Governor Race Polling, Pt. 2

As reported by Gordon Fischer a new WSJ/Zogby poll has the governor's race at Culver 48 - 45 Nussle. Still too close to call. Debate dates set. Three debates: October 2, 16 and 21 in Cedar Rapids, Davenport and Des Moines respectively.

Still nothing on IA-01 although Chris Bowers at MyDD echoes most of the beltway analysts by listing the race as Lean Democrat.

Governor Race Polling

Old news for most I'm sure. But Rasmussen has the governor's race a toss-up. Culver 41 - 38 Nussle. Well within the MOE. No published polls yet on the IA-01 race.

Blog Rules

I do not blog at work. Okay, sometimes I'll edit something that is in dire need. But for the most part I obey the firm's strict net use guidelines. What this means is that I blog almost exclusively at night and on weekends. Most weekends I'll start one or two drafts that I'll polish and post in the pre-dawn hours during the week.

But when lots of stuff is going down on the weekends, posting gets pretty thin. That's why. Lots of activities last weekend. This weekend off to hang out on the restored prarie of Laura's sister's spread just north of the Wisconsin Dells. I'll take pictures but all they have is AOL dial-up and I'm not sure I can stomach that.

Hang in there.

Bill Gates Will Burn In Hell Pt. 2

Heck, its only been eight-and-a-half months since the last time I had to spend several days dicking around with Windows. So, I don't know why I feel so violated having to restore a system that seems to be have been perversely FUBARed by my backup software!

I have a bunch of cool things I want to write on 4th Generation War and nattering nabobs of negativity but all is in abeyance until I get the home PC sorted.

I'll tell yout this much. This is my next computer.

Hmm, 17-inch or 20-inch?

City Manager Update

Jeez, they ain't exactly yelling, "stop the presses!" down at the Clinton Herald are they? Since Friday, near deadline there has been nothing in the local paper of record save one, hastily written story which was very short on details. Meanwhile, being owned by Gannett notwithstanding, the Des Moines Register is all over the story which has revealed some ham-fisted human resources management on both sides.

Koostra hired by Waukee City Councii albeit under a cloud of secrecy. Wha?

Waukee city officials on Monday hired a new chief executive and agreed to pay him $110,900 a year.

They did it without mentioning his name.

The 4-0 vote to hire Clinton's city administrator, Jeffrey Kooistra, was taken without discussion and came on the heels of a closed-door meeting earlier this month that drew criticism from open-government advocates.

Koostra also jumped the gun a bit in his resignation letter last Thursday, claiming that he had accepted the Waukee offer when in fact it was not official until yesterday's council meeting.

Kooistra wrote Thursday in his resignation letter, obtained by The Des Moines Register, that he had accepted the Waukee offer and expected to start work on Oct. 16. The letter was sent to Clinton Mayor LaMetta Wynn and council members. On Friday, one day after the letter was written, Waukee City Attorney Steve Brick said Kooistra was the choice for the job.

According to the contract approved Monday, Kooistra's first day in Waukee is Oct. 16.

Waukee Mayor Bill Peard said before Monday's official vote that Kooistra had not been formally offered the position in advance.

"I'm not quite sure why that was in the resignation letter," Peard said. "The job can't be offered until we meet and agree on a contract with Mr. Kooistra. We do know the law."

I can't think of a good explanation for this other than if someone in Waukee told Jeff that "it's a done deal, the Council meeting is a formality." Even if that was the case, it was unwise of Kooistra to tip his hand like that. The secrecy element has riled up Waukee residents and letting the story loose could have easily cost him the job.

Kind of a messy end there Jeff.

Help Wanted: City Manager. Cat herding experience a plus.

Well, shit. Jeff Koostra, Clinton City Manager is resigning to pursue an opportunity as city manager in Waukee, Iowa. First, let me just say that I wish Jeff the best of luck. He is an intelligent, honest, hard-working person in a very difficult position. I've met some sleazeballs in municipal governments (not necessarily confined to Clinton) over the years and Jeff stands out as a good guy.

You never know what you've got 'till its gone. I suspect we will have ample opportunities to miss Jeff Koistra in the next couple of years. On the other hand every time a door closes another one opens and all that. Perhaps we'll get lucky and lure in some young go-getter, who knows?

