Classical Spin

Oh ho ho, what have we in Arizona?

2012-01-17T09:43:00.003-07:00

Ah, yes. Arizona. Home of Sheriff Arpaio. A quarter of Arizonans are of Mexican ancestry. A third of the population identifies as Hispanic. The state of Arizona has the highest concentration of speakers of Native American languages*. A state which has not just cut but banned the teaching ethnic studies. And in order to comply with this, the largest school district in the state is now is banning books from the schools in order to avoid potentially teaching about ethnic studies.

Outraged yet? You should be, because telling teachers they can't teach something is a despicable act meant only to perpetuate the willful ignorance (which ultimately hurts the democratic process and, in turn, America). Banning books is absolutely nothing more than a harmful act of absolute cowardice; to ban books is to attempt to ban free communication of ideas. The

Oh, and one of the texts being thrown out of schools includes Shakespeare's The Tempest, so I'm going to go ahead and throw away civilized discourse and say this: fuck you, Tucson Unified School District.

I'm not hugely worried about this. It's deeply, deeply upsetting - oh, hell, yes, I'm going to play this card: I am an American soldier. I swore an oath to defend and uphold the Constitution (which, since most people seem to need a refresher, boldly includes amongst its purposes "...form a more perfect union," and "...promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves..."). Things like this - banning books, banning the teaching of certain ideas - is in every way contrary to the American Constitution. We want to talk about keeping our nation safe? It's things like this that we need to be vigilant against; seemingly little things like banning certain classes in our public schools, things that slip under the radar at Board of Education meetings the way termites slip into a building's walls.

But it's not going to work. Whatever their goal is (and I honestly couldn't possibly guess as to what, exactly, they want to accomplish by this) they won't reach it this way. You know why? Because for every kid that shrugs and says, "Eh, whatever," there's going to be another who says, "Wait, what books aren't we allowed to read? Why not?" And then that kid is going to go to the library, or Amazon, or their parents, or a friend, or someone. They're going to find a copy of that book, and they're going to read it. Why? Because A) teenagers are teenagers and a great way to get them interested in something is to tell them no, it's too mature/dangerous/whatever, you can't see this, and B) teenagers are not half as dumb as we'd like to think they are. Those books will still be read. (Hell, if there's a student from the Tucson Unified School District who sees this - let me know if you want and I will order you any of those banned books on Amazon.)

Here is the contact information for the board of the Tuscon school district. More importantly, here is the contact information for the state Superintendent of Schools, who was the one to ultimately decide that Tucson had to cut their ethnic studies classes or lose funding. Arizona, like all states, gets a fair bit of federal funding for their public education system. As a taxpayer, even if you're not an Arizona resident, I'd say you still have a vested interest in the situation.

*I'm not entirely sure what the most accepted terminology is - indigenous languages seems like it may be better here?

What in the everloving hell is this?

2011-12-19T10:38:00.005-07:00

Read this.

As a soldier, all my medical care is provided by the Army. I don't have health insurance so much as the understanding that in most situations the Army will provide whatever care I need - but if they can't, they'll send me to civilians who can, and the Army will pay the tab.

Unless I'm raped and don't want to carry and birth the child of my rapist; in that case the Army doesn't give a fuck about me. Civilian government workers? Yeah, we'll cover that. Federal prisoners? Sure. Service members? Nah, they can just go ahead and suck it up, because fuck them, right?

That Rick Perry ad

2011-12-11T05:32:00.001-07:00

My favorite Texas governor has a new campaign ad! I keep trying to ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist but it's like they said in Inception - once an idea is in your head it's awfully hard to get rid of it. Perry's latest oeuvre is a thirty-second spot entitled "Strong", which doesn't even start off crazy and go downhill; it just sort of spawned into existence at the bottom of the Great Right Swamp of Idiocy and thrashed around in the mud a bit. Let's take a look:

Okay. First of all, before you start considering killing yourself after watching this, note that as of right now it's got 17,732 'likes' and 597,744 'dislikes'. It also, in my opinion, constitutes hate speech, which means you can report it as offensive to YouTube. Now let's break it down piece by piece.

1. Rick Perry is not ashamed to be a Christian. This is outstanding! This is America, where we pride ourselves on our religious freedom and tolerance. Freedom of religion is explicitly spelled out in the Constitution and no one should ever be made to feel uncomfortable when it comes to professing a particular faith. And he's right - you certainly don't need to regularly attend a Christian church to see that there's something wrong with this country...

2. "...when gays can serve openly in the military." I will freely grant that Gov. Perry is wholly entitled to think that gay people are wrong/creepy/sinners/etc. However, I personally don't see what is wrong with allowing fully-capable volunteers to serve in our all-volunteer military, and I really don't see why in the world it would be acceptable for gays to serve in the military so long as no one knew they were gay. Do you think it's some sort of mentally-transmitted disease, where merely being aware that Joe's going on a date with Mike this weekend will do harm to heterosexual soldiers? Somehow, whatever risk Joe and Steve's date poses is contained by them never mentioning it to their colleagues and going to a movie theater two towns away?

3. "...but our kids can't openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school." I was quite unaware that there were any laws anywhere in the United States prohibiting children from openly celebrating Christmas (whatever that would even mean - banning Christmas music?) or praying in school. In fact, while public schools themselves cannot lead organized prayer, it's generally considered to be a violation of the Anti-Establishment Clause to forbid students from praying, so long as the prayer is not disruptive. You want to bow your head in homeroom? Go for it. You want to wear a Christmas sweater to school? Go for it. Your school tried to break up group of students who decided on their own to pray before the first bell? I imagine the ACLU would like to hear about it.

4. "As president, I'll end Obama's war on religion." Good grief, I am literally the worst soldier in the US Army, as I had no idea we were even fighting a war on religion! Actually, no one at any of the three Army bases I've been assigned to thus far must have heard, because I've met chaplains - ordained ministers, all of them - at each place! And been in chapels! And been at events where, despite the questionable first-amendment implications, the event is opened with a brief prayer! This war is going even worse than Afghanistan.

5. "And I'll fight against liberal attacks on our religious heritage." You do that. Meanwhile I'll be over here hanging out with our religious heritage, including the Jefferson Bible and some of Dr. Benjamin Franklin's writings, like this:

The Faith you mention has doubtless its use in the World. I do not desire to see it diminished, nor would I endeavour to lessen it in any Man. But I wish it were more productive of good Works, than I have generally seen it: I mean real good Works, Works of Kindness, Charity, Mercy, and Publick Spirit; not Holiday-keeping, Sermon-Reading or Hearing; performing Church Ceremonies, or making long Prayers, filled with Flatteries and Compliments, despis’d even by wise Men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity. The worship of God is a Duty; the hearing and reading of Sermons may be useful; but, if Men rest in Hearing and Praying, as too many do, it is as if a Tree should Value itself on being water’d and putting forth Leaves, tho’ it never produc’d any Fruit.

6. "Faith made America strong." Sure did! You mean things like "faith in the ability of a small colony to break free from the yoke of a tyrannical regime" and "faith that the democratic process would work" and "faith that, no matter what happened down the line, the Constitution would always be held as the most important document in the nation," right?

7. "It can make her strong again." Attention everybody: According to Gov. Perry, America is no longer strong. The nation which has the second-largest active-duty military force in the world, which has the third-largest population in the world, has the seventh-highest GDP in the world, and has the world's second-largest nuclear arsenal, is no longer strong. Good to know!

Hey, Texans...can you all please do something about your governors? Like keep them from running for president, because that just seems to lead to a heap of incoherent crazy?

Here's your Hanukkah pork!

2011-12-09T02:16:00.001-07:00

Hey, Army: you say it's just a "holiday semi-formal." Attendance is optional but those who go get released early the day of and come in to work late the next day, and those who don't go will work regular hours doing shitty details in the motor pool.

Knowing this I chose not to attend, largely because I don't celebrate Christmas and generally try to avoid giving the appearance that I do. Yes, I go to my cousin's Christmas eve party, and exchange gifts with my family, but in my mind that's a rare chance to see everyone together (ten cousins plus a sister, spread across four different states, none in the same country as me), and the fact that sometimes I can take off from school or work during Hanukkah but other years I cannot.

So here's the thing: I'd buy your story that it's not a Christmas party were it not for a few minor little points:

1. December 8 is awfully early to celebrate New Year's.

2. The graphic on the official invitation card thing shows a Christmas tree and Christmas ornament.

3. I'm quite certain that were I to ask the higher-ups who organized this when Hanukkah starts this year - to say nothing of asking for a brief explanation of what the holiday celebrates, or how it is observed - I would be met with blank stares*.

4. Each company was apparently to put together a little skit, based on a Christmas movie. (Number of Christmas movies I have ever actually sat down and watched from start to finish: one.)

5. If you offer a choice of main dishes at a catered event and one of the choices is pork** then, uh, don't be surprised if the idea that you're somehow including Jews in your Christmas celebration isn't really taken very seriously.

I have no problem with having a Christmas party***. At my last two jobs there were Christmas parties. i chose not to attend. Fine. But if you want to have a Christmas part - have a fucking Christmas party. If you want to have a "Happy everyone's going on leave soon, it's dark and gloomy and German weather sucks, let's go dress up all pretty and eat a nice meal," great - but skip the Christmas theme and the pork.

*Note: this is fine. I'm willing to bet a significant amount of money that neither the commander nor sergeant major of the squadron are Jewish, and I don't expect anyone to know about other people's holidays. HOWEVER, if you don't know, don't claim to be celebrating it.

**I didn't realize until fairly recently that while I don't, nor have I ever come remotely close to truly keeping kosher, there are certain things that somehow absorbed into me. For instance, as far as I know I have never in my life eaten any pork, and even when I was being the worst vegetarian in the world during basic training, the idea of eating pig is kind of horrid.

***It gets a bit..squidgy, ethically-speaking, when we're talking about the military, but I'll let that go for now.

Newt Gingrich is a loathsome little troll

2011-12-06T09:43:00.001-07:00

Mr. Gingrich, a few minor points you seem to be unaware of:

1. "Food stamps" are not issued as a cash benefit.
2. "Food stamps" are not issued as a credit card.
3. You cannot use 'food stamps' to purchase anything other than food.

The program once known as food stamps is now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Here is how it works: you are eligible to receive SNAP benefits if your income is 130% or less of the national poverty line. When you begin to receive benefits you are given an EBT, or electronic benefits transfer card.

In many senses the EBT card works as a prepaid debit card. An amount of money, calculated based on your income and household size, is deposited on the card every month. You have a PIN. At the grocery store, instead of hitting 'debit' on the PIN pad, you hit 'EBT', type in your pin, and the total is taken out of your account and given to the grocery store.

You cannot use your SNAP EBT card to purchase anything other than SNAP-eligible food, because it is not a credit or debit card. This means that at the grocery store, you cannot use your EBT card to purchase napkins, or diapers, or alcohol, or hot food*. Understand that it's not a "you're not supposed to", it's that you can't. The computer system will not allow it; if your order includes $25.00 of SNAP-eligible food and $10.00 of beer and paper plates, and you pay by EBT, it will say you still owe $10.00.

Please, please, please, let's next do food policing and whether or not other people should be allowed to dictate what someone can buy with their SNAP funds. (Spoiler: no, they shouldn't.)

*I'm not sure why hot food is prohibited - you can buy frozen meals all you want, but no hot rotisserie chickens.

Wish I could say this for real

2011-11-18T04:20:00.001-07:00

Attn: certain Army officers
Re: your recent briefing

1. There is not, as far as I'm aware, any particular correlation between "going to church" and what we colloquially refer to as "being a shitbag". There are plenty of churchgoers who do things like beat their spouses and drive drunk and don't change the toilet paper roll after it's empty. There are plenty of good people who do not ever and have not ever gone to church.
2. You said that when soldiers are called into your office for disciplinary reasons you ask them if they go to church. Since we do not work for a religious organization, this is - to put it bluntly - none of your fucking business. If you encourage soldiers to go to church or any other religious service, you are wrong.
2a. To illustrate, let's flip this situation around and pretend you are speaking with a soldier who is facing UCMJ action for, let's say, slapping his wife around. "Do you go to church?" you ask. "No sir," PFC Snuffy says. "Well, did you growing up?" you ask. "No sir, my family never really did." "Well, maybe you should stop, because it's obviously not doing you any good." Would this be okay to you?
3. A mandatory briefing for a group of enlisted soldiers is a grossly inappropriate time for you to discuss or even mention your belief in God, or a higher power, or lack of belief in that, or anything of the sort. You want to make sure we're all aware of the religious services offered on-post? Great, hand out pamphlets or put it in your PowerPoint presentation. For one, it's highly likely that none of the soldiers sitting in front of you are interested in your beliefs. Two, you don't seem to understand that some of us do not in any way agree that there's something 'outside the laws of science' driving the world, so no, it is not something we have to acknowledge.
4. This was a briefing for soldiers who are new(ish) to this unit. Congratulations! Your weird proselytizing-lite made this secular Humanist Jew feel distinctly uncomfortable!
5. I don't know, maybe you were just deeply confused. Just because the briefing happens to be in the chapel does not mean it's okay for you to preach to us.

