More thoughts on packing

How do you manage to accumulate so much stuff at college? I've been living in a ten-by-ten room with a tiny closet and tinier drawers and even tinier bookshelf since August. I should not have this much, but I do. I shipped a big box home, put copious quantities of stuff in storage, have two suitcases fit to burst at the seams, and two carry-ons for when I fly home, and that's not a lot compared to some people.

We put stuff in storage and I did a lot of packing today. I was on my feet all day, and was wearing flips because I'm lazy and didn't feel like unpacking other shoes. My feet kill right now.

Santa Fe is a great town.

Consumption of Things

The end of the school year and the ensuing packing up has had me absolutely insane, so my 'write *something* daily' has failed a bit. Anyway. I'm mentally writing something up about the whole Newsweek calamity, but that's going to take more time and slightly fewer boxes/suitcases/etc surrounding me on my bedroom floor, threatening to engulf me like oddly-cubic amoeba. So instead, I'm going to talk about dogs.

Dogs, as everyone knows*, are great. They come in all sorts of shapes and sizes. They come in all different personalities, from the mellow old labrador just hanging out on his front porch, to the young and yippy bichon which literally is incapable of staying still if it's awake. You've got professional dogs, who are smart and calm and observant, and you've got dogs like my own beloved mutt, who, after ten years of living in our house, still seems befuddled when she goes sliding across the hardwood floors into the wall.

All dogs are great. They've all got their flaws, and their redemptions. But there are different degrees of Great Dogs. Some specimens simply embody what it is to be a Great Dog, and boy, do they rock. For example: the Prince's dog in The Little Mermaid. For those adult-types who can't recall, let me introduce you to Max (scroll down; he's the furry guy). Man, is that a good dog. Just look at him: the fur, the nose, the tongue...You can't even see his eyes, but you know he's totally looking up at his master. He's content to sit and wait, and knows that, soon enough, he'll get a pat on the head or a treat or maybe even some horseplay, and man, that'll be the best thing ever!

He's a good dog. He's loyal, he's friendly, and a little dopey looking. This dog, ladies and gentlemen, rocks.
*if you don't know this, you have no soul

Some about the other England

The country this time (actually, the UK, but there's no "other" UK I've been talking about, as far as I'm aware). Congratulations are in order, apparently, to Mr. Tony Blair for his record third term.

Yeah. Maybe he'll actually start doing what's best for his country, perhaps? (*coughIRAQcough*)

More on England

Once again, not the country. A mistrial has been declared, as England testified that she knew the photos were purely for amusement, while another involved soldier (interestingly, England's ex) said that they were for legitimate training reasons. I personally am suspicious of that: what sort of training requires nude pictures?

England trial

England as in the soldier Lynn England, not the country. Now her testimony is being questioned because one of her higher-ups said that the pictures taken of them abusing Iraqi prisoners were for training purposes. In her original testimony, England said she knew that they were solely for the guards' amusement.

Pentagon analyst accused of "passing secrets"

This Just In: passing secrets to an American pro-Israel group.

Yay America!

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case between several colleges and the military. The issue: according to current laws, if a school refuses to treat military recruiters exactly as they treat 'other employees', then the school can be denied any and all federal funding. The entire text of the law can be read here. This ought to be required reading for any American college student, I think (as should the bits of the No Child Left Behind act for all public high school students [as that, unbeknowest to most, mandates that students' parents must submit an official form to opt out of having their personal information handed over to the DoD]).

According to this law (The Solomon Amendment), if a college refuses to provide recruiters with access to campus and the phone numbers, addresses, names, dates and places of birth, academic history, and other personal details, then the school can be denied any and all federal money. In short: if it comes down to it, your school can maintain your privacy and sacrifice possibly millions of dollars in federal money. Or, they can provide a bigoted, violent organization that has frequently been accused of war crimes and grotesque, blatent violations of human rights, with your personal, private information.

Is this country great or what? Yay America! God bless our troop!

Gay-rights issues, take one-million-and-six

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case between several colleges and the military. The issue: according to current laws, if a school refuses to treat military recruiters exactly as they treat 'other employees', then the school can be denied any and all federal funding.

Kansas is it's own world.

At the least, it's its own country. I'm an American, and I refuse to accept that Kansas is stil part of my country. We're not all complete idiots, and they are, apparently, doing everything that they can to change that. They're having state hearings to debate how they ought to teach evolution and creationism in schools. The sheer amount of stupidity in this whole thing - I'm quite tempted to refer to it as a shenanigan - is overwhelming. While I'm tempted to break down the CNN article sentence by sentence, I don't have that much time. So I'll just pick out some of my favorites.

"I feel like I'm in a time warp here," said Topeka attorney Pedro Irigonegaray who has agreed to defend evolution as valid science. "To debate evolution is similar to debating whether the Earth is round. It is an absurd proposition."