That said, I have to ask why he would resign before he has another position, unless the Waukee thing is a done deal after all. The Herald article is unclear on this. Looks like they rushed to press to get the story out and couldn't get any statements from Jeff or Waukee officials.

I'm also sure that I'm not alone in the opinion that Clinton has a lot going on right now. None of us who are working on the various things that the City has, or needs to have some involvement in, are especially looking forward to breaking in a new guy or gal. So, while Jeff has to do what Jeff has to do it's really going to blow for the rest of us.

I'm sure there will be more on this.

Post Script08/21/06, 0630 cdt. Over the weekend I am told by City sources that Jeff Koistra is the final choice for the position and that all that remains is for the Waukee City Council to confirm his appointment at their next meeting this week.

Energy Economics Wrap Up

Lots and lots and lots of interesting news and doings in the energy economy sector this past week or so. I confess that I haven't had time to completely read all of these myself. But the one thing is clear: among serious economists and capitalists, energy economics is rapidly gaining mindshare as a very important issue.

First off, from the excellent econ-blog, Econbrowser, comes an exchange with Dallas Fed Director of Energy Economics, Stephen Brown on the (free) WSJ Econblog on Will Oil History Repeat Itself Econbrowser coauthor and Professor of Economics at U.C. San Diego begins:

The price of oil has more than doubled in the last three years, going from $30 a barrel to now above $75. On previous occasions when we saw oil price moves of this magnitude, such as 1974, 1979 and 1990, the world economy went into a recession. What's different this time?

In my view, part of the answer has to do with the cause and timing of the oil shocks. In each of the previous episodes, oil prices made their move within the space of a few months and were caused by war-related cuts in oil production. By contrast, the current run-up has been a more gradual process extended over several years, caused by surging world demand running up against limits to what global producers can supply.

Brown, replies,

Rather, what we have seen is an expanding world economy driven by gains in productivity. The gains in trade with China and other countries have boosted output and labor productivity around the world. The increases in productivity hold down inflationary pressure even as they increase the return to capital investment and boost the demand for and the price of energy.

The result is strong economic expansion, a relatively benign inflationary picture, and rising oil prices. This describes fairly well the experience over the past few years.

Even though productivity gains and expanding world economic activity have been a major factor driving the price of oil upward, that does not negate the high likelihood that U.S. economic growth would have been even stronger had world oil supplies not hit capacity and oil prices had not risen over recent years.

The entire exchange is well worth reading in its entirety. Both men conclude that although the run-up in oil prices in the last three years has probably held back the economy to a serious degree, the gradual rise has allowed for individuals and corporations to reallocate resources to cope with them and thus has not led to an oil shock-driven recession.

One should also note though that both men caution that increased growth in consumption combined with the rather bleak outlook (not shared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration) for development of future reserves means that upward pressure on oil prices can be expected to remain high for the foreseeable future.

Which is pretty good news, actually. If prices continue to rachet up slowly then we have time to begin to transform our economies away from oil dependence. Enough time? Who knows? But, indications are that business leaders are starting to get it.

Witness this Business Week Special Report Wall Street's New Love Affair. A huge multi-article report on everything pressure being exerted on corporate boards to go green pension fund managers to solar energy's big comeback. The introduction states:

In liberal and conservative circles alike, energy independence is becoming a national imperative, and renewable energy is attracting an unprecedented array of groups. "We're seeing an alignment of the environmental interests, automakers, the agricultural industry, the security and energy-independence proponents, even the evangelicals," says billionaire venture capitalist L. John Doerr. "When did all those [interests] come together before?"

You know a cultural movement is real when the money men get on board. In just the past year a broad swath of financiers -- venture capitalists, hedge funds, investment banks, public pension funds, and even stodgy insurers -- have begun sinking billions of dollars into producers of ethanol, fuel cell superbatteries, microscopic bugs that turn glucose into plastic, environmentally friendly pesticides, anything that might tap into the green craze. Saving the planet, protecting America, doing God's work, cynically exploiting a feel-good trend -- call it what you will. Wall Street sees money to be made. When John V. Veech, a managing director at Lehman Brothers Inc. (LEH ), showed up at a renewable energy conference in June, he was amazed to see that it was standing room only. "If you went five years ago you'd see a lot of ponytails," he says. "Now these conferences are packed with suits."