Priorities

2011-11-13T06:27:00.001-07:00

Say you work - well, anywhere. You are an adult, with a job. At your job, Underling A comes to you and says "I saw Underling B raping a 10-year-old." The correct course of action in this situation is to tell Underling A to sit down and wait while you pick up the phone and call the police. There should be no waiting. You should, of course, report this to your superiors, but you do not go to them first. When you are told there is reasonable suspicion that someone has raped a child, you do not wait.

Say you are an athletic coach, and therefore are required by law to report any suspected child abuse to the police. At your job, Underling A comes to you and says "I saw Underling B raping a 10-year-old." Can you guess what the correct course of action is? Hint: it's "tell the police immediately."

Say you are an athletic coach, and therefore are required by law to report any suspected child abuse to the police. At your job, Underling A comes to you and says, "I saw Underling B raping a 10-year-old." Underling B runs a program which uses your program's facilities to help young children. What do you do?

If your answer to that last question is not "immediately call the police and tell them that 'I have just been told that one of my employees may have harmed a child, and he is involved in a youth program, I need you to do something right now', and then going to your employer, relaying the same information, and insisting that you do not want Underling B working for you until the matter is settled by the proper authorities," you're a pretty horrible person. You might be a great football coach, but you fail at basic humanity.

Dear Daily Mail: Stay away from my state please.

2011-11-05T01:57:00.002-06:00

So here's a little article in one of the world's worst newspapers about a town near my hometown. It's a strange little piece that for some reason has gotten under my skin; I think a lot of that is because the author has clearly never been to Los Alamos (or quite likely anywhere in New Mexico). A few points:

The small, dusty city of around 8,000 households has just one public golf course and very few luxury shops, with those wanting to experience the high life usually driving 35 miles northwest to nearby Santa Fe.

1) Santa Fe is southeast of Los Alamos, which if you look at a compass, is in fact the exact opposite of being northwest of someplace.
2) Okay, this may be the weird perspective I've developed having been raised in Philadelphia but then spending six years in New Mexico: Sure, compared to Los Alamos Santa Fe is "the high life". It's a bigger city and has art galleries and the opera and some of the best restaurants in the world* and things like that. But "the high life"? Kind of, maybe, I guess. According to The Internet, the per capita income is about $25k, so...okay.
3) I'm not sure I'd refer to Los Alamos as a "small, dusty city". Small, yes. And well, okay, pretty much everywhere in New Mexico is dusty to some degree or another in a weirdly literal sense. But, uh, let's refer to places like Truth or Consequences - tiny towns where in the eyes of outsiders nothing significant really ever happens as "small and dusty" and perhaps acknowledge that some of the world's most advanced research happens here?

On the other hand...

Kiplinger said of its report: 'If it weren’t for the national laboratory, Los Alamos might be just another stagecoach stop in the desert.

Guys, if it weren't for LANL, there would be no Los Alamos. No stagecoach stop. No anything other than, I don't know, maybe some rancher with a bunch of sheep? I mean this absolutely literally. The town didn't exist until the government bought up all the land in the 40's.

*Oh god stuck in Germany surrounded by horrible hateful food please send huevos rancheros and green chile.

While we're airing our grievances...

2011-10-09T06:30:00.000-06:00

Can someone please explain to me what, exactly, John Doe is thanking Private Snuffy for when it comes up that Snuffy's in the military? Please try and use small words and maybe even pictures, because I honest to god don't understand how John Doe, accounts manager at a property management company - or whoever - benefits from Private Snuffy enlisting in the army.

Justice should not see any national borders.

2011-10-07T12:55:00.003-06:00

Hey, Occupy Wall Street and wherever else you're occupying. Can we talk?

Great. I want to start by bringing up two points:

1) You're completely right in that our nation is, to put it bluntly, completely dysfunctional. The inequalities in wealth exhibited in modern-day America is pretty much at odds with any sort of progressive thinking. The fact that there are people making millions of dollars off of those who can't afford to pay their rent is unconscionable. The amounts of money thrown around in DC is disgusting and entirely antithetical to the spirit in which this nation was founded - this country was meant to be run by everyone, not by those who can buy into industries which have millions to feed into the legislative machine.

2) You're completely wrong about a lot of stuff.

Fact: in the grand scheme of things, if you are posting something to the internet about how you are in the 99%, you are grossly misguided about the way the world works. Why?

Can you afford food? I don't mean good food, I don't mean lots of food, I mean 'something that will provide some calories and nutrients'? If yes, you are better off than about 925 million people in the world.

Can you afford shelter? Meaning, on a regular basis do you have access to a building in which there is an adequate place to sleep? If yes, you are better off than about a hundred million people in the world.

Did you go to elementary school? You had a better start than over a hundred million children today.

Can you read? I'm assuming you can, so you're better off than nearly 800 million adults around the world.

Are you afraid that you're going to die from an easily-preventable disease? I don't mean 'die of cancer because I can't afford chemotherapy', I mean, for example, 'die of cholera because there is no such thing as clean water here'. If not, then you're better off than the roughly five million people who will be effected by cholera alone every year.

If you are born in America, you are unbelievably lucky. As broken and corrupt as our system may be it is still a functional system that is light-years ahead of the vast majority of the world.

I'm not writing this off as White People's Problems, because 1) it's not and 2) one of the things that makes America great is that Americans will always, always fight to make things *better*. That, more than anything else, is the soul of our nation - we are never satisfied and always want things to improve. Yes, let's reform our financial industry. Let's march on Washington and camp on the Mall and shout and stomp and play guitar until Congress gets the message and stops listening to rich industry lobbyists and starts listening to us. Let's chain ourselves to the gate in front of the White House until President Obama orders Guantanamo to actually close. Hell, if I was still back in Santa Fe and un-/underemployed there's a chance I'd have joined the crowd in Albuquerque. Our country has problems; let's try to fix them.

But. To entirely lose perspective is disingenuous. To not have any perspective in the first place is worse, but probably more common.

If your problem is you can't afford your mortgage? In the grand scheme of things, that doesn't matter. You're still rich, globally speaking. Living on ramen noodles? Every five seconds a child dies from hunger. Today - just like they did yesterday, just like they will tomorrow - people are dying of diseases like malaria and cholera and measles, diseases which barely exist in America. Today, women live in countries where they are not allowed to speak or read or drive. Today, children are working in sweatshops. They work on farms and in mines, in unspeakable conditions.

Does it suck that the head of JPMorgan Chase makes millions while other American struggle to feed themselves and their families? Yes. And I've been there, in a situation where you're scraping by paycheck-to-paycheck, and your employer is trying to cut costs, and you feel sick when you need to call someone and ask if you can borrow some money, and you feel a little knot of shame in your belly whenever you're at the grocery store and need to tell the cashier it's an EBT, not debit card, because if it weren't for food stamps you couldn't afford groceries at all. It sucks. It's unfair. We need to change it.

But let's remember that the world is not fair, and perhaps one of the greatest privileges that we have as Americans - maybe even greater than having clean water and some semblance of social support networks - is that when push comes to shove we have a voice. We can take to the streets. People may get pepper sprayed or hit by the police or rounded up and arrested. They will not be shot in the head. The police will not see you protesting, then come into your home during the night and kill you and your family or worse. The Occupy Wall Street protesters will not disappear into a prison which on paper doesn't exist, to an ultimate fate unknown.

Things are bad in America, but they're bad *by our standards*. Let's try and remember that. Remember that while you protest banks, children die preventable deaths in nations where their parents *can't* speak out against the system. Just keep it in mind, that's all I ask.

Tasty

2011-09-28T00:20:00.005-06:00

Resolved: Morningstar Farms Sausage, Egg & Cheese Biscuits are far better than anything from the frozen food aisle really has any right to be.

Today is just fabulous

2011-09-20T08:51:00.001-06:00

Don't Ask, Don't Tell is officially a thing of the past. You can now be as queer as you want to in the US military and not get kicked out for it! Which is pretty cool; we've now joined progressive nations such as Albania, Colombia, South Africa, Slovenia, and Uruguay. And also every other NATO country.

However, please don't think that we actually offer *equality* now. There's still a federal law on the books called the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Since the military is run by the feds, the military is required to abide by DOMA. In order to understand the significance of this, we first need a crash course in how military pay works.

For the sake of this discussion there's two main types of military pay: your base pay (ie, the set amount that everyone at your pay grade gets per month), and allowances. Allowances come in various types, are tax-free and are generally meant for a specific 'purpose'. If you live off-post you get a "Basic Allowance for Housing" - how much it is depends on your pay grade, the cost of living where you're assigned and how many dependents (spouse and children) you have. A similar allowance is the Basic Allowance for Subsistence which is meant to support your food budget. Then there's also things like the Family Separation Allowance, which is money you get if you're living geographically separated from your dependents. None of these take into consideration how much money your spouse makes: you could be married to a billionaire and you'd still get the same BAS and BAH. Even at my relatively low pay grade, these allowances can add up to a fair amount - someone the same rank as I am who's married may be bringing home at least twice as much money as I do.

So there's arguably some injustice in that system to begin with: having a dependent (even a spouse who works full-time themselves) automatically nets you a lot more money.

DOMA, of course, says that the federal government can't recognize same-sex marriage. Since the federal government writes our paychecks, the military can't recognize same-sex marriage. Which means, if you are a gay service member, you now get the privilege of saying, "Yup, not straight."

You do not get the privilege of being eligible to move out of the barracks (if you're junior enlisted) or to live in family housing on-post, or collect BAH and BAS at the with-dependents rate. You are not eligible to have your spouse live in on-post housing with you, nor will you get separation pay for not being able to live with them. Your spouse will not be considered a military dependent at all, which means amongst other things, they are not eligible for the highly-subsidized health care plans the military offers families. They are not eligible for any of the support programs the military offers families.

It's my opinion that the main problem is not that a gross double standard between hetero- and homosexual relationships persists; it's that there is a gross double standard between how single and married soldiers are treated. I, at the age of 25, need to live in the barracks, but the 18-year-old who got married to the guy she met in training and has known for all of six months gets a free house? Obviously the issue is all tied up in our nation's heteronormative mindset, but - still.

Baby steps are better than no steps at all, I suppose...

On the road again

2011-08-05T16:05:00.000-06:00

I'm en route back to Santa Fe - right now sitting in the Houston airport waiting to head off to Albuquerque. I originally was ticketed for a flight that would just now be boarding in San Antonio; instead a very helpful Continental employee cheerfully got me a seat on an earlier flight to Houston and then a more timely connection through to Albuquerque. I've had good experiences with Continental's customer service in the past, but I'm pretty sure being in my spiffy dress uniform helped.

I cannot begin to express how happy I am to be:
1) On leave. For the two weeks I can go to bed whenever I want, get up whenever I want, eat whenever and wherever I want, and don't need to answer to a single NCO. The last day I had like that, free of any sort of obligation to the Army, was January 30.
2) Out of San Antonio. Current weather in San Antonio: 105º, "feels like" 108º and according to weather.com is so hot that outdoor activity should be avoided. This is unremarkable weather there; it was the same weather, for example, for our two-week field exercise. Current weather in Santa Fe: 83º, "feels like" 81º, temperatures gently falling to 57º this evening. Most places in the industrialized world have more pleasant weather than San Antonio.
3) Away from Ft. Sam Houston. There's a good chance in my career that I'll end up back there for further training. But for sixteen weeks one of the strictest training companies there. A few hours each weekend off post (assuming you want to pay for the cab ride) is not sufficient.
4) An adult again. Things I can now do now that Army training no longer owns me: go places on my own without a "battle buddy". Stay out past 8:30 PM on a weeknight or 10:00 on a weekend. Skip breakfast if I so desire. Skip lunch if I so desire. Drive. Sleep in past 6:30 on a weekend. Carry my cell phone on me during the day. Carry a book on me during the day. Walk around in civilian clothes without a bit of paper on my person indicating that I have permission to do so. Wear tank tops with nothing over them, with my shoulders and armpits exposed for the world to see.
5) On my way to see mountains. Northern New Mexico spoils you and you truly don't realize how lucky you are to be there - until you're not. There's nowhere in the world like it: the way the mountains just glow around sunset, the smell of chiles roasting in August, the sudden downpours of monsoon season, the art and food and bustle of tourists and thrum of day-to-day life all blending together with the incredible natural beauty everywhere you look. Then after a few days in the Land of Enchantment I'm off back to my original home in New Jersey, where there's good pizza and perhaps a trip down the shore, definitely a trip to one of Philadelphia's museums, and most importantly, the comforting familiarity of the house where I grew up, my parents, their delightfully goofy dog.
6) On the cusp of another adventure. I'll be spending the next 24 months stationed in Germany, which means I get to live in Europe! For two years! With a steady, decent paycheck! There'll be lots of trips to Fun Places in Europe (first up: London, of course), good German beer, a fantastic opportunity to learn a fascinating language, and hopefully two years of learning more about medicine.

