I complained a while ago about WaMuWhooHoo, which (at the time) seemed another spurious webineering attempt by a corporation that thinks it can spam Twitter the way it spams my Gmail account. I was wrong.

Here is a sampling of some twittering I’ve seen from their account:

• A good consumer stays in debt! WhooHoo!
• We always share customer data . . . for optimal marketing saturation.
• Our overdraft fees are now $33.00!
• We suck the least!

So, clearly, this is not some asinine marketing ploy by a half-clueless corporation that takes its communication cues from Robert Scoble (or from their 16-year-old kids). Instead, it’s the quasi-legal emotional core dump of a man who’s either been screwed on overdraft fees or really likes Wachovia. Power to you, sir.

Cheryl just pointed me towards Kiva, one of the best web sites I’ve ever laid eyes on. Microfinance firms around the world sign up and create profiles for each of their entrepreneurs who are seeking funds. You, the fat-cat Westerner who makes more than $1 a day, can make loans to these folks through the website in a matter of minutes.

The idea is that these entrepreneurs can email you with updates on how they’re using your money, and eventually they start paying you back through the same process. It’s not really going to supplant any of the charitable giving I already make (especially since it’s not tax-deductible). But I’m still really excited about it.

I didn’t think it would be this soon that Google would feature direct-to-cortex integration.

Last week, Karl told me about a site that could show housing prices on an interactive map, with some neat effects (like a heat map of a metro or regional area). But I couldn’t remember the name. Wasn’t it something like “zooloo“?

Nope. But Google still figured it out for me. “Related searches: zillow, home value”

That’s it, Zillow. Sort of like “zooloo”, except not at all.

The only logical conclusion is that, without telling me, Google has signed me up for its beta service that somehow uses WiFi antennas to directly infer search terms from my brain. I wouldn’t put it past them. Smart guys.

I joined Facebook when it was young and relatively immature (remember when it was TheFacebook.com?), so I’ve missed out on riding its usage peak. I just can’t compete with college undergraduates in terms of the number of free hours per week I’m willing to spend clicking through a web site.

But here, as far as I can tell, are a few ground rules for anyone who is just getting started with the Facebook phenomenon:

1. Add as many applications as you possibly can. The more people have to scroll to get to the bottom of your profile, the better. I think there are seven different “Zombie versus Vampire” applications available. Add them all.
2. Invite all of your friends to every app you find. Even if you don’t intend to use it. Because applications are fun. They do stuff! Even if you don’t want it. Like a zombie bite.
3. Post as many photos as you can of yourself drinking. Future employers will appreciate your willingness to share reflections of your social life with your extended network of friends.
4. Post as many photos as you can of other people drinking and “tag” them, so that it forces your pictures onto their profile. It might come in handy if you’re ever competing with them for your dream job.

I got an Aliph Jawbone today and I can’t get enough of the slick product packaging. It’s genius. It’s gorgeous. It makes me want to buy a second one for my other ear.

I got a Twitter notification today that WaMuWhooHoo is following me. It’s not the first time (or the tenth time) that some random account has started following me in an attempt to get some eyeballs on itself. Normally these tactics are either for link-spammers (who get summarily blocked) or for bands trying to sell CDs online.

But a bank? Who in their right mind would invest money in an organization just because they came across this:

Our overdraft fees are now $30 per transaction! Whoo-Hoo!!!!

Washington Mutual, I know you’re trying to be hip, but can’t you show some restraint? Why do you have to join the ranks of the spammers and punk rockers who resort to twittering as a form of spam? Why you, WaMu?

Do we really need another war? This is in South America, of all places, where economies are still struggling to recover from decades of mismanagement. (Or, in the case of Venezuela, where economies are actively being mismanaged.)

Hugo Chávez seems to think we do, and President Bush is mincing no words in his support for Alvaro Uribe. But the Secretary of Defense doesn’t think a war is likely, and if it is, he doesn’t see us getting involved. I myself am unsure that our narco-fighting ally has much legal ground to stand on.

Colombia’s official stance is that they were in hot pursuit of Raúl Reyes. Now they’re also trotting out the weapons of mass destruction excuse. Can someone in Washington call and let them know it doesn’t work anymore? Even the U.S. isn’t buying it this time.

But why does Colombia get to have all the fun? We’ve been in hot (tepid?) pursuit of Osama bin Laden for years, and we pretty much know he’s hiding in Pakistan. That doesn’t mean we can start bombing around Quetta. If the Bush Administration isn’t able to solve the problem of striking Osama across an ally’s border, why should Colombia get a pass when the other country hates them?

In the end, it’s hard to side with the FARC guerrillas on this one. They are a vicious lot and present a serious threat to Colombian stability. Reyes deserved what he got. Besides, if we could put a guided missile on top of Osama bin Laden while he’s in his pajamas, we’d probably do it–better to ask forgiveness than seek permission. But if the cost of Colombia’s strike is a regional war with Venezuela, where the U.S. lacks the resources (or political will) to lend any real support, I question the cost/benefit of taking out a handful of Marxists.

Exciting news from the primaries this week. John McCain is about guaranteed the Republican nomination (though Huckabee still made a brilliant appearance on The Colbert Report.) Clinton and Obama are about tied for the number of states they’ve carried, but Clinton is winning more delegates.

I’m still pulling for Obama to come out ahead on this one. The last thing I want to see is “Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton” for 24 years. It’s time to set aside the culture wars of the 1960s. I am ready for a new generation to start taking over Washington.

I’m far more excited, though, about John McCain trouncing Mitt Romney. I have admired McCain in the Senate for years, and there is nobody more qualified to clean up the mess that his 2000 rival has left for us. Romney is too packaged and too opportunistic for me to ever trust him as a solid leader in a time of national crisis. McCain is a libertarian rock star.

If the general election comes down to Obama vs McCain, I will have some soul-searching to do; I’ll also pay close attention to whom they choose for their running mates and what campaign promises they make loudly. But if the Democrats want to make this a really easy choice for me, they’ll elect Hillary. If she’s the nominee, I know exactly which way this independent vote will swing.