I haven't had time to wade through all of it yet, but it is worth the read in order to see where these people are putting their money and how the "mainstream" business press is treating it.

Meanwhile, the Great Ethanol Debate continues. Vinod Khosla, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, serial entrepreneur, and venture capaitalist, who is now a very prominent investor and cheeleader for ethanol was recently called out by The Oil Drum's Robert Rapier, who's work on ethanol economics I regerenced here. Lots of electrons expended in this debate. Rapier's original post is entitled, Vinod Khosla Debunked. In addition to reiterating his own previous work on the viability of ethanol as a substitute for oil -- and that's the main thing issue, the idea that we can just continue with business as usual and use corn instead of Saudi Oil -- Rapier's main beef with Khosla's road show is:

People trust that he knows what he is talking about. The Wikipedia biography says he is “successful and influential”. Make no mistake; he is influencing people in this ethanol debate, including political leaders. Khosla is convincing people that his projections are viable. Yet, are they carefully scrutinizing his claims? No, because they trust him. Yet claims like his, will dampen conservation efforts, and Americans will not be prepared for Peak Oil. After all, Khosla, a guy they trust, says we are going to produce enough ethanol to replace our oil imports.

Khosla to his credit took Rapier's criticism seriously (another victory for the blogsphere!) and the conversation between Khosla and Rapier is written up by Rapier on the Oil Drum, in A Conversation With Vinod Khosla. Although Rapier pushes his own opinion forcefully, he does a very good job of summarizing Khosla as well. Khosla's own, unvarnished, pro-ethanol position can be found on this Google Video interview.

This entire set of links should take about two or three hours to go through. But at the end the reader will be rewarded with a very complete working knowledge of both sides of the debate on ethanol fuel. Worth every minute. Because, as the links above show, investment and policy decisions are being made now that will profoundly shape our economic future. If the economists are right, we have some time to play with to get our energy economics house in order. But a trip down an economic or resource dead end would probably use up what time we have to spare.

It seems to me the most conservative approach would be the following:

1. An energy policy approach that acknowledges that there is no single-solution to oil dependence and that allocates research and development to all technologies with the idea that each region will have a combination of technologies that is appropriate. Here in the Midwest for example, we are blessed with excellent wind, moderate solar and lots of biomass (ethanol). Whereas Phoenix and environs will be a solar paradise.


2. Leveling with the American people that, the Vice President's assurances notwithstanding, the American lifestyle is negotiable. It will either be handed down to us by the invisible hand of the marketplace, or it will be the product of some healthy debate and thought on the part of the American people. But things will have to change.

Dept Of: What Part of $3.50 A Gallon Don't You Understand?

Back in May, NY Times Know-It-All, Tom Friedman wrote (paywall) of General Motors' current business strategies,

"Surely, the sooner this company gets taken over by Toyota, the better off our country will be.

Why? Like a crack dealer looking to keep his addicts on a tight leash, GM announced its "fuel price protection program" on May 23. If you live in Florida or California and buy certain GM vehicles by July 5, the company will guarantee you gasoline at a cap price of $1.99 a gallon for one year — with no limit on mileage. Guzzle away."

And while GM officials immediately attempted to rebut his over-the-top but valid complaint, they have not yet shown any ability to you know, adapt to changing market conditions.

NY Time Reporter, Nick Bunkley writes:

As gasoline prices surge past $3 a gallon in most of the country and closer to $4 in some cities, sales figures show Americans are snapping up small cars that go easier on fuel and on their wallets. But none of the smallest cars are designed or developed by Detroit companies, which in the face of high gas prices are now highlighting another kind of automobile not usually thought of as energy efficient: the muscle car.

Ford Motor said Wednesday that it planned to build a 325-horsepower version of the Ford Shelby GT. It also plans a big luxury car, the Lincoln MKS, which will become the struggling brand’s flagship sedan. The announcement came at an industry conference here sponsored by the Center for Automotive Research.

On Thursday, General Motors is expected to confirm that it will resurrect one of its most famous muscle cars, the Chevrolet Camaro, which was a hit at the Detroit auto show in January. . .

Ford or Chrysler sell no subcompacts in the United States, even though they or their corporate parents sell them in other global markets.

By contrast, Toyota, Honda and Nissan have all introduced small cars in the last few months, all of them sold overseas.