Life, right now, is *good*.

Robots in disguise. Misogyny, not so much.

2011-07-10T09:05:00.000-06:00

I saw the new Transformers movie. Whether this was a good thing or not is kind of up in the air.

The good things about the movie: Lots of stuff blows up, Chicago gets pretty much destroyed. If you like to see giant robots destroying things - and you can tolerate Michael Bay's deeply chaotic style - it's not awful.

The bad things: Shia LeBeouf continues to be himself - an insipid, uninteresting whiny brat. The plot is completely incoherent - the bad guys want to...bring their planet to Earth, because...I don't even know. And then there's an entirely obnoxious subplot in which Shia LeBeouf's girlfriend exists and his parents want him to get married and blah blah blah. Which brings me to...

The ugly: Oh, Mr. Bay. Have you ever met a woman? Like, actually conversed with a real, live female?

There's this theoretical 'test' out there, the Bechdel test. What it amounts to is three questions: are there at least two female characters in a film? Do they talk to each other? About something other than men? It's not meant as an assessment of how anti-feminist/misogynistic/etc a work is, but more of something applied to track trends (a *huge* number of modern movies fail this test). For example: the new Transformers film passes. There are three female characters. Two of them talk to each other. They do not talk about men (well, they do, but they also have about ten seconds of dialogue on another topic).

Female Character A exists purely as sex appeal. She has precisely zero personality. We don't know what she likes or dislikes, we don't know anything about her history or how she ended up where she is, we don't know anything about her friends or family. The first time we see her in the movie? Literally a panty shot of her ass, barely covered, as she walks up the stairs and then goes and straddles her boyfriend in bed. Her further contributions to the plot include creating conflict by having another man interested in her, and being taken hostage and waiting helplessly for rescue.

Female Character B is a career woman in the intelligence community who comes across as a shrill harpy. She's a cold-hearted bitch. We can tell because she treats her assistant with absolute disdain, and walks into situations and attempts to take control when the (male) people who are already there are rapidly losing control and messing everything up. The first time we see her, she has her flunky carrying her multiple designer purses and an extra pair of shoes around for her.

Female Character C is the main characters mother, who makes reference to her son's being a loser and says he can't expect to get another girlfriend as hot as Female Character A unless he has a big penis.

97% of the movie is divided between the useful characters fighting the bad guys, and Shia LeBeouf whining about being unemployed while his super hot girlfriend has a job, which of course makes him feel emasculated. His girlfriend overtly says she loves having him around the house as a "boy toy"; the implication is that the fact that he's unemployed and she's not is (and should be) inherently bad. The issue isn't so much that he's unemployed and feels bad about it (understandable) but his girlfriend has a job and he doesn't (haha look at the looooser!).

The thing about movies like this is that it in and of itself isn't deeply problematic. Of course a Michael Bay movie is stupid and worthless in the moments when it's not about blowing stuff up*. The thing is it's indicative of the society that not only creates movies like this but embraces them - that not only sees nothing wrong with but downright enjoys a movie where our introduction to the first female character is literally a tracking shot of her ass as she goes up a flight of stairs. It's not a cause but a symptom of a huge problem with our culture - women are objects meant to be looked at, not people with meaningful lives.

*I also seriously question the way that Michael Bay thinks the military works, by the way.

Back from the dead for a very important birthday message

2011-07-04T14:50:00.000-06:00

It's that time of year again - time for us to throw some dead animals on a fire, drink a juice made from fermented flowers and shoot some explosives pointlessly into the air, all in honor of the fact that around this time 235 years ago, a bunch of passionate (or crazy, or both, depending on your point of view), brilliant men wrote a document saying "Enough is enough." Sitting there in the heat and the humidity (and boy, in the past month or so have I learned about heat and humidity), fifty-six men decided that the injustices rained upon them by Great Britain were no longer tolerable - and as such, the nation of United States of America would no longer sit back and accept it. "...all men are created equal," they wrote. Britain refused to treat them as such, and so it was natural, the morally right thing, to dissolve all bonds uniting them.

Simple, really. Brilliant. Unprecedented, at the time. World-changing.

It's been a rough year, yet again. Our economy still stumbles. We've had tornados and floods, political scandals and conflicts. Our government nearly shut down. We've made significant leaps towards equality in some arenas - soon gay, lesbian and bisexuals will be allowed to serve openly in the military, and can now get married in six states. Six out of forty-four may not seem like a lot, but consider that sodomy was illegal (and such laws were selectively enforced only against same-sex couples) within the past decade, and the progress is clear.

25,000 American soldiers died during that first war. Today we still have troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan; more than 6,000 of them have died. This resonates more with me this year than it did last - petty, perhaps, but at the end of January I raised my right hand and swore to spend the next four years in uniform, protecting and upholding the Constitution against all enemies. And in April one of my friends, who I've known since the first day of college six years ago, deployed to Afghanistan. Many of my new friends will be heading over there in the next six months. I may be myself.

It's a funny country we have here. We began with those words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." and proceeded, for 236 years, to refuse to treat all men equally. This is a nation that was born in the mud and fire and pain and heartbreak of war, a war we were thoroughly unprepared for, that we went into without an idea of what came after the war - and here we are, two and a half centuries later, doing the same thing, plunging headfirst into war after war. Some may be morally justified, truly fighting for the ideals our nation was founded upon. Some may be fought for vague and muddy, nebulous reasons. Do we always get it right? No, not by a long shot. But sometimes we do.

So here's to Jefferson and Franklin and Adams. To the fights we've fought for the right reasons - for freedom and liberty. To those who've fought in uniform, in the press, and in the streets; those who've fought against fighting and stood resolute and said that they will not raise up arms, that their fight will forever be one of words and ideas but never violence. To the flag on the moon and Francis Scott Key's flag which still hangs in our nation's capitol. To all the patches on the quilt - the colors and ideas and conflicts and contradictions that make up this country. We have been many things, and will continue to be many things, and someday maybe we'll figure out what we are.

An excerpt

2010-12-23T20:38:00.000-07:00

Every year the local alt-weekly does a sort of year-end wrap-up, where they briefly recap what they deem to have been some of the most significant stories of the year. It's nice, if only because the Santa Fe Reporter is the only vaguely worthwhile news publication in the state*.

Anyway. One of the year's top stories is the rather unsurprising news that law enforcement in northern New Mexico is, uh, challenged. They start with a brief recap of some late-breaking news in which the county sheriff admitted he'd been selling sheriff's department property on e-Bay in order to try to keep his house out of foreclosure. Then we get this:

If Solano’s shenanigans were characterized by discreet cunning, former Santa Fe Police Officer David Smoker’s violent assault on a handcuffed teenager last January seemed to result from a total lapse in self-control. Smoker was caught on video beating 17-year-old Brendon Singer.

Oof. Yeah, you defend yourself against that handcuffed kid. But wait - there's more!

The Santa Fe Police Department terminated Smoker and Officer Robert Hollingsworth, and suspended Officer David Rael, because Hollingsworth and Rael failed to stop the attack. The incident reverberated in the March city mayoral election, when the video was made public; the city police union supported Mayor David Coss challenger Asenath Kepler. The union had opposed the terminations.

Nothing like a bit of groupthink. But, um, wait! There's more.

Lt. Stephen Ryan, who conducted the internal investigation into the beating, was later put on paid administrative leave for a year and a half after being charged with driving under the influence. When his conviction was overturned in October, City Manager Robert Romero put him back in the internal investigations section, angering the Santa Fe Police Officers Association.

....Yes, the guy who was responsible for investigating alleged misconduct by other officers was then charged with drunk driving. And then put back into the same position. Did he get to investigate his own misconduct the first time around?

Meanwhile, just down the road in Albuquerque, we have city police officers passing out drunk in their cars on the side of the interstate and getting sent home with a few stern words.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Land of Enchantment.

*A couple months ago our local daily newspaper ran a headline about an ex-con's ongoing attempts to avoid reincarnation, which was a bit baffling until you realized that they meant reincarceration, which may or may not be a word to begin with. No one was really surprised.

Grumble grumble.

2010-12-20T10:11:00.000-07:00

Me: Grumble grumble *two* services I need to put shit together for this week stupid Christmas stupid blah grumble.

Boss: Unitarian Universalists aren't really big on Jesus, so for the clip art on the bulletin cover, keep that in mind. Take a look at whatever they did last year.

Me: Grumble grumble. *digs out last year's Christmas service bulletin*. *looks at big old Nativity scene on the front* *sighs* *mumbles something probably inappropriate*.

Drink me

2010-12-14T15:52:00.000-07:00

I've switched back to drinking cow's milk, rather than rice or soy milk for various reasons (interestingly, it's not a financial decision - I refuse to drink non-organic/hormone-free milk, which means the price is pretty much the same). Also, when I say "drinking" I mean "using on cereal and in cooking/baking things".

But! Acting completely on impulse I bought some Hershey's syrup today, and made myself a glass of chocolate milk.

...

Good god, there is no reason to ever grow up, if growing up means you stop drinking chocolate milk.

Also

2010-12-11T15:50:00.002-07:00

Hot on the heels of my adventure with 80- to 100% accuracy: the alphabet, phonetic or not, does not include numbers.

Welp...

2010-12-11T15:47:00.000-07:00

There's a number of online "training" things I need to do before I ship out to basic training at the end of January*, which - since it is both in my mind to do so and I have not yet lost *this* slip of paper with the password written on it - I have started today. Lesson one has taught me several things:
1) Apparently the 24-hour clock is complex enough to warrant a dozen plus slides explaining the concept of "add twelve, or a zero."
2) One of the problems with having both text displayed on the screen (say, your objectives and goals for this lesson) and a recording of someone reciting those goals is that they might not match up.
2a) A voice telling me that I need to pass the lesson exam with 100% accuracy while the text on the page tells me I need to pass it with 80% accuracy will, perhaps, not *entirely* convince me of the utmost importance of total accuracy.

*Speaking of which, I've had the following conversation probably half a dozen times: "So when do you leave?" "Last day of January." "Where are you going for training?" "Fort Leonard Wood, in Missouri." "Oh, boy, I hope you're ready for some cold weather." *Every* person who is familiar with that base has had the same reaction. So, uh, apparently I might freeze to death. And then die of heat stroke when I move on to my further training in San Antonio in early April, where the average high that time of year is in the low 80's.

Why computer literacy is important.

2010-11-24T11:07:00.000-07:00

This is from a work-related mailing list. Ironically, in a discussion about ideal mailing-list software, someone neglected to create a rule in their email software specifying that you do not need to send your out-of-office autoreply to a mailing list, and definitely don't need to send it to the same person twice. As a result, her email software is now stuck in a loop, where it sent the autoreply to the list, which automatically sent a copy of it back to her own inbox, which in turn responded with the autoreply. Repeat ad infinitum.

(I am now receiving her autoreply roughly every two minutes).

People, *please* stop being morons.

(It now takes up the entire view of that folder of my inbox.)

NaNoWriMo

2010-11-10T21:57:00.000-07:00

Dear Big Emotional Scene In My NaNoWriMo novel:

Just write your own damn self already, stupid scene that's not even supposed to be here in the first place and I don't even want you here.

Solve one problem, cause another.

2010-11-08T17:27:00.000-07:00

Problem: A friend still has a large baking dish of mine.

Solution: Friend brings baking dish to a NaNoWriMo write-in this afternoon, where we will both be.

Problem: I rode my bicycle there, and baking dish will not fit into my backpack along with my laptop,.

Solution: Pop the front wheel off my bike, stuff it in friend's large car, get ride home.

Problem: It's going to be really damn hard to ride to work tomorrow morning, since the quick-release mechanism that holds the front wheel of my bicycle to the rest of it is still in the back of my friend's car.

Solution: admit to friend that I'm a muppet; then pretend I'm a spy and we are in fact arranging some sort of clandestine exchange of state secrets, rather than her returning a six-inch steel rod, without which I cannot get to work.

I gave him my money and now he won't give it back!

2010-10-20T09:33:00.003-06:00

Banks, who are foreclosing left and right, have started complaining that they shouldn't have to stop doing it just because they might not have the right paperwork, or might not have the legal right to foreclose on that house, or (in at least one case) because the homeowner does not in fact even have a mortgage*. Why? Well, because these people borrowed money and lapsed on their payments!

So here's a hypothetical:

Say I have a cousin. His life is kind of a mess - he's marginally employed in a shitty retail job, he spends most of his paycheck on beer. To make ends meet he's got nine credit cards, all with significant outstanding balances. He's lost some money in the past gambling and buying lottery tickets. Basically, he's kind of a loser, and clearly has no idea how to manage his money.

This cousin comes to me one day and asks if he can borrow a thousand dollars. I've got a good job and can pay my bills and still tuck a bit away each month in savings. But my cousin comes to me and says he found a great deal on this used car - it runs great, really, it's a fantastic buy - and he needs me to lend him a thousand bucks. I say: Sure, but you've got to repay this, two hundred bucks a month for five months. Great, he says, and he takes the check and off he goes. He buys his new car. A few months later he loses his job because he came in late one too many times and got fired, so no more paychecks, so he stops repaying me.