Point: There has not been debate over that in many, many, many years. There was a nice ancient Greek man named Ptolemy who was certain that the Earth was round, and it wasn't a revolutionary idea then. This is just a pet peeve of mine, as you hear it all the time and it's (basically) a logically flawed argument if it's taken word-for-word.

"We're not against evolution," said Calvert. "But there is a lot of evidence that suggests that life is the product of intelligence. I think it is inappropriate for the state to prejudge the question whether we are the product of design or just an occurrence."

Oh, the joke here is so obvious I can't even bring myself to make it. Anyway: The state of Kansas is not, as far as I can tell, deciding whether or not humans are "just an occurence" or something else. I don't think any state is doing that. I do think that nearly 150 years of scientific research is saying: "According to the research that many highly qualified scientists have done, this is the most scientifically sound theory." The state (most states, anyway) are saying, "In our science classes in public school, we ought to be teaching the most scientifically sound theories."

The current proposal pushed by conservatives would not eliminate evolution entirely from instruction, nor would it require creationism be taught, but it would encourage teachers to discuss various viewpoints and eliminate core evolution claims as required curriculum.

Any teacher worth their salt is going to do this. Perhaps the problem is not the subject matter. Perhaps, instead of spending taxpayers' money on needless 'trials', the state of Kansas should be spending that money on educating, training, and hiring quality teachers who don't need to be ordered to discuss alternate viewpoints.

Detractors also argue that evolution is invalid science because it cannot be tested or verified and say it is inappropriately being indoctrinated into education and discouraging consideration of alternatives.

Uh - what? What horrible, horrible things are they doing to logic in Kansas? No, evolution cannot be 'verified' as such. Natural selection (which is the basis for Darwin's theories of evolution) has, in fact, been verified. Repeatedly. If their argument against evolution is that it cannot be tested or verified, what makes intelligent design/creationism superior? Are we going to 'prove' the bible? In my opinion, if any science teacher - if any teacher of any subject - ever said that something being in the bible - one single book - is reason enough to accept it as fact, then...well, I'd go ahead and say that they're not really a teacher. A teacher ought to stimulate though and encourage you to look at everything around you and draw your own conclusions from it. Unless, of course, that's not the way things are done in Kansas.

"If students ... do not understand the weaknesses of evolutionary theory as well as the strengths, a grave injustice is being done to them," Abrams said.

That's absolutely correct. Also, if students don't understand the weaknesses of biblical theory, a grave injustice is being done to them. If high-level math students don't understand the weaknesses of Euclidean geometry, a grave injustice is being done. If students don't understand the weaknesses of one historical point of view over another, then a grave injustice is being done: that particular injustice happens all the time.

That, however, is a rant for another day.

No. I don't care at all.

I saw Hitchhiker's Gude to the Galaxy last night. It was well done, I think, considering how gloriously absurd the book is. I think Martin Freeman was a glorious casting choice for Arthur Dent: he nailed the 'everyman' persona that comes across so strongly in the book. The Heart of Gold wasn't quite how I pictured it, but it was still well-done. They left out some things I think they should have included, yes, but, really: any movie that can pull off the sudden creation of a very surprised sperm whale gets my vote. And the opening sequence was to wonderful for words.

Okay, had to get that out of the way. Onto the Rant of the Day*: News in America. I'm not going to bitch about the entertainews that plagues TV - my opinion is that the closest shot you've got at getting actual news on TV is perhaps tuning into C-Span. Forget the talking heads, they're worthless. A 15-second sound bite is not news, it's a scripted recitation of what the authorities want you to know, and/or an alarmist scheme to boost ratings so that more people are indoctrinated by the subject matter of ads.

No, my issue is what Americans care about. I'm going to use Google News as my example here. Let it be said in advance that I adore all things Google, I think that those folks are brilliant, Google News is great based on the fact that it consolidates hundreds of stories on one topic into one list, and now you can customize it however you want. My Google News is my start page, and I've got it showing me the the 'World' section, the 'U.S.' section, the 'Business' section, and 'More Top Stories'. That's it. I like it that way, because those things actually matter.

The top story right now under 'U.S.' is "Many in Runaway Bride's Town Feel Betrayed", via ABC News. The general gist is there was a young lady who was about to get married. She went missing, and called in a phony kidnapping tip. She had not, in fact, been kidnapped, but gotten nervous, chickened out of getting married, and decided to fake her own kidnapping.

Okay, weird, yes. An unkind thing to do, which consumed a huge amount of police time and money, and also left many people upset. I agree. Is it one of the most important things going on in the nation, though? No, it is not. I would say that our government confirming that North Korea has successfully tested a short-range missile is more important. Or that proving that abuse did indeed occur at Guantanamo is a bit more important.

However, no one cares, because that doesn't make us feel warm and fuzzy. We don't want impersonal, factual news; we want warm fuzzy special features, interspersed with alarmist stories about how a factory is polluting and the toxic smoke is going to kill you all within three days! Details at eleven.

*I've decided that many of my rants like the above are, quite simply, irrelevant. Writing exercises for myself, you see.