“It is a mistake and it’s very disappointing,” said John Casesa, managing partner of Casesa Strategic Advisers in New York. “I just think it shows that Detroit still has a business model predicated on low energy prices."

Even while dangling the new shiny in front of the legacy market of muscle car fans (and believe me, I lust after those new Mustangs and Chargers even while acknowleging that they are Bad) the invisible hand of the marketplace is forcing changes on GM. From the Wall Street Journal,

Chief Executive Rick Wagoner said the company will slow production of its new lineup of large sport-utility vehicles during the second half of the year to cope with rising inventory as average U.S. gasoline prices stay at more than $3 a gallon.

Any slowdown in production of large SUVs could put a dent in GM's bottom line, as the vehicles are substantially more profitable than the small and midsize cars more Americans have been buying as gasoline prices have soared. The move highlights the risks in GM's strategy of relying on its lineup of large SUVs to propel its North American turnaround in the near term. . . .

According to Ward's, GM built 106,334 Chevy Tahoes in January to June. According to Autodata Corp., 84,933 were sold in the same period, a 4.2% increase from a year earlier.

As of the end of July, GM and its dealers had 82 days' supply of unsold Tahoes, 89 days of unsold GMC Yukons and 75 days of unsold Chevrolet Suburban ultralarge SUVs. Historically, auto makers have aimed for a 60- to 65-day supply, or less, to avoid resorting to profit-draining discounts to clear stock.

Mr. Wagoner said GM won't shut down SUV production lines but will curtail "some" overtime and introduce other products into the production mix. He didn't disclose further details. At least one of GM's production plants is capable of building both full-size SUVs and pickup trucks, and GM is about to launch new versions of its full-size pickup trucks. "We've been basically running all-out," Mr. Wagoner said.

Compare that to Toyota which in July, surpassed Ford and Daimler-Chrylser to become the number two seller in the U.S. market. Although sales of the Toyota Tundra pickup are down too (10 percent year-to-date) the revitalized RAV4 and new subcompact Yaris are flying out the door. The Yaris sold 10,000 plus in July alone.

I took a good amount of stick from The Union Thug and his buddies when I bought my Toyota Matrix. But you know what? G.M. and Ford are doing a disservice to their shareholders, their (union) employees and the country as a whole by continuing to be completely clueless about the changing shape of the marketplace. One would think that having gotten their asses handed to them in the 1970's -- when upstarts Nissan (then Datsun), Honda and Toyota first cracked the North American market -- they would have learned their lessons. They certainly had no shame about learing all they could about lean manufacturing, just-in-time supply chains and total quality managment from the Japanese in the '80's. But apparently the ability to see past the immediate quarterly earnings horizon; to synthesize larger economic and sales data into a proactive strategy; to design products that are both market appropriate AND sexy... Apparently these are skills that are forever beyond the ken of the multimillionaire leaders of America's last great industrial manufacturing sector.

It used to be a truism -- and in a macroeconomic sense still is to a degree -- that what was good for G.M. was good for America. It looks more and more to me that the best thing that could happen to G.M. would be for it to fail and let Schumpeter's creative destruction create a worthy successor from the ashes. If it is owned by Toyota, so be it. At least American workers will have reliable jobs turning out automobiles that Americans can afford to drive now and in the future.

The Lost World: Israel, Palestine and Lebanon Pre WWII

http://community.livejournal.com/vintagephoto/656051.html

Amazing photos! Check out the zepplin over Jerusalem! How about those modernist/Bauhaus buildings in Tel-Aviv and Haifa? T.E. Lawrence and Winston Churchill. The beautiful seaside of 1930 Beirut and the Buick dealership in Jerusalem.

It's The War, Stupid

So, ol Jomentum lost his primary. The conventional wisdom will tell you that the overwhelming power of the big, bad bloggers did Joe Lieberman in. Why the blogsphere got behind another multimillionaire businessman senator is beyond me, but they did. Bloggers helped Lamont get some early seed money -- as if he needed it -- and some early volunteers and organizing, that's about it. The rest of the noise made very little difference in a local race in a small, one-party state.