Who's at fault here?

Obviously: yeah, the cousin's a loser and needs to get his act together. Dude should stop drinking and smoking, concentrate on holding down a steady job and maybe spend his booze-and-smokes money on some classes at the community college instead, to pick up some useful skills. He knew he couldn't repay me, not at the rate that I wanted, and so he shouldn't have taken the loan on those terms. But I'm the real idiot here, for giving away my money to someone who obviously did not have the means to repay it. It's my money. If I want to give it away - hand my cousin a check as a gift, rather than a loan - I'm free to do so. But if I want to loan someone my money, then it's up to me to make some effort to do so only to those who at least look like they'll be able to repay it. If someone's not earning much and is already up to their eyeballs in debt and you know this, but you loan them money anyway - well, you're kind of a moron.

So do the homeowners who tried to live beyond their means and buy houses they couldn't afford bear some culpability in our current economic disaster? Absolutely. You're responsible for living within your means, and if you spend more than you have you have to deal with the consequences.

But ultimately, it's the banks who decide who they give their money to. They, too, made a bad call, and my sympathy for them is...limited. If you loan someone a bunch of money without a reasonable belief that they can and will repay it, you're a moron.

And there's more to it too: some people were actively and intentionally misled about the terms of their mortgage. Some people I'm sure could afford their homes before the economy collapsed and they lost their jobs. Some people could afford their homes before they got sick and couldn't afford their medical bills, or had to take reduced hours at work to care for a relative.

So are individual consumers at fault? Sure, in plenty of situations. They took out a loan they couldn't repay; now there are consequences. But are the banks blameless victims in this? Sure, if by "blameless victims" you mean "suffering the consequences of a situation they created themselves".

*For an excellent, brief explanation, read this: http://www.observer.com/2010/wall-street/foreclosure-fiasco-and-wall-streets-shrug

Movie review: Red

2010-10-18T19:05:00.004-06:00

When I first saw the preview for this a couple months ago, it made me giggle and really really want to see it, because it looked like everything an action movie should be: lots of stuff blowing up, lots of gunfights, some witty dialogue, and just a whole lot of fun.

Red totally lived up to that.

First, the really good that I knew would be good: Helen Mirren! Helen Mirren, in a white evening gown, with a really big gun! Morgan Freeman! Morgan Freeman as an old retired assassin!

Next, the surprisingly good: Bruce Willis as a bored retiree is, as it turns out, kind of awesome. He's aged pretty well, which I think is part of what made it work so well. The cinematography was actually really good - the film is (very loosely) based on a comic book, and the opening of the film captured that really well. The fight scenes were all pretty goofy but in a good way. John Malkovich was, I thought, incredible in his role as a crazy man. There was a relationship between a woman and a somewhat older man which was handled surprisingly well - it wasn't a Creepy Old Man, and it wasn't some old dude just banging a young blonde or anything.

The meh: The pacing is a bit off, I think - I'm not sure exactly how, but it could've been a bit better.

All together, there's not much to say about it but this: If you're looking for two hours of witty dialogue, fun gunfights, and an overall stupid plot carried by incredibly talented actors (actors of the caliber which action movies can't often get), go see Red. If you're looking for an engaging story or something that will make you think, go see something else (then, at some other time, see Red, because it's just so much *fun*).

Attn: media. Re: everything you say sucks

2010-10-12T17:49:00.002-06:00

1. Please please please please PLEASE stop referring to it as "global warming." The 80's called, and would like their cut-rate science reporting back. If you call it "global warming" then people - who are by and large morons who get their news exclusively from CNN and FOX - will experience cold days and decide it's all untrue. Meanwhile, 98% of climatologists and the majority of other scientists are holding their heads in their hands weeping. Call it climate change, because for all practical purposes, that's what we are experiencing: our climate? It's changing. QED.

2. When a man and a woman love each other very much, they may do an adult thing. This might result in a zygote. A zygote is the product of a sperm fertilizing an ovum, or egg. This is called a zygote. It is not a fetus. Once that cell begins to divide, it is still not a fetus, but it is an embryo. It will remain an embryo for eight weeks. Then, eight weeks after fertilization, it becomes a fetus. Understand? Up to eight weeks post conception, it is not a fetus.

3. There are some vaccines that still do contain thiomersal. Assuming a typical vaccination schedule for a child in the United States, these are not given within the first two years of life, if at all. Thiomersal is not used in any routine early-childhood vaccinations.

3a. There is no evidence - none, whatsoever - that thiomersal causes autism. It was removed from most vaccines as a preventative measure, not because there was any evidence at all that it causes any sort of developmental delays.

3b. Autism rates have increased even since thiomersal has been phased out, which is fairly compelling evidence that thiomersal does *not* cause autism.

4. Autism rates have likely not actually increased; *diagnosis* rates have. This is because up until quite recently, anyone who showed markedly delayed or different mental development was labeled as sub-standard and chucked into an asylum to waste away. It is a good thing that we don't do this any more. It does not mean that we have a plague of any sort.

5. Those disease parents are refusing to vaccinate their children against kill people, every year. They are not common problems in the United States because for decades we have had highly effective vaccination programs. After the Soviet Union broke up, there was a tremendous dip in vaccination rates in the former Soviet nations, and by 1998, 5,000 people - five thousand - had died of diphtheria. This year, since parents have stopped vaccinating their children, pertussis (whooping cough) has killed ten children in California. Rotavirus - my favorite - is still a major cause of death in the developing world and kills half a million children every single year. Young children are fragile; childhood vaccinations are specifically designed by very smart people to protect them.

6. There is minimal, if any, scientifically accepted evidence that any of the following work to heal humans of conditions or diseases: acupuncture, acupressure, anything involving energy fields or auras, aromatherapy, chiropractic, faith healing, crainosacral therapy, any sort of homeopathy, reiki, or anything else that has not been tested under controlled, clinical settings.

6a. If someone claims to be able correct poor eyesight using anything other than physical reshaping of the eye, they are lying.

7. Assuming you are reasonably healthy to begin with, here is what you need to do to remain healthy:

i) WASH YOUR HANDS. Diseases in the western world are, by and large, spread by someone's hand coming in contact with their juices (usually mucus or saliva), touching something else, and then you repeating the process. If you wash your hands with soap and water frequently, you will dramatically increase your chances of not getting sick.

ii) Eat food. Not processed food products. Eat whole grains and fruits and vegetables. Drink lots of water. If something has to clarify that it is a "product" on the label, it's probably not terribly nutritious. Moderation is key here: you don't need to always eat healthy, but don't always eat crap.

iii) When you are tired? Sleep. When you are hungry? Eat. When you are *not* hungry? Don't eat.

iv) Seriously, wash your goddamn hands.

v) Exercise. You don't need to run five miles a day. You do need to use your body once in a while. Go for a walk every other day. Take the stairs instead of the elevator. Go up to the mall and window-shop the entire length.

vi) Don't binge drink. Don't smoke. Don't drive drunk or set your head on fire or anything like that.

7) Here's the thing: teenagers want to have sex. This is an absolute biological fact - once human beings hit sexual maturity, they want to have sex. Some of them will act on these urges. If these teenagers have been provided with comprehensive, honest information about the risks and safety precautions of responsible sexual activity, they will have safer sex. If they are told "don't have sex because then bad things will happen," then they will still have sex and more of them will wind up with STDs and/or pregnant.

7a) No, really: teenagers *will* have sex. Short of locking them in solitary confinement for their entire teenage years, nothing can change this. And this is nothing new - Romeo was maybe sixteen; Juliet is not yet fourteen years old.

8) We landed on the moon. There is no question about that. No one assassinated Princess Diana; she was the victim of a drunk driver. There are no aliens on this planet, reptilian or otherwise. The Denver airport is not part of some vast conspiracy about anything. Freemasons are pretty much a bunch of old white guys who still want to hang out in a no-girls-allowed clubhouse.

This is just weird and creepy and kind of gross

2010-10-06T13:36:00.004-06:00

I've decided that I'm not going to see "The Social Network" despite the fact that it was written by Aaron Sorkin. This is because it's a film about Mark Zuckerberg, who A) is still quite alive and running the company featured in "The Social Network" and B) had nothing to do with the making of the movie. Making a film adaptation of a still-living guy's autobiography, with his blessing? Sure, go for it ("Catch Me If You Can" is kind of awesome, actually). A historical film in which still-living people are portrayed, but aren't really about the people so much as what they were doing? Sure. Making a movie about someone who's dead, without the blessing of their surviving family? A little weird, but at least the dude's not going to be seeing someone else disguised as him on movie posters. Maybe it's because I'm kind of a crazy privacy person, but the idea of it just skeeves me out.

So there's that - creepy, in my opinion, so I won't see the movie. I'm not outraged over it or anything.

Then there's this:

"Channel 4 is to show a drama-documentary based on what would happen if Prince Harry were taken prisoner while serving in Afghanistan.

The 90-minute film, called The Taking of Prince Harry, features contributions from former hostages and intelligence experts.

It includes scenes showing the prince, played by actor Sebastian Reid, being held behind enemy lines while negotiations are carried out to free him."

...

So, uh, some people sat around in a conference room somewhere in London and said, "Hey, let's make a movie depicting some guy who's grandmother is famous getting captured and tortured by terrorists," and...other people agreed that that was a good idea? This is like Saw franchise style torture porn meets mindless celebrity nonsense meets pure, astonishingly poor taste.

I mean, it's one part just bizarre ("What would happen if the youngest son of a man who's mother holds a position of ceremonial importance gets kidnapped?" is not, as far as I'm aware, one of the burning questions of the day), one part just weirdly invasive (again, the "Hey, uh, we're gonna make a movie about you, just fyi" thing), and two parts grossly insensitive ("Hey, let's depict our soldiers getting taken as hostages, just for kicks!" is kind of morally dubious, IMO, and "Hey, marginally-famous-guy! Look at what could have happened when you were in Afghanistan!" is just...creepy).

I mean, for god's sake: have some dignity. Hire some hack to whip up a script in which a prince goes off and serves in the Overseas Conflict du Jour and gets captured and there can be a heroic rescue or escape or tragic death or whatever. Do not give said character the same name as an actual living prince who has served in the Overseas Conflict du Jour, and do not hire an actor who looks like said actual living prince. Ta-Da! You've got your cheaply-made generic made-for-TV movie, and now you're only vaguely tasteless, not Incredibly Fucking Creepy.

Seriously. There are people who get paid significant amounts of money who think this is a good idea. At least creepy, invasive movies aren't just American!

Toy Story 3

2010-09-15T22:05:00.003-06:00

I'll write more on this later, but: I just (finally!) saw Toy Story 3.

Standard disclaimers: I'm a giant Pixar nerd, and the Toy Story franchise got it's claws into me at a young age. That said...this film is tied for the title of "best movie of the year". It's Pixar doing what they do best. There are believable, whole characters. The story is fun and adventurous and never too intense. The characters are great. The animation, of course, is fantastic. Did I mention that there are great, emotionally-accessible characters? And at the end, you get an ending so happy that - well, I'd say you'd have to be a terrifying monster to not find a Pixar ending heartwarming, but they made a movie about terrifying monsters and it had a heartwarming ending, so there you go.

Anyway - I saw the original Toy Story when it first came out in 1995 and loved it, and this movie concluded the saga in the absolute best possible way. I imagine it would stand up perfectly well on it's own, but as the conclusion to a story that first started when I was nine, it was perfect.

(And yes, it goes on the list of "Pixar films which, rather embarrassingly, have caused me to weep like a baby", up there with, well, Up. And Finding Nemo. and Monsters, Inc. And Wall-E. And Ratatouille. And the other Toy Story movies. Curse your emotional manipulation, Pixar!)

Today in history

2010-08-28T10:48:00.002-06:00

August 28, 1955: Emmett Till, a 14-year-old African-American boy, allegedly whistles at the wife of a white grocer, whose store Till had stopped in to buy some candy, in Money, MS. That night, Till is dragged from his home, beaten and shot. His body was tied to a heavy piece of metal with barbed wire and dropped in a river. Three days later his body was found. His face was too distorted from the beating and he could only be identified by a ring he wore.

August 28, 1963: Hundreds of thousands of Americans descend on Washington, D.C., for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. The march is organized by a coalition of religious, civil rights, and labor organizations. In front of at least 200,000 people, a man named Martin Luther King, Jr. makes a speech about his dreams of equality and peace and freedom. This man was an ordained minister and held a Ph.D. in theology and had already had his house bombed by white supremacists, been stabbed in the chest, been repeatedly arrested, and had his phone tapped by the FBI. In October 1964 he would become the youngest person to ever be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

August 28, 2010: Thousands of Americans descend on Washington, D.C. for the "Restoring Honor" march. The march is led primarily by Glenn Beck, who has stated his goal as to "reclaim the Civil Rights movement." Beck is a talk-show host with both a nationally-syndicated radio show and a TV show on Fox News; in the past year he made an estimated $32 million dollars from his shows, speaking engagements, and profits from several books. After graduating high school, Beck got into radio, initially as a morning DJ. His higher education consists of one class at Yale University. He holds an honorary doctorate from Liberty University, an Evangelical Christian university founded by Rev. Jerry Falwell.

