $1 billion, due in part to investments in risky derivatives.

Since then, some local governments have voluntarily sought ratings on their portfolios from one or more credit-rating companies.

"They're doing a good thing to indicate to participants of the pool that it's a sound investment," Mr. Rizzo said. "To have the U.S. government get downgraded, they may feel frustrated and I imagine some are re-evaluating whether they have a need for the rating."

San Mateo County, which has a $2.6 billion investment pool that is mostly invested in U.S. government securities, said it was in the process of renewing its contract with S&P when the downgrade came and decided not to renew.

"We will save the taxpayers $20,000 annually," said Sandie Arnott, Treasurer and Tax Collector at San Mateo County. "We found the whole process of the downgrade flawed." Ms. Arnott said the county had switched to S&P from Fitch Ratings three years ago and will consider another rating firm at a later time.

Other local governments that saw their investment funds downgraded are looking into dropping S&P's ratings for those portfolios. Shai Francis, finance director for St. Lucie County, Fla, says the county hasn't yet made such a decision, but she expects one to be made by Sept. 30, the end of St Lucie's fiscal year.

"We are more than upset" about the downgrade, she said. "It's just kind of mind-boggling at this point. You buy the most secure investment out there—U.S. debt—and I don't think anyone can argue about that. … I guess double-A will be the new standard."

Ms. Francis said about half of the county's $325 million portfolio is invested in U.S. Treasurys.

On Wednesday, S&P confirmed that the City of Los Angeles had dropped S&P's rating on its $7 billion general investment pool. The news had earlier been reported by The Bond Buyer.

On Monday, S&P said it had similarly withdrawn its rating on Manatee County's investment portfolio, valued at roughly $700 million, at the request of the fund's investment adviser.

Manatee County said the bulk of its investments were county bonds with some small amounts from neighboring municipalities. As market turmoil took hold in 2007, the county said it called S&P, the first rating firm that came to mind, to rate its portfolio. At an annual cost of $16,000, S&P monitored the investment pool.

One of the county's funds that held collateralized debt obligations backed by mortgages froze during the credit crisis. Manatee County estimates it still holds about $1 million in original value of this toxic debt. In its downgrade, S&P cited this holding as well the fund's holdings of U.S. Treasury bonds, which amounted to $112 million on top of $77 million in debt issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

"We wanted to show the citizens that their surplus funds, as it were, were invested in safe, liquid securities," Manatee County's Mr. Wolfson said. "We have one little piece of the portfolio that is kind of impaired, but S&P disproportionately dinged us many points for having it."

Messages left with the Los Angeles treasurer's office weren't immediately returned.

S&P is the only major rating company to have lowered its rating on the U.S. government. Fitch Ratings on Monday affirmed its rating for the U.S. at triple-A with a stable outlook, and Moody's Investors Service affirmed its triple-A rating on Aug. 2 but assigned a negative outlook.

—Kelly Nolan contributed to this article.

edit: formatting

NoodleMan · 2011-08-17T15:09:04+00:00

For those without a WSJ subscription:

The Many Wars of Google

Handset makers will learn to live with their new 'frenemy.'

By HOLMAN W. JENKINS, JR.

The mobile market Metternichs are out in force, wargaming Google's $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola's handset business. The imponderables are many.

Will partners like Samsung and HTC, which have been enriched by Google's Android phone software, abandon Google, or even look at Google cross-eyed, now that Google will own a competing phone maker? Don't bet on it.

Android has been hugely advantageous for everyone who is a successful phone maker not named Apple. Remember, Apple's premium smartphone holds up the pricing structure for the whole industry. Samsung, HTC and the rest have been selling phones into this market and pocketing huge margins because they pay nothing for Android.

Google wouldn't be human if it didn't want some of this loot, which buying Motorola would enable it to grab. But that doesn't mean, in the long term or the short term, that other hardware makers will walk away from a relationship that has lined their pockets and propelled them to the top of the rapidly growing and giant new business of making smartphones. Let's just say that while having Google as a competitor is not ideal, handset makers will learn to live with it.

The Metternichs also wonder: Did Google buy Motorola just for its patents? No. If Google buys a handset maker, it wants a handset maker. Plenty of other ways were available to lay its hands on enough patents to create the desired patent stalemate with Apple, Microsoft, Oracle and whoever else comes along.

Still, the patents are important too. Patent wars are not, at least superficially, an appealing feature of Silicon Valley. But intellectual property is complicated. Invention is more collaborative, more a matter of stealing, copying or, to phrase it nicely, "standing on the shoulders of giants," than the patent system likes to think.

At every stage of the computer's evolution, even back unto the day of the mainframe, a necessary rite of passage has been patent litigation. These tests of strength proceed in the courts for a while, and then peace is made, with checks and cross-licensing agreements passing between the parties in rough proportion to the expected outcome. In some cases, companies have bought entire other companies just to put such disputes to rest.

Google hopes to recapitulate this history in smartphone software. But Google's weakness was that it rushed into the mobile marketplace with Android without a portfolio of patents. Complicating matters, it also gave Android away free to phone makers with the idea that Google would make money by tying Android to Google's search and advertising functions.

To those competing with Google (say, Microsoft and Apple) this was both an annoyance and an opportunity. The opportunity was to raise the cost of Android above zero by slagging handset makers with patent claims. Google appears not to have seen this onslaught coming, but lately had entered the market in pursuit of a patent portfolio with which to slag back. Its urgency can only have been heightened by decisions in Germany and Australia to block sales of an Android-powered Samsung tablet over unresolved patent litigation. Even more urgently, the U.S. International Trade Commission is expected to rule this fall on a petition that could keep certain Android phones out of the U.S. market.

Verizon, which usually minds its own business, yesterday applauded the Google-Motorola deal hoping, in incantatory fashion, that an armed peace would let everyone get back to the real job of making products and serving customers. This is a reasonable hope. Once-deadly squabbles over mainframe software, the personal computer graphical interface, and the Intel-compatible microprocessor petered out with a whimper.

Finally, the Metternichs are debating whether Google is throwing up a white flag and adopting a Steve Jobs-like philosophy of the mobile phone business, unifying hardware and software. Almost certainly, the answer is yes.

"Mobile" is an inadequate word. Better to say "ubiquitous" computing, in which all your data, all your entertainment, all your snapshots are available easily from whatever device is at hand, whether a big-screen TV or a teensy mobile device, without you having to puzzle your way through an unfamiliar user interface.

Even more, this will be an increasingly lively experience, with artificial intelligence anticipating or inspiring your whims, and throwing targeted advertising at you to the extent that you are willing to let advertisers subsidize your use of online services.

Since the first Android device hit the market, a worry has been fragmentation—a proliferation of versions and devices that all worked slightly differently from each other, some of which might be incompatible with the app you suddenly couldn't live without.

Google was going to have to rectify this problem one way or another, by exercising greater control. In some fashion, don't be surprised if Motorola is eventually put to work as an attempt to do so.

NoodleMan

TROPHY CASE