Republicans may rejoice that Democrats have gone back to doing what Democrats do best; beating the living crap out of each other. I wouldn't sweat that too much either. Joe Lieberman's position was always somewhat like that of the Ne'er-do-well, gold-digging son-in-law who married the pretty, if not too bright daughter of the loved and respected founder of the company. Dad built the business with his own hands and knows the first name of every man on the floor. Dad never knew what to do with the dweeby college kid; long on mouth and short on common sense. But he made guy a shift Foreman for his daughter's sake and to keep the little twit where he could keep an eye on him. Dad's dead now -- keeled over from a massive coronary at his desk -- and his wife's pretty young eyes have turned to a new hunk. It didn't take long for the union guys on the shop floor to turn on Joe.

Here is the takeaway from CT: It's the War(s), Stupid. And: The Democratic Base is mad as hell.

P.S.:Joe is going to run as an independent.Bad enough that he had his "progressive" nose that far up the President's butt. But, to turn your back on the party that just three years ago you wanted to lead... Well then, Joe deserves every bit of the massive beatdown he is about to receive. The Union Thugs on the shop floor never liked that kid anyway.

Long Tail Video

Busy weekend puttering around the house, working on some sideline projects and pointedly ignoring the outside world. Here's for your Monday morning though.

If you are unfamilliar with the theory of The Long Tail and how disintermediation is working to shape our economy, then click on those links for some interesting reading.

I'm looking at you realtors. How long do you think it will take Zillow.com to begin slurping down data in Clinton, IA? Would that be before or after you plan on retiring? Just asking... although if zillow.com is anything like cell phone and Starbucks that will be P+1 year where P = the approximate time to complete market domination.

Anyhoo, this is a fun movie.

The Street Finds Its Own Uses For Things

Finding Gibson's blog has been like running into a long-lost friend. His literary output is pretty slow, with three to four years between books. So, I've been busily reading the teasers of some work in progress that he posts on the blog.

And yes, I am aware that there is another, much more famous guy named Gibson who is making news just now. Here's the difference. Actor, Mel Gibson is a raving lunatic albeit with some talent as a film maker. Writer William Gibson is an introverted Canadian who reinvented a (at the time) torpid literary genre and invented many of the core concepts that we now associate with the Internet and information technology.

To wit: the expression, The street finds its own uses for things. The meaning should be self-explanatory. The World Wide Web, originally designed to help nuclear physicists link massive data sets together becomes a way to purchase almost any book every published and have it shipped to your home.

Gibson ponders the uses of Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions:

Myself, I keep going back to my no doubt sloppy and imperfect understanding of Thomas S. Kuhn's The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions. If the theory of "fourth generation war" is viewed as a new paradigm (and it seems to me to meet the criteria) then this is more than a failure of perception on the part of neoconservatives.

Consider the following, from the Wikipedia entry on SSR:

'According to Kuhn, the scientific paradigms before and after a paradigm shift are so different that their theories are incomparable. The paradigm shift does not just change a single theory, it changes the way that words are defined, the way that the scientists look at their subject and, perhaps most importantly, the questions that are considered valid and the rules used to determine the truth of a particular theory. Kuhn observes that they are incommensurable — literally, lacking comparison, untranslatable. New theories were not, as they had thought of before, simply extensions of old theories, but radically new worldviews. This incommensurability applies not just before and after a paradigm shift, but between conflicting paradigms. It is simply not possible, according to Kuhn, to construct an impartial language that can be used to perform a neutral comparison between conflicting paradigms, because the very terms used belong within the paradigm and are therefore different in different paradigms. Advocates of mutually exclusive paradigms are in an insidious position: "Though each may hope to convert the other to his way of seeing science and its problems, neither may hope to prove his case. The competition between paradigms is not the sort of battle that can be resolved by proof." (SSR, p. 148).'

This would explain, it seems to me, the apparently literal impossibility of explaining the fundamentally counterproductive nature of the United State's invasion of Iraq, or of what's currently going on in Lebanon, to those who disagree. Or, literally, vice versa. If you're behind the curve on the paradigm shift, if I'm reading Kuhn at all correctly, you're literally incapable of getting it. Or vice versa. "It is simply not possible, according to Kuhn, to construct an impartial language that can be used to perform a neutral comparison between conflicting paradigms, because the very terms used belong within the paradigm and are therefore different in different paradigms."

The bad news is that the policy-makers of the United States and Israel apparently (still) don't get the new paradigm, and the bad news is that Hezbollah (et al, and by their very nature) do. Though that's only bad (or double-plus-ungood) if you accept, as I do, that the new paradigm allows for a more effective understanding of reality. So if you still like to pause to appreciate the action of phlogiston when you strike a match, you may well be okay with current events. So many, God help us, evidently are.