One of these things is not like the others, I think.

Some points about the "Ground Zero mosque"

2010-08-23T13:15:00.002-06:00

1. There is already a mosque using that space for Muslim prayer. Really. They're right there, in the exact location all the fuss is about. Praying. So the whole 'debate' is incredibly inane.

2. It is also not at Ground Zero, it is two blocks away. Manhattan is a very small, very dense island; nothing on Manhattan can truly be a significant distance from anything else. A brief look at Google Maps reveals the the following businesses are an equivalent distance or closer from the site of the former WTC towers: a law firm, a dental office, an Amish market, a sailboat charter business, two health clubs, several hotels, a dozen or so cafes and restaurants including a Starbucks and McDonalds, a Payless Shoe Source, Staples, and a post office. Hallowed ground, indeed.

3. It's not a mosque. It's a community center. There will be a space for prayer (which, again IS ALREADY HAPPENING AT THAT EXACT SITE). There will be an auditorium and meeting room. There will be a swimming pool and basketball courts. In short, it will look a hell of a lot like a YMCA or JCC. Know what it will most likely be used for? Meetings and presentations and swim classes and basketball games and things like that .

4. The fact that A) there are already Muslims praying right there and B) there's any demand at all for this center indicates that there is already a significant Muslim population in Manhattan. Know what else supports this theory? It's fucking New York City. Pick a demographic, any demographic, and there's a significant chunk living there*. Get over it.

*Possible exception: the Amish.

Engrish

2010-08-09T18:22:00.002-06:00

I saw an offer online a while ago for a free pedometer in exchange for my email address, and I figured why the hell not, since I'm someone who walks a fair bit, I might as well attach some numbers to my walking to nerd over. I then forgot all about it, so I was pleasantly surprised to get something other than junk in the mail today, in the form of a shiny new made-in-China plastic gadget.

It came with a little sheet of instructions, which is highly necessary for a device with all of two buttons and one function (the two buttons let you scroll between a display of steps, calories burned, or distance in miles or km, and the second button resets it). For an incredibly cheap made-in-China plastic gadget, the instructions are surprisingly well-written. Obviously there was some cut-rate translation involved, but they're usable. There are a few gems: "When changing the battery, please call the expert [er?], or maybe cause damage" is kind of charming, actually, because it's arguably true - call an "expert", or maybe you'll cause damage! Most of the page is like that - the grammar and word choice is a little odd, but it works.

And then at the very end, I'm treated to this: "Breakable does not drop and wet."

...So close! It's literally the last sentence(ish) on the sheet. They were six words away from a more-or-less acceptable English instruction sheet, and then I guess the guy who knows English best took off early or something. I suppose it's possibly true, that breakable does not drop and wet, but...

Well, okay then.

2010-08-05T21:58:00.002-06:00

I have absolutely no way to describe this, so I'm just going to put a link that you should click right here: http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15673894

A random thought about the space program

2010-07-30T19:15:00.002-06:00

The Universe: Congratulations, humans! You have evolved! You use tools and forge things out of metal and soon will invent even more wondrous things, like the internet and that weird nacho "cheese" that they put on your chips at the movie theater! Well done!

Humanity: Yeah, but I kind of feel like something's missing. We still haven't done everything we can with the technology we have.

The Universe: Well, you've pretty much been everywhere there is to be. You've explored pretty much all of all seven continents. You've been to the south pole. You've been to the north pole. You've even, however briefly, descended to the very deepest depths of the ocean! What more is there to explore?

Humanity: *looks up at the heavens* Y'know, I've always wondered what it's like up there.

The Universe: Don't be silly, humanity! Space is incompatible with life. There is, for starters, a fundamental force that effectively pins you to land, making it quite hard to go up. And even if you could, there is a distinct lack of things like air and water and everything else up there, which present some significant obstacles to squishy little things like you.

Humanity: *thinks for a moment, then shrugs* Let's get building, boys.

Humanity proceeds to build a series of rockets that are strong enough to overcome a fundamental force of the universe, yet gentle enough to safely carry humans, and then goes and does a couple loops around the planet.

The Universe: Well done. I'm impressed.

Humanity: Oh, just you wait. *lands on the moon*

The Universe: Very nice, guys.

Humanity: And how about this? *shoots several probes off in various directions, receives data for thirty some years* And this? *builds robots, sends robots to Mars* *builds another robot and sends it to the surface of Venus*launches satellites to predict weather* *launches satellites so someone can watch TV broadcast from the other side of the planet* *launches satellites that can take pictures of your license plate*

The Universe: Sweet.

Humanity: *builds manned space stations* *puts up some satellites so that anyone can precisely pinpoint exactly where on earth they are* *builds reusable spaceships to ferry supplies and people back and forth* How 'bout your fundamental forces now, Universe?

The Universe: I stand corrected, guys. You all are pretty good at finding new frontiers to explore.

Humanity: *looks at thirty years of data from Voyager 2, six years of data from two Mars rovers, and twenty years of pictures from the Hubble telescope* Man, this is expensive and boring. Let's go drill for oil! *abandons manned space exploration*

The Universe: ...what the hell?

How you know you work with an older demographic

2010-07-28T09:16:00.003-06:00

From my workplace's monthly newsletter: "It's easy to log on to the website - simply google .org, and click on "Welcome to ".

Movie review: The Karate Kid (2010)

2010-07-23T19:56:00.002-06:00

To begin with: I'm a shameless fan of the original film, so a remake already has tremendous shoes to try to fill. I'm biased and will freely admit it. The original is so perfect in it's cheesy 1980's glory. On the other hand: I'm a shameless Jackie Chan fan. I've become less a fan of his more modern (and horribly over-commercialized) work, but still - the man knows how to put together a fight scene.

The good:

*Jackie Chan did not disappoint. Again, he had tremendous shoes to fill here, and he stepped up to it. Is he Mr. Miyagi? No. Does he take the role, make it his own, and create something surprisingly good? Absolutely. This version of Mr. Miyagi being drunk and sad is surprisingly well-done. There's some emotional depth that I think Chan doesn't normally get to go into in his typical roles, but he certainly can do it.

*I won't spoil anything, but there's a whole sub-plot involving cars which is a surprisingly subdued and clever hommage to the original. We do see a car being waxed, but it's not just a shout-out, it's truly a new little story, which I was pleasantly surprised by.

*Some of the fight and training scenes are pretty decent; at least one of them was obviously highly influenced by Chan's style, if he didn't choreograph it himself. Some nice creative use of scenery, harsh enough to be interesting but clever enough to not be too scary for kids (or adults).

*Similarly, I was pleasantly surprised by how some of the kids pulled off their fight scenes.

The bad:

*C'mon, the kid's 12. You don't need a love interest.

*Jaden Smith...has potential as an actor. I'm sure, given who his father is (it may be an unpopular opinion, but Will Smith can give a decent performance), he can get all the coaching he needs. That said, he's young and I didn't for a second feel that he was talented enough to carry a film as a lead. A minor player? I think he'd be perfectly respectable. If he keeps at it, in five or ten years? Sure, seems possible. But I just didn't find him convincing for most of the movie.

*Beyond the fact that a story about preteens does not need a love interest, the whole girl subplot was just kind of...lame. It basically just spat out some stereotypes for us and gave us a montage of two kids running around Beijing. The whole story could've been cut and the film would've been better overall.

*I have no first-hand experience with Kung Fu, no with recreational martial arts in China, but, uh...a youth tournament attracts such a crowd that it fills up what looks like a very large gymnasium? Really? Hundreds of spectators, an MC, big flashy video screen displaying custom graphics? TKD matches at the Olympics barely attract crowds like that.

The ugly:

*Speaking of the tournament...okay. Again, I'm not terribly familiar with kung fu, and certainly not the sport aspect of it in China. But the tournament appeared very much to be a no-holds-barred type affair. With - well, okay, I'll be generous and just say one great big under-18 division. And they wear absolutely no protective gear. And one competitor repeatedly during one match needs to be physically dragged off his opponent after the referee calls for them to break, and he gets...a warning? And then later disqualified for injuring his opponent with an illegal move, when the score is tied, so the injured opponent...loses? And kicks to the head, knee and back are all legal? And did I mention the part where you have 12-year-olds fighting in a full-contact match with no protective gear? Reeaaally? Willing suspension of disbelief will maybe deal with the enormous crowd of devoted fans, but come on. This is some sort of youth TMA tournament, not an MMA cage match.

*Overall, I got the feeling that the creative team couldn't decide whether they wanted to be a new film which paid tribute to the original, or simply a remake.

*Pleaaaaaase stop conflating various martial arts. Karate is not kung fu. I'm not demanding any real accuracy about the actual style, but please please please make some teeny tiny little effort and get the name right.

Overall conclusion: It's a summer movie. Jaden Smith has potential, but isn't there yet. I kind of wish I'd waited and seen it on dollar day, rather than at the regular $3.50 price. Were it not for it's namesake, I think it would've been a total flop, but there's enough references in there to keep it from being a total flop. I've seen worse, but they could've done much better.

"It's only rape if he's not my religion"

2010-07-21T14:10:00.004-06:00

I might write more about this later - once I've had time to let it settle in my brain and I stop with the mindless exclamations of "No, seriously, what the hell?", but for now I'll just leave this here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/21/arab-guilty-rape-consensual-sex-jew

So a nice Israeli Jewish lady meets a guy who introduces himself, at least by name, in a manner that implies that he is a nice Jewish boy, and he's looking for some love. They go off together and have sex and, I assume, a good time is had by all. Then he reveals that actually he's not Jewish. Since she's now sullied herself with gross non-Jew bodily fluids, our young lass does the only reasonable thing: accuses him of rape. And the jury does the only reasonable thing: finds him guilty. He's off for an 18-month stay in prison.

So, uh...as I said, I'll try to come up with some more cool-headed thoughts later, but for now: seriously, what the hell?

At last, our long national nightmare is reaching it's middle

2010-07-15T14:20:00.002-06:00

11 deaths. 86 days. Up to 9,000 square miles. Up to 8,600,000 gallons of crude oil.

It's stopped. Probably. Temporarily. It won't really be fixed, truly for-good fixed, until they finish drilling relief wells and plug it from the inside, which won't happen for quite a while now. So there'll probably be more crude oil spilling into the Gulf yet. And if we continue living the way we have, it's really just a matter of time until there's another offshore drilling accident just like this one.

In other BP news, they've admitted that they strongly lobbied for the release of the guy who blew up a commercial airliner in 1988, because he was Libyan and the Libyan government wanted him released, and BP wanted to drill for oil off the course of Libya. The bomb this guy planted killed 280 people.

Copy, paste

2010-07-13T09:54:00.002-06:00

The NY Times has an article (found here*) about plagiarism. It is quite a bit "Kids these days!", but also raises some valid points: one of specific interest is that it's been shown that students who cheat don't learn as much and/or don't retain knowledge as well.

Which - well, of course. If you're not actually working with the assigned material, you're not going to learn it as well. If I'm told to write a paper on, say, Hamlet, or on the theory of general relativity, I can do one of two things. Option A is to sit down, and read through Hamlet or Einstein, take notes on important points and themes, find a core idea, and work things into that while writing a paper, turning the ideas around in my head and toying with them until they fit. Or, I can take option B, and buy a paper from the internet, put my name on it, and turn it in.

Now, I never even tried to cheat during college. I say this not out of some sense of moral superiority, but if nothing else, there was the fact that you really couldn't cheat at St. John's. I'm sure you could try - I could have downloaded a paper on Dante instead of writing it myself. But those papers are turned in after months of sitting in class discussing things. You're actively engaged with the material long before any papers are due, so if you suddenly hand in an essay that sounds nothing like the way you speak, nor anything close to the ideas you've discussed in class, your professor will notice.

So that's where I'm coming from, and that's why I find it a little baffling that the professor referred to in the article is resorting to in-class writing assignments, so that he has a baseline to compare later papers to, so as to better look out for plagiarism. Wouldn't that time be better spent just discussing the material with the students? Surely "I know that Student A has a great eye for picking up on the broad themes in a given work, and Student B tends more to pick at little details, trying to find great meaning in the flourishes" is just as effective, if not more than basing your judgement on a handwritten essay forced out in a 60-minute class session?

*It has occurred to me that Facebook doesn't import links in notes, so if you're reading this via Facebook: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/opinion/13tue4.html?ref=opinion

Ye olde bigge toppe

2010-07-11T21:53:00.003-06:00

Growing up, one of my absolute favorite movies was Dumbo. It was one of the VHS cassettes I probably just about wore out (along with The Land Before Time, and an old recording of episodes of Winnie the Pooh). I was always totally freaked out by the pink elephant scene - which I'm pretty sure is justified because even as an adult my reaction is pretty much "Man, what the hell?"

