Will his people prevail?
Violence spilled over from Tibet into neighbouring provinces as Tibetan protesters defied a Chinese government crackdown while the Dalai Lama warned that the area faced "cultural genocide" and appealed to the world for help.
1989, the military arrested peaceful protesters and Hu Jintao declared martial law for 14 months. This time around, China's one-party leadership has another incentive to muffle protests: the Olympics. China won the Games after assuring the International Olympic Committee that it would respect human rights. The Tibetan uprising is thus a major embarrassment, all the more so because Beijing has been increasing its heavy-handed control of the province. The Olympics were supposed to be a showcase for Chinese progress. Instead, the government's fear of political dissent and its authoritarian overreaction are showing the world that far too little has changed since Tiananme
ina must hope, and friends of Tibet must fear, that when the Dalai Lama dies, much of the momentum towards Tibet's eventual freedom will die with him. Don't count on it. Tibet will still be a country that is ethnically and culturally very different from China. It's not a question of preserving Tibet's ancient culture; that hangs on in remote villages, but it's mostly gone in Lhasa. It would have changed anyway. Mobile phones and the internet would have undermined Tibet's oppressively religious polity, already being reformed by the current Dalai Lama, just as they are doing to China's version of communism. It's a question of identity. The fact remains that Tibetans feel Tibetan. No amount of economic development will change that. It's also true that China is implacable in its determination to stay put. Only a settlement that allows Tibetans genuine freedoms and economic equality will bring lasting peace. And that means meaningful agreements with the Dalai Lama. Only then will Tibetans begin to trust the Chines
The duelists.
Lacking a clear route to the selection of a Democratic presidential nominee, the party’s uncommitted superdelegates say they are concerned about the risks of a prolonged fight between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and perplexed about how to resolve the conflict.
The New York Times interviewed dozens of undecided superdelegates -- the elected officials and party leaders who hold the balance of power for the nomination -- found them uncertain about who, if anyone, would step in to fill a leadership vacuum and help guide the contest to a conclusion that would not weaken the Democratic ticket in the general election.
When will the Democratic primary fight ever end? In Pennsylvania next month? At the convention in August? And when it does end, who will be left standing?
So what is a poor Democratic Party to do... besides sing for a rock and roll band? With two tarnished candidates lumbering toward the convention, this may call for more drastic medicine. There's a great old book about baseball by Ring Lardner (published 1916) called "You Know Me Al." Maybe everyone should start reading it. It begins this way: "FRIEND AL: Well, Al old pal I suppose you seen in the paper where I been sold to the White Sox..."
Hillary Clinton needs to convince the remaining uncommitted superdelegates to split for her by about a 2-to-1 margin. The only way she can get a split like that is if she can persuasively argue that Obama is unelectable. And the only way she can do that is to make him unelectable. Some people have treated this as an unfortunate byproduct of Clinton's decision to continue her campaign. It's actually a central element of the strategy. Clinton campaign Mark Penn is already saying he's unelectable. It's not true, but by the time the convention rolls around, it may well be.
The Jayhawks' colors? Red and blue.
Today is the day: The nation will find out which 65 teams have been invited to the NCAA Tournament to decide the national champion of men's college basketball. And on Monday, offices across the land will be abuzz with employees figuring out the brackets for their office pools -- many of them illegal.
An estimated 3 million people participated in online brackets last year, placing $2.5 billion on illegal bets and costing their companies $1.7 billion in lost productivity.
Why do we go so crazy for March Madness? And is there an upside to your office pool?
Responsibly operating a first-class office pool wasn't a completely selfless act. Running the office pool allowed me to study the sociological curiosity that is homo predictus up close and personal. It was a regular anthropological expedition every March.
And over the years I've developed a few theories as to why everyone and his brother, cousin, aunt, uncle, mom, dad, cat, and neighbor's in-law's second-niece twice-removed can't resist filling out a bracket.
Theories? Well, I've developed one theory: Americans like to gamble, especially if it's vaguely verboten. Indeed, the wink-wink illicitness of bracketology adds to the bonding experience. The NCAA pool is the modern-day version of bath-tub gin.
It happens every year, and next week, it'll happen again, and if you're the manager or owner of a company, you may be wondering if you should let it happen: The March Madness office pool.
Actually, don't worry. As it turns out, there are good business reasons to keep your college basketball office pool going. According to a recent survey conducted by Harris Interactive, of the 44% of American workers who have participated in an office pool, 45% of them named office camaraderie as the main reason for doing it. Thirty-six percent of the people participating do it for the love of money; 15%, for the love of the game; 2%, pressure from their other co-workers.
In other words, the study suggests that you're actually fostering teamwork if you let your staff participate in a March Madness office pool.