I've heard that Kuhn fiercely lamented the application of SSR to anything other than the structure of scientific revolutions, but that's how it usually is, when the street finds its own uses for things.

I've read about Kuhn before but never had it explained to me so succinctly, if imperfectly and sloppily. But thinking about current events in the Middle East in this light seems to explain pretty much everything. If we were all physicists, it would be as if American, Israeli and other governments are making policy using a four-dimensional, Newtownian paradigm, while Hezbullah, et. al. operating using rules of quantum mechanics and uncertainty. These two paradigms, while existing in the superset of what we call physics, operate under completely different -- at times mutually exclusive -- principles. In other words, Bush, Olmert, Blair, Rice and veryone quite literally don't get it with regards to what Hezbullah, Al Quaeda and their 4GW compatriots are trying to do.

Ahhh... William Gibson

I thought he was far too much the purist writer to have a blog. But no, the man who coined the term "cyberspace" indeed has a place in cyberspace and publishes snippets of works in progress. And before you start, yes, I know Wikipedia is non-authoritative and that particular article is announced to be dubious. But trust me on this, I'm such a Science Fiction geek, I am actually an authoritative source on this one.

Also, trust me on this: Even if you don't care for SF as a fiction genre, just check out the writing chops.

From the William Gibson Blog:

There was something about Rize, Milgrim decided, reclining fully dressed across his New Yorker bedspread, that reminded him of one of the more esoteric effects of eating exceptionally hot Szechwan.

Not just hot, but correctly, expertly seasoned. Hot like when they brought you a plate of lemon slices, to suck on as needed, to partially neutralize the burn. It had been a long time since Milgrim had had food like that. It had been a long time since he’d eaten a meal that had provided any memorable pleasure at all. The Chinese he was most familiar with these days was along the lines of the stepped-on Cantonese they brought him at the laundry on Lafayette, but just now he was recalling that sensation, strangely delightful, of drinking cold water on top of serious pepper-burn – how the water filled your mouth entirely, but somehow without touching it, like a molecule-thick silver membrane of Chinese anti-matter, like a spell, some kind of magic insulation.

The Rize was like that, the cold water being the business of being Milgrim, or rather those aspects of being Milgrim, or simply of being, that he found most problematic. Where some less subtle formulation would seek to make the cold water go away, the Rize encouraged him to take it up, into his mouth, in order to savor that silver membrane.

Though his eyes were closed, he knew that Brown had just now come to the connecting door, which stood open.

“A nation,” he heard himself say, “consists of its laws. A nation does not consist of its situation at a given time. If an individual’s morals are situational, that individual is without morals. If a nation’s laws are situational, that nation has no laws, and soon isn’t a nation.” He opened his eyes and confirmed Brown there, his partially disassembled pistol in his hand. The cleaning, lubrication, and examination of the gun’s inner workings was ritual, conducted every few nights, though as far as Milgrim knew, Brown hadn’t fired the gun since they’d been together.

“What did you say?”

“Are you really so scared of terrorists that you'll dismantle the structures that made America what it is?” Milgrim heard himself say this with a sense of deep wonder. He was saying these things without consciously having thought them, or at least not in such succinct terms, and they seemed inarguable.

“The fuck—“

“If you are, you let the terrorist win. Because that is exactly, specifically his goal, his only goal: to frighten you into surrendering the rule of law. That's why they call him ‘terrorist’ He uses terrifying threats to induce you to degrade your own society.”

Brown opened his mouth. Closed it.

“It's actually based on the same glitch in human psychology that allows people to believe they can win the lottery. Statistically, almost nobody ever wins the lottery. Statistically, terrorist attacks almost never happen.”

There was a look on Brown’s face that Milgrim hadn’t seen there before. Now Brown tossed a fresh bubble-pack down on the bedspread.

“Goodnight,” Milgrim heard himself say, still insulated by the silver membrane.

Brown turned, walking silently back into his own room in his stocking feet, the partial pistol in his hand.

Milgrim raised his right arm toward the ceiling, straight up, index finger extended and thumb cocked. He brought the thumb down, firing an imaginary shot, then lowered his arm, having no idea at all what to make of whatever it was that had just happened.