Also as an adult - it's a great film. It's touching and the music is great and the animation! God, they don't make cartoons like they used to. And brief foray into LSD-induced nightmares aside, it strikes a great balance between silly fun and scary for the kids.

But.

So there's the obvious thing where all the crows sound stereotypically black and the uncomfortable part where the main crow? is named Jim Crow. So...yeah. But further? Early on there's that scene where the circus train pulls up and they're all setting up the tent, which is primarily set up by a bunch of "roustabouts", who are portrayed as decidedly dark figure lacking in any clear features, which is...well, okay it was made in 1941, and maybe it's a stylistic decision? It's during a rainstorm after all. And since it's a Disney movie they sing a fun little song. In which they describe themselves as happy-hearted roustabouts. Who never learned to read or write, who "slave until we're almost dead" (yeah), and don't know when they'll get paid, but it's fine because they'll just toss it away when it comes.

So...yeah. Great movie, but a little bit cringeworthy at points.

Dear gas-guzzling morons:

2010-07-08T13:14:00.003-06:00

Putting a bumper sticker on your car saying "Slow down, save gas, reduce oil profits" will do precisely nothing to reduce oil profits (or, for that matter, to reduce the degree to which oil companies rape the planet).

You know what will help to reduce oil profits?

STOP DRIVING YOUR RIDICULOUS FULL-CAB, EXTENDED-BED PICKUP TRUCK. ALSO YOU JUST RAN A RED LIGHT AND NEARLY HIT ME SO MAYBE DON'T DO THAT ANYMORE EITHER.

Seriously - you want to reduce your carbon footprint/stick it to the man/etc? Buy a bicycle and/or a bus pass! You can't - I repeat, *can't* - claim to be making any sort of meaningful effort to reduce your oil consumption if you drive. It's not a priority in your life? Fine. I personally think you're at best a short-sighted dick if so, but fine, it's your choice. If that's the case, stop with the stupid bumper stickers and t-shirts and slogans. Shut up or step up.

Congratulations! It's a representative democracy!

2010-07-02T21:34:00.003-06:00

Well, it's that time of year again: time to cook some dead animals over open flames, drink beer, and then maybe watch some things blow up in the sky.

It's been a rough year for you, America. That's inevitable, I suppose, when you're a nation founded on the idea that every man has the right to stand up and speak his mind, and every man has the right to seek his own fortune. Now don't get me wrong - a dictatorship might look tidier, but I wouldn't trade it for the world.

Recently I've been reading a bit about America's western expansion. An odd time in our history, wasn't it? On one hand, it was a time of pure possibility: there was a hell of a lot of country out there, and if you could gather your things up and get a horse, well - go find your slice of it! But at the same time, amidst all this passion and hope and enthusiasm, it was at best overlooked that there were already people living there; at worst they were forcibly relocated, starved out (intentionally or not), or just plain killed.

So we've kind of always been a nation of mixed messages - we are all Americans! every man for himself! - and this year has been no different. Right now, of course, one of the biggest stories is the BP oil spill in the Gulf, which is the largest accidental oil spill in history and unquestionably the worst environmental disaster in American history and quite likely in the world. We've got people drawing Hitler mustaches on pictures of the first non-white president (which is...uh, logically questionable), shouting that we can't possibly offer some sort of state-run health insurance (other than Medicare, Medicaid, the Indian Health Service, the VA, health care for active-duty military members and their dependents and SCHIP), and pulling over brown-skinned people and asking for their papers (not to mention what happens if you're a different shade of brown and try to get on an airplane). And our economy, of course, is still somewhere south of awful, with no meaningful recover on the immediate horizon.

So, yeah, a rough year. And that's part of why I tend to have a kind of hard time with the 4th of July as it's celebrated. Celebrate our freedom, sure. Commemorate both the political minds who had the audacity to declare "Sorry, George, we're a free and independent nation" and those who fought on the ground for it. And enjoy and use that freedom that people fought for: have fun, take a day off work, say what's on your mind. But don't forget that we're not perfect, and to claim we are leads down a dangerous road.

And yeah, we've got some good stuff going for us. We've got a non-white president, and no matter what: we've got the freedom to draw a Hitler mustache on a picture of him, and we've got the freedom to tell the mustache-drawers that their thoughts are moronic. And when it comes down to it, today is a holiday because 234 years ago, a group of men sat down and said, "Our government has failed us, so we no longer recognize them as our government. We tried to reconcile things peacefully, and that didn't work, so we're taking matters into our own hands." No colony had ever declared themselves to be an independent state before, and certainly no rag-tag band of thrown-together militias had ever dreamt of successfully taking on the British forces. But they did it and - god almighty, it worked. I grew up less than ten miles from where Mr. Jefferson took Mr. Locke's philosophy and turned it into something real, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

But here's my other problem with celebrating the 4th of July the way we do: when those 56 men signed that piece of paper, they were committing treason and effectively declaring war against the greatest military force in the world. When George Washington had the Declaration read to his troops in New York, there were British forces camped within sight. Imagine that: you're a soldier in the Continental Army in 1776 - which quite possibly means you were no more than a teenager. There you are, in a scruffy uniform, camped in the oppressive New England summer in New York, and you can see the greatest military force in the world, right there, waiting. And then here comes your general, and he reads out a document that declares that this is not some little uprising, and this will not be just a series of small skirmishes. This is war, and not just that but a war of ideas. This is about liberty and freedom and self-determination; this is about the fact that we will not yield to your tyranny.

And then the British responded: we will not leave. We do not accept your declaration.

And so they fought. 25,000 American soldiers died. 20,000 British sailors died. 7,500 Germans died. Some of those soldiers died in combat. More of them died from illness - from cold, from starvation, from scurvy and smallpox and pneumonia and everything else that thrives in big groups living in close quarters, in the cold, with no clean water, under tremendous stress. Over fifty thousand people - almost entirely men, mostly young - dead. Because of what was written on a piece of paper and signed on July 4th.

Was it worth it? As much as a death in war can be worth anything, absolutely. Had those men not died we would have no concept of political freedom like we do today; the closest anyone had come was promising limited rights to the rich elite, via the Magna Carta. If ever there was a war which made the future better, it was the Revolutionary War. But it was still a war. Young men still died. Families were still torn apart. Tens of thousands of lives were shattered.

So - keep that in mind. Enjoy what you have and celebrate that you have it. Take a look at the actual Declaration - it's truly a masterpiece and well worth reading. And take a moment, just a few seconds even, to remember that this day commemorates not just freedom, but a war. That American independence did not just happen; the British were in no rush to let it be taken. Maybe they fought because they truly believed in American independence, in that je ne sais quois that is America and not Britain. Or maybe they just knew they were asked to fight, so they did. Or maybe they were pressed into service. Or they were simply young and looking for something to do. It doesn't matter why, because in the end, they either lived, or they died. That's worth remembering, even now.

...really?

2010-07-02T10:26:00.002-06:00

From today's police blotter in the local paper:

"Police arrested Mateo Trinidad-Rodriguez, age unavailable, 20A Sierra Place, on Wednesday and charged him with aggravated driving while intoxicated, reckless driving and leaving the scene of an accident. Trinidad-Rodriguez was involved in a rollover crash on Armenta Street. The arrest was his seventh on DWI charges." [emphasis added]

Really? And he wasn't charged with driving without a license, meaning that after six DWI charges, dude's still got a valid license? Because, um. Perhaps after - well, one, in my opinion, but certainly after, I don't know, three or four or five or six arrests for drunk driving, you should perhaps not be trusted to operate a motorized vehicle anymore?

Ah, for the simple days of alien invasions

2010-07-01T09:59:00.006-06:00

I'm working at this church, and one of my responsibilities at work is to put together the "order of service" - the little 'program' handed out every Sunday morning that tells people what songs and hymns are being sung and who's singing and so on and so forth. People email me all that information, I pretty it up and print it out.

Of course the theme this Sunday will be, well, the fourth of July. People will speak about patriots and revolutionaries from within this church and there'll be lots of terrible patriotic songs and so on. I got it early this week - I don't normally until Friday - and so I'm taking my time with it, trying to make it readable and, most importantly, hunting for some nice patriotic clip-art for the cover. It's printed brochure-style, on a legal-sized piece of paper folded in half, and the front page has the name of the church and the date and the ministers name and so on, and some vaguely-thematic picture.

So, to Google I go! "Fourth of July" gives me lots of animated GIFs and pictures of hot dogs, which aren't really doing anything for me. I tweak my search terms. I get a sudden thrill of joy...before the cold knowledge of reality smacks me down.

It probably would not be appropriate to put the movie poster from the film Independence Day - either the version which depicts a giant alien spaceship blowing up New York City, or the version which depicts a giant alien spaceship blowing up the White House - on the cover of this. Will Smith sitting on top of a smaller alien space ship smoking a cigar, having just punched an alien in the face and shouted "Welcome to Earth!", is probably also inappropriate.

Inappropriate - especially considering that the average age in this congregation is, like, 80 - yet oh so very tempting.

ETA: Further things which are probably inappropriate: Captain America, a derogatory map of "the world according to America", a picture of Mickey Mouse saluting a flag, Obama with a Hitler mustache, an image of the Twin Towers superimposed on an American Flag, an image of fireworks with the words "Armed citizens used assault weapons to fight tyrannical and oppressive government", a rather attractive young lady wearing tight-fitting jeans and an American-flag-print bikini top throwing up a peace sign while standing in a wheat field, a picture of Mario reaching the end of a level and bringing down the American flag next to the castle, an attractive young woman wearing *only* an American flag, a dog dressed as a WWII-era soldier in front of an American flag, and a kitten in an American-flag hammock. Internet = weird.

Second edit: Also, while it is vaguely thematic in that it has the Liberty Bell on it, it would probably be frowned upon if I used the Phillies' logo.

Food for thought

2010-06-27T18:55:00.002-06:00

"Whether we wish it or not, we may soon have to make a clear choice between the special nation to which we pledge our allegiance and the broad humanity of which we are born a part. This choice is implicit in the world to come. We have a little time in which we can make the choice intelligently. Failing that, the choice will be made for us in the confusion of war, from which the world will emerge unified - the unity of total desolation."

-- E. B. White, The Wild Flag, 1946.

Om nom nom

2010-05-16T21:01:00.002-06:00

Grilled cheese sandwich + tomato soup = delightfully simple, yummy dinner.

Things of interest, interest in things

2010-05-13T00:55:00.004-06:00

I have this kind of perpetually changing list of "things that I don't know much about but think maybe may be interesting but not enough to really seek out information, unless I'm bored or just stumble across something on that topic in which case I'll take a look and see if it's interesting or not." This is a widely varied list (a great shock, I'm sure, to anyone who's ever met me) and currently includes topics such as cholera, the history of tea in the western world, whether the local train is diesel or what, and historical dentistry (don't ask).

It turns out that another item on this list was cricket - the sport, not the insects (which freak me the hell out). I saw a passing mention of a cricket and said, "The extent of my knowledge about this sports is 'flat bats' and 'it's played in an oval I think?' Perhaps I shall use the internet to educate myself."

Conclusions:

1. Apparently you can write out cricket scores as fractions.

2. I still really understand nothing about the sport.

3. Perhaps it's my cultural bias and ignorance, but cricket seems to be the stupidest damn sport ever. I reached that conclusion when Wikipedia informed me that a particular fielding position (which isn't always in the same place or something?) is referred to as the "silly mid on". It's like no one is even trying.

4. Cricket is, however, a sport which could be dramatically improved by adding one hungry grizzly bear per game. There aren't many sports I think that about (ice dancing is another that comes to mind), but cricket definitely belongs on the list.

What.

2010-05-09T20:23:00.003-06:00

My attempts to understand what exactly the problem is with Britain's massive screw-up of an election have led me to the conclusion that there's only one good solution:

Write a freaking constitution. Seriously, the universe is trying to tell you guys something, and maybe it's that working from an unwritten, nonsensical system kludged together according to the changing whims of society of hundreds of years is perhaps not the best idea. Case in point: as far as this stupid American can tell a big part of the problem is that you for some reason need a supermajority in the House of Commons in order to have a prime minister, however, there's no real obligation to have a prime minister. There's no legal document that says,"Uh, yes, we need to have a head of government" - basically the highest office in the land is ruled by nothing more than tradition and momentum. That, amongst other things, strikes me as maybe something you want to fix? For god's sake, there's no shame in it. Just write some stuff down, come up with a coherent electoral system, and join the, oh, post-Industrial Revolution world!

Granted, what I'm really hoping for, solely for the "Holy shit" factor is for the queen to actually use the privilege that she does have and, you know, take over. Corgis and silly hats all around!

I no longer live in New Jersey

2010-05-06T19:26:00.003-06:00

Right now, the first two stories on the local newspaper's website are:

Officials aim to trap foraging bear

and

New Mexico confirms first hantavirus case of 2010.

I swear, every time I start to think I love this place, I remember why it sucks. And then every time I start to think it sucks I remember why I love it. Some of the most beautiful scenery in the country? Check. Terrible, frightening potentially fatal disease spread by rodents? Check. Fantastic sunsets just about every night? Check. Recreational drunk driving? Check. Amazingly wonderful food? Check. Something like fifteen measly inches of rain per year? Check.

My nerd thoughts on Doctor Who, let me tell you them. (Spoilers)

2010-05-02T18:00:00.006-06:00

I have finally watched both The End Of Time and The Eleventh Hour, and will be finishing my Who catch-up tonight. Spoilers ahoy!

So far I'm kind of lukewarm on Matt Smith's Doctor, but I was a big Tennant fan, so he's got some mighty big shoes to fill. His characterization seemed a little bit rough in The Eleventh Hour - but the terribly devious thing about Doctor Who is that, well, yes, he's in a sense a brand new person, so they have an in-universe excuse for it.

Amy seems like she'll be a decent enough companion, though there's kind of too many shades of both Rose Tyler and Donna Noble - she's a little bit dumb, working some stupid dead-end job, crappy/no family, etc. But I did grow to like Donna, and I'm willing to wait a bit before judging. I did really hope that she was actually a police officer, just because that would've been an interesting change, and I think it could've gone some amusing places. But oh well.

If someone could please explain to me the part where Martha married Mickey Smith, that would be great, because - what?

I [i]love[/i] the new Tardis. I will miss the old, more busted-up appearance, but as soon as I saw the spinny thing on the control panel and the hot and cold water taps I was in love. Sexy thing, indeed.

The Doctor's eagerness to have Amy join on struck me as kind of weird, because remember when he really was hesitant about letting his prior two companions on? Yes? Well, apparently he's not, and if that means we never hear a damn thing with him mooning over Rose Tyler again, I'll be pretty damn happy.

Prisoner Zero and the whoever aliens were pretty good monsters of the week - the part with the little girls in the hospital was surprisingly effective. Apparently Steven Moffat is now the writer and Russell T Davies is gone - which is good, because Davies gave us all sorts of mediocre-at-best episodes, and Moffat gave us goodies like The Girl in The Fireplace and Blink (which I still maintain is one of the best television episodes ever). So plot-wise, I'm feeling pretty optimistic, and I have a feeling that Moffat will also do good things with the characterization.

Did I mention that I love the new Tardis? And my god how much do I want to see the Tardis's library?

Papers, please

2010-04-24T11:56:00.002-06:00

Arizona just passed a new law about immigration enforcement. What this new law does, primarily, is require local law enforcement personnel to detain anyone who they reasonably suspect is an illegal immigrant. It also requires legal immigrants to carry their immigration papers with them.

From my point of view, there are a few big problems with this. 1

1. Don't the cops have better things to do? Seriously - let's leave immigration enforcement to the feds, and let the local guys deal with, well, local crime. I'm sure the police in Phoenix or wherever have plenty of theft and burglary and domestic disputes and DUIs and drug problems to deal with. If we add in, "needing to take someone into custody because you think they're illegal and hold them until we get it cleared up with the feds", I suspect the amount of time cops have to deal with the other stuff will be reduced. Contrary to what some people believe, "dude who crossed the border illegally and now works mopping floors at McDonalds" is not really an immediate threat to anyone's safety. "Dude beating the crap out of his wife" is.

2. Uh, so, what exactly is "reasonable suspicion?" That's what the bill says - if Officer Smith pulls over John Doe for rolling through a stop sign and has "reasonable suspicion" that Mr. Doe is in the country unlawfully, then Officer Smith has to check that out. So, okay, what's going to lead to a reasonable suspicion? It can't possibly be "Dude's got a hispanic name," because, uh, there's quite a number of people in Arizona who are Hispanic, and not all of them illegally. It's quite possible to be hispanic, and your family's been here for centuries and you're white as can be. It's also possible to be hispanic, and your family's been here for centuries, and you're not white. Or you could look hispanic, have the name, and be a new resident of this country but perfectly legal. Somehow, I strongly suspect that in many places, Carlos Chavez who looks Mexican (but his family's been here since the 1700's) is much more likely to get hassled under this law than Carlos Chavez who looks white (but his family's been here since the 1700's). This is because this is an incredibly stupid law, that basically kicks a door wide open and invites law enforcement officers to let their personal biases be used as an excuse for detaining people.

3. In the unlikely event that this law is not struck down as being grossly unconstitutional and also really rather stupid - you know what's going to happen? A lot of Arizona's illegals are going to leave Arizona. Some of them might go back to their country of origin, sure, maybe. More of them will head west to California, or Nevada, or maybe even Utah - or head on over here, to New Mexico.

Now, I generally feel fairly apathetic about illegal immigration. On the one hand: I do think that we need an orderly process that allows our government to know who's in the country. On the other hand: I don't really see who all these people getting hurt by illegal immigrants are, and I think that if we all the sudden come down real hard, it's going to hurt an awful lot of American citizens, because there won't be anywhere near as many people washing dishes and mopping floors and mowing lawns and putting up drywall, and there's not really a lot of American citizens waiting in line for those jobs.

So part of me wants to say: Eh, New Mexico gets an influx of super cheap labor willing to do jobs I'm not willing to do? Fine. Another part of me, though, does remember that they like any humans will need places to live and medical care and so on. So is there an impact on the community? Yes. Is it a positive or negative impact? I don't know - I'm inclined to say it's fairly neutral (because they need medical care, yes, but they also work and buy stuff).

Regardless of how it effects my state, though - this AZ law is really stupid. If it is enforceable, it's going to A) hurt local communities by distracting police from the rest of their police work, and B) open a great big huge door with lights and arrows and a giant welcome sign for discrimination lawsuits.

Really?

2010-04-21T12:11:00.002-06:00

Since my job-hunting process can now be summed up as "Is there some possibility I meet the requirements for this job regardless of whether or not I want it? Yes? Apply!", I've encountered a couple varieties of applications.

1. Most common for retail and customer service positions: those obnoxious online "personality" screens where they ask you fifteen different ways if you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree that it's acceptable to steal from your employer.

1a. A subset of these includes drug questions, where they specifically ask you if you think it's okay to use marijuana on the job. And cocaine. And heroin. And PCP. And so on.

2. Real jobs, where they want you to write a letter saying why they should hire you, and send them your resume. These are good.

3. Federal government jobs, where they would like to you to jump through six hoops (two of them flaming), submit a copy of your birth certificate in triplicate, swear an oath of loyalty to USAJobs.gov's resume builder, put your left foot in, put your left foot out, put your left foot in, submit your resume and sixteen pieces of paper via the postal service, shake your left foot all about, and then contact an undercover operative with a copy of your third-grade report card. Then you wait six months to hear anything. These are somewhat annoying.

3a. Jobs with the TSA (shut up, I'm in dire need of a paycheck), where they want you to answer 35 individual yes-or-no questions as to whether or not you have been convicted of a given offense. Included on said list are offenses such as murder, aircraft piracy, kidnapping, treason (really), sedition (no, really), and my favorite: "Lighting violation involving transporting controlled substances. Essentially, this means that if you have been convicted of transporting illegal drugs in a plane without activating the navigation or anti-collision lights you are disqualified."

I'm baffled by the specificity in that last one - "interference with navigation" is already covered, as are any number of felony convictions (involving drugs? burglary? cats? conspiracy? etc), so it's not like, "Well, you smuggled drugs by air into the country, but you had the proper lighting, so that's cool".

Science! (not really)

2010-04-13T14:32:00.002-06:00

Problem: I'm kind of approaching mullet-esque territory.

Cause: When I last got my hair trimmed, the stylist neglected to pay enough attention to the neckline in back.

Hypothesis: Judicious application of cutting appliances will solve this problem.

Process: Adjust three mirrored medicine cabinet doors such that subject can view appropriate area of body. Obtain scissors and comb. Hack around realizing once the first cut is made that you have no idea what you're doing. Continue anyway, because why would you pay a professional to do something like this? Briefly consider saying "to hell with it," busting out the clippers, and going GI Jane again. Continue anyway. Acknowledge that I am likely due for a proper trip in a month or so and figure they'll repair any minor damage then.

Results: Obviously amateur, but within acceptable parameters.

A true cat story

2010-04-05T18:40:00.003-06:00

INT: KITCHEN - DAY

HUMAN stands at the stove, cooking herself some eggs for lunch. Behind her, the cat door clatters open and BIG BLACK CAT enters.

HUMAN

Hello, housemate's Big Black Cat. You are absolutely covered in dirt, as you often are.

Cat makes a beeline across the open-plan house and stops in front of the front door.

CAT

Meow

(subtitles: Lemme out!)

HUMAN

You just came in from outside, you doof.

CAT

Mow meow MOW MOW

(subtitles: Oh god oh god why won't you let me outside right now you horrible person it hurts!)

Human crosses to front door and opens it.

HUMAN

Fine, you stupid beast, but I'll remind you that this is the same damn outside you just came in from.

CAT

Mow.

Cat stands uncertainly in doorway.

HUMAN

In or out, your choice, but please pick one before my eggs overcook.

Cat backs up a step.

HUMAN

Okay, inside it is.

The cat dashes out through the closing screen door.

CAT

Meow!

(subtitle: Gotcha, sucker!)

HUMAN

Stupid cat.

Script Frenzy

2010-03-31T14:39:00.003-06:00

So starting tomorrow there's probably going to be very little posted here for about a week or so, then a flurry of activity, then nothing again. Expect unusual posting habits for April. Why? Because I got talked into attempting to write a 100 page screenplay or script in the month of April.

Yes, this is brought to you by the same people who do NaNoWriMo, the "Write a 50,000 word novel in November" thing. No, I have never written any sort of script before ever. No, I don't expect to produce anything particularly worthwhile, but I think it'll be a decent writing exercise if nothing else.

For NaNoWriMo this past November I was going to try to write a coming-of-age story. Something happened in my brain and I threw that out a couple pages in and ended up writing an attempt at psychological horror involving sea monsters. This month, I'm going to try to write a coming-of-age story. I'll report in a few days as to whether there are sea monsters or not. Also, having another timed writing project to work on will probably be the inspiration I need to finally go back to editing my NaNo novel (which technically is finished, but is a pretty unreadable mess still).

Anyway. Happy writing to us all.

The waves! They burn!

2010-03-29T15:18:00.003-06:00

So there's a blurb about my adopted hometown on Consumerist. It links to this article in the Chicago Tribune. Short version: A guy here in Santa Fe is now suing his neighbor for using an iPhone. Really. He says he has "electromagnetic sensitivities"; he claims he bought the house thinking somehow it would be a refuge from...well, electromagnetic radiation. He's also been pissing all over Santa Fe's attempt to get some sort of municipal wi-fi going on.

So, the first thing: electromagnetic radiation includes things like, oh, visible light. And ultraviolet radiation, and infrared radiation, not to mention straight-up radio waves and such. So claiming you have "electromagnetic sensitivities" is completely meaningless. Everyone does - ever gotten sunburn? Congratulations, you have electromagnetic sensitivities! Have you heard of someone getting radiation poisoning? Electromagnetic sensitivities!

Two: If you're going to sue for someone aggravating a medical condition, it's courteous to produce some sort of evidence that said condition actually exists. That does not mean a note from your doctor who you apparently visited with your lawyer (as per a recent article in the Santa Fe Reporter). That means multiple, scientific, controlled, peer-reviewed studies. "My doctor said so" is not scientifically valid proof.

Three: He lists dimmer switches as something that his neighbor was using that bothered him, to which I say: what? Dimmer switches work by, in some way, altering the voltage a lightbulb gets. I know that given the already-flaky claims this is just quibbling, but even if I did believe that my cell phone or wireless router or laptop was somehow giving you muscle pain (which I don't), I'd be pretty skeptical if you claimed that a device which, at it's most basic level, shunts some of the electrical current through a resistor is giving you muscle pain. Really?

Four: Here is a map of where this house he bought is, on Barela Street in Santa Fe. As you can see, it's not exactly remote. Santa Fe one of those places where it's still pretty easy to find a place to live that's way the hell out in the boonies. The state of New Mexico has an average of 16 people per square mile - it's not particularly hard to find someplace in this state with a couple dozen miles between you and your neighbors. If someone using electronic devices can cause half a million dollars worth of damage (he's suing for roughly that), maybe instead of living in downtown Santa Fe, you'd prefer to live on the outskirts of Santa Fe, or even further away from the city out in the middle of nowhere, where the only electronic interference is your own.

Five: Santa Fe sometimes is a great town but my god do I hate that things like this happen here.

Springtime

2010-03-19T13:27:00.002-06:00

Spring in Santa Fe: when you have three consecutive days of painfully beautiful, 60+ degree weather...followed with a prediction for three inches of snow.

Alice in Wonderland

2010-03-08T20:10:00.002-07:00

Saw Alice in Wonderland last night. Conclusion: meh. It wasn't bad. I fondly recall both the Disney cartoon version and the book from when I was a wee one, so trying to make my mental picture of it change is kind of questionable.

Visually, obviously, there's huge, huge potential. And it was nice and interesting to look at, but again: meh. I think The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus actually did more interesting things visually. The costuming was great, though, and I did like what they did with both the Red Queen and the Hatter.

I'm beginning to think that, unexpectedly, Johnny Depp playing a crazy person will never get old, because he's so good at it. Similarly, no one does evil crazy quite like Helena Bonham Carter. I'm a bit mixed about Alan Rickman as the Caterpillar - he has such a distinctive voice that I'm not sure he's well-suited to voice work at this point in his career.

The Chesire Cat was well done, I thought: Stephen Fry and the visual team did a good job of putting an original spin on him but also keeping his "I'm only doing this because it amuses me" attitude. I'm not sure where exactly the bloodhound came from but he was adorable and I wanted to rub his belly.

All together, I think it's most charitably seen as an homage to Carroll's works, not as a retelling of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (because it's not). I don't think it's a particularly bad movie - the pacing was okay, enough characters were interesting enough, it was pretty enough - but it's not particularly good, either.

The best thing about it, actually, was that it's showing both in 3D and 2D here. I can't see movies in 3D, so we went and saw it in 2D. When we walked in, there was a line crossing the entire lobby of people waiting to get into the 3D showing - it was close to sold out it not entirely - whereas the 2D theater was less than half-full and we walked right in. So that was nice; for once I was glad for my visual processing failures.

My thoughts on a very important issue

2010-03-04T15:20:00.003-07:00

I finally gave in and watched (both!) trailers for the unholy remake of The Karate Kid that they're doing (seriously - Jackie Chan as Mr. Miyagi? That just...doesn't work for me).

I like the part where it's now set in China. I really like the part where one of the lines in the trailer for The KARATE Kid is "I will teach you kung fu."

Let's ignore the minor linguistic issues which make it fairly unlikely that a native of Beijing would say that (as opposed to "I'll teach you Wushu). And obviously, the actual 'martial arts' in the movie are going to be very silly. But presumably there was some advisor somewhere who knew something about martial arts. I wonder if this individual even bothered to point out that kung fu is not karate? Really. I promise. Ask either the Japanese or the Chinese - or any student of either art - and they will tell you. They are in fact two very distinct arts, each with a myriad of styles.

So...yeah.

Phrase I never want to see used again:

2010-02-25T19:17:00.003-07:00

Anything along the lines of "Women can protect themselves but only men can truly prevent rape".

1. Female-on-male (and male-on-male, and female-on-female) rape can and does happen. Is it as common? No, probably not. Is it very much rape when it does happen? Yes.

2. In modern Feminism*, you hear an awful lot about being "empowered" and being a "strong woman" and such. You want to empower yourself? Hit the gym so that A) you're healthier and B) if Mr. Asshole gets grabby you can stomp his balls into paste. If women are equal, then doesn't it follow that they too can prevent rape?

3. It strikes me as a knee-jerk, hyperbolic reaction to victim-blaming. If you get raped, is it your *fault*? No; by definition it's sexual penetration without consent. Does this mean that women are somehow ultimately powerless to prevent rape, and it's just a matter of time before the worst second date ever? Uh...no. See point 2, for starters. To say that only men can truly prevent rape is like you take a victim-blaming argument and want to get rid of it so bad that you tie it to a boomerang and fling it off a cliff...and it comes right back and smacks you in the face.

Alternate interpretation: I'm a terrible woman who has been brainwashed by the patriarchy** into blaming the victim and has self-esteem issues and is out of touch with her feminine spirit.

*Feminism, with a capital F, meaning the social movement, not to be confused (IMO) with feminism, the political/legal idea that women should/do have the same rights, responsibilities and privileges as men.

**I just realized why I hate the idea of "The Patriarchy": Say (for the sake of argument) that our society is completely male-dominated. And you think that the dominant group is going to voluntarily bow down and give you a helping hand up and stop being so dominant? No, that's just not the natural order of things. If you're so fed up of The Patriarchy, stop complaining about it, stop blogging about how unfair it is, stop blathering on to weenie men who aren't afraid to call themselves Feminists and are afraid to be male, and get in the game. You don't like that the political arena is predominantly male? Stop talking about it, run for office, and for god's sake, don't talk about "patriarchy" in your campaign, because that's a fantastic way to alienate everyone who's not a capital F Feminist.

A minor point regarding homosexuality and the bible

2010-02-24T15:49:00.001-07:00

If you want to condemn homosexuality because it's clearly condemned in the Old Testament, and you're not an Orthodox Jew who makes an honest attempt to live by all of the rules laid out in the Old Testament, you are probably a hypocrite.

Thoughts on the whole "fat people on a plane" thing.

2010-02-17T15:22:00.002-07:00

Kevin Smith got booted off a Southwest flight because he's fat. Apparently, he bought two seats, but then got on standby for an earlier flight and got the very last seat on a full flight, and then he was told that he was too big and would have to get off the plane. The main issue seems to be that he apparently could lower the armrests (the de facto test) but was kicked off anyway. My thoughts:

1. What the hell is Kevin Smith doing flying on Southwest? Southwest is for people who can't afford an airline that pretends not to be a bus, not big Hollywood producers.

2. "People of size." Okay, I get that you can't have an official Fat People Policy, but come on. Are the "people of size" different from...what, those literally one-dimensional people? Please, airlines, I'm begging you to come up with a slightly less inane euphemism, because every time I hear someone identified as a "person of size" I want to start screaming that OF COURSE they're "of size," everyone and everything has size, you idiotic PR-obsessed morons!

3. If you are tall, there's not a damn thing you can do about it, short of chopping off your legs. Planes are designed to be as efficient as possible, which means cramming as many tiny seats into a tube as possible. This is not going to change, so get the hell over it. Fly business class, spent the extra twenty bucks for an exit seat, or drive.

4. If you are fat, you can do something about it! You can lose weight! Yes, you can! No, seriously, you can. I don't care whatever made-up glandular problem you have; if you take in fewer calories than you burn, you'll lose weight! Forget about nutrition; that's the first law of thermodynamics. The energy that your body needs to pump blood around and get up and walk and blink your eyes needs to come from somewhere. Usually it comes from the food that you eat. If you eat less food, some of that energy will come from the fat already within your body. That is why humans have fat, as an emergency battery. If you say you can't do anything about it, you're lying.

4a. I do not care if you're fat. If you want to live your life slurping down McDonalds and die of a stroke at the age of 35? Fine. Not my problem.

4b. If you make that choice, it comes with trade-offs. You can be too fat to fit in a single seat on an airplane and buy two, or you can lose weight and fit in a single seat.

5. If you cannot fit in one seat, and the flight is otherwise fully booked, you will need to reserve a second seat on a less-full flight. This is not a personal insult. This is not punishment. This is not a moral judgement. This is just how buying things work. You pay to occupy a seat on a plane going from A to B. If you want to occupy two seats, one of which could potentially be occupied by a second paying customer, you have to pay for two seats. If I go to Subway and buy a 6 inch sandwich, but decide I'm really really hungry, Subway is not obligated to give me a second sandwich for free. If I pay for a one-way bus fare, I cannot ride the bus again for free just because.

5a. If the flight turns out not to be fully booked, the money for that second seat should be refunded; this, I understand, is how it already works.

5b. THIS IS NOT DISCRIMINATION. Pointing out the obvious (this passenger does not fit in one seat) is not discrimination.

6. It would be lovely if the airline staff was discrete and polite in these situations. It would also be lovely if airline staff was polite when your flight is delayed for whatever reason, or when you've been sitting on the tarmac for three hours and you have to pee, or when you nearly miss your plane because the gate suddenly changed from A1 to Z452. It would also be lovely if cashiers always handed you your coins first, if milk never went bad in the fridge, and if I woke up tomorrow and had 20/20 vision. Humans are humans, and usually we're a mean, brutal people, and nothing's going to change that. Suck it up and deal.

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus

2010-01-26T00:21:00.003-07:00

Brief, just-saw-it late night review: possibly a bit too ambitious, plot-wise. A bit muddled in the story. A bit sad, both story-wise and in the conspicuous absence in certain scenes of Heath Ledger. Makes up for most weaknesses in being visually breathtaking.

Worth paying to see it on the big screen. Probably worth a second viewing on DVD.

Wrong answer

2010-01-22T10:41:00.002-07:00

From the local police notes column:

Ismael Cardenas, 25, address unavailable, was arrested Tuesday on a charge of aggravated DWI. Police encountered Cardenas after finding his vehicle parked on N.M. 14. When police asked Cardenas how much alcohol he had consumed, he replied "not enough," according to the police report. Cardenas refused to submit to field sobriety and breath-alcohol tests.

Ignoring that he was allegedly driving drunk, can you find where this fine citizen may have gone wrong?

Haiti

2010-01-13T20:43:00.002-07:00

There are times that I'm incredibly glad that I don't naturally have any sort of spirituality or faith in a sentient Higher Power.

This is one of those times.

If I did have belief in some sort of Higher Power, I would just be wondering what the hell. Seriously - Haiti? One of the world's poorest and certainly the poorest in the western hemisphere? Haiti, which even without a nation-shattering earthquake has pretty much no industry to speak of? Which has an incredibly unstable government, and absolutely no real infrastructure in any meaningful sense? This is the country that deserves to get run over by some tectonic activity?

I'm just going to go ahead and say 'screw you', Nature.

Choices, choices

2010-01-07T22:27:00.002-07:00

So either I claim "more Superfund sites than any other state, still has a quaint organized crime problem, gave the world Jersey Shore*, most famous resident is a singer whose songs are about how awful the place is New Jersey" as my home, or "funeral homes ship heads in to the families, first place to ever get nuked, most famous export is stolen/misplaced state secrets New Mexico".

Neither, apparently is going to go for equality anytime soon. Neither of them explicitly prohibit it, per se, they just don't allow it (which some people say is a meaningful difference, somehow). Despite today's disappointment, NJ still does allow civil unions, which I guess is good, though "separate but equal" ideas are kind of dangerous.

So really it comes down to nuclear weapons vs stereotypical New Jerseyans, cowboys (and indians) vs guidos (who are pretty much all from Long Island anyway). Springsteen and Bon Jovi vs...uh, Georgia O'Keefe, but that comparison just doesn't work. I'll call it a draw, for now, and continue looking for a new state to try.

*MTV execs who are originally from New Jersey, because there must be at least a handful of you: [i]you're not helping[/i].

New Mexico

2010-01-06T20:56:00.003-07:00

NM woman dies. Family has her body shipped back to NM, along with her personal effects. The brain is included amongst the personal effects.

Land of Enchantment indeed.

Mr. Beck

2010-01-06T20:19:00.001-07:00

Dear Glenn Beck,

I have no idea if your bit about the Coke commercial that showed up on The Daily Show was truly what they made it seem. Regardless, please shut up.

Warmest regards,

The rest of the world.

THE NEW PRODUCT COME INTO THE MARKET

2010-01-02T11:01:00.005-07:00

Instructions for Environment-Protective Torch for 21st century

Features:

1. Only shake it forward and backward while in use, So as to make it generating to light up.

2. Its switch system is based on advanced magnetic induction technologies. So it's long in service life and reliable in performance.

Advantages:

1. A torch is used for emergency lighting purpose. However, the traditional battery-supplied torch may cause you a big trouble because the batteries will become ineffective and produce

pollution if the torch is left idle for a long time. The chargeable torch also has the problem of power leakage; or it will help you remember to charge only at the time you need. This innovative torch is the breakthrough in solution to waste and inconvenience.

2. Being self-supplying, it will serve you long and well.

(taken from the box of an electromagnetically-powered flashlight).

(shockingly not made in the USA)

(the box has a German recycling logo on it as well.)

A weird and unlikely combination

2009-12-17T18:05:00.002-07:00

Hugh Grant was on The Daily Show last night. Apparently, his newest movie was shot (partly?) in New Mexico!

On one hand, it's refreshing to hear New Mexico, well, acknowledged as existing, even if it is only for our weird "please come make a movie here, you get tax breaks!" thing. On the other hand, Mr. Grant's impression of the state seemed to boil down to "More film people than Wyoming, really good [but incredibly fattening] food, and people are crazy about guns there."

Which...well, that's true. There are, I'm sure, far more A) film technicians and B) movie-related tax breaks in New Mexico than Wyoming. New Mexican food is, indeed, wonderful (albeit completely unhealthy). And...well, Santa Fe is it's own weird little enclave of weird, but this state is still very much the American Southwest, and if there's one thing rural Americans love, it's carrying guns around with them for no particular reason.

Thoughts upon watching Angels and Demons

2009-12-13T16:35:00.005-07:00

Dan Brown is unbelievably stupid and did precisely no research about CERN, the LHC, antimatter, or anything like that.

It's playing in the background and they just announced that the explosion could be the equivalent of "five kilotons." Kilotons of what? