Monthly Archives: August 2007

Useful ‘Mattress Comparison Index’

Being one who justifies his fanatical comparison shopping by the public good side-effect of keeping markets efficient, I am particularly irked by the tactics of mattress sellers.

As is well known, most mattresses sold in the US are made in a small number of factories. In order to make comparison shopping hard, the mattress provide “unique” product lines to each major retailer. By making minor adjustments to the fabric or something and changing the (almost inevitably ridiculous) model names they sell under, Sealy and the like make price comparison shopping impossible. And they allow each possessor of a 'unique' line to make price-matching guarantees that they know are meaningless since no one else carries goods with the same name.

That's why I'm glad there is a Mattress Comparison Index which (says it) tells you which silly name is comparable to which other silly name.

Even armed with this information there is still a lot of product out there and field testing these things is both ridiculous and not particularly informative. It's easy to dismiss many mattresses as too soft or too hard, but that leaves a large range of choices, about none of which I feel confident about how they will feel in a year.

I wanted to illustrate this with a picture of Li'l Abner in his role a professional mattress tester, but while I could find some of him, there were none of him at work, which somehow seems fitting.

Incidentally, I was surprised to learn that professional mattress testers really exist!

Posted in Shopping | 8 Comments

Vista Apostasy

Jim Louderback, outgoing editor of PC Magazine, writes about why he's soured on MS Vista. Money quote: “If Microsoft can't get Vista working, I might just do the unthinkable: I might move to Linux.”

I wonder what former PC World editor, and Vista enthusiast, Ed Bott has to say about this.

Posted in Software | 4 Comments

Interesting State Secrets Decision

Secrecy News brings word of a really interesting state secrets decision from the DC Circuit:

In an unusual move that may signal a new, more discriminating judicial view of the state secrets privilege, a federal appeals court has reinstated (pdf) a lawsuit which a lower court had dismissed after the government invoked the state secrets privilege.

The lawsuit was originally filed in 1994 by former Drug Enforcement Administration official Richard Horn who alleged that the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency had unlawfully eavesdropped on his communications while he was stationed in Rangoon, Burma.

The government asserted the state secrets privilege in 2000 and moved for dismissal of the case. The government motion was granted by the D.C. district court (pdf) in 2004.

But in a June 29, 2007 decision (that was unsealed on July 20), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the dismissal. The Court did not dispute the government's invocation of the state secrets privilege, but concluded that there was sufficient unprivileged evidence on the record to permit the plaintiff to argue his case.

“In many state secrets cases, a plaintiff has no prospects of evidence to support the assertions in his complaint and this lack of evidence requires dismissal. Here, however, Horn [the plaintiff] is not without evidence,” the Court said.

The Court presented its ruling as a straightforward application of established principles, including fairness to the parties.

But in a sharply dissenting opinion, one conservative member of the Court said that the decision to reinstate the lawsuit could fundamentally alter the use of the state secrets privilege.

“The majority's reversal of the district court's decision,” wrote Judge Janice Rogers Brown, “pushes this circuit's state secrets jurisprudence in a new and troubling direction — one at odds with all other circuits that have considered the issue.”

The case was remanded to the district court level for further deliberation.

See the unsealed Appeals Court ruling “In Re: Sealed Case,” June 29, 2007.

Note that Janice Rogers Brown is on every short list of Republicans whom the Administration might seek to promote if a Supreme Court seats opens up. And that she's seriously extreme.

Posted in Law: Constitutional Law | Comments Off on Interesting State Secrets Decision

Justice!

Feds pay $80,000 to couple arrested for wearing Bush protest T-shirts.

It's nice when the Constitution wins one.

Posted in Civil Liberties | 10 Comments

TMP Collects “Gonzales’ Top Six Fibs”

TPMmuckraker collects “Gonzales' Top Six Fibs”.

Isn't one too many?

Posted in Politics: The Party of Sleaze | 2 Comments

Too Tame By Half

Jim Henley writes in No More Mister Nice Gal:

If I needed to describe the Laura Rozen Style in two words, they would be “quietly devastating.” Rozen prefers a level tone, sparse verbiage and the assembly of relevant quotes. So it tells you where we are that she writes something like the following:

There’s a solution no one has thought of here. Congress needs to come back and pass legislation to make perjury no longer a crime. If Gonzales is the example of how you are allowed to lie to Congress, just take it off the books as a crime. Did anyone ever think of that? The Judge Alberto Gonzales Lying is a Sometimes Necessary Form of Protected Free Speech Act of 2007.

Of course, my first reaction is, don’t give them ideas.

But of course the first commentator sets Jim straight:

Congress doesn’t need to legalize perjury. It’s an inherent power of the Executive. And anyway, the power to perjure was reaffirmed in the Authorization to Use Military Force.

Now, that, I can see them arguing.

Update: It has come to my attention that some people need the relevance of the above explained to them. If you are one of those people, look here.

Posted in Politics: The Party of Sleaze | 1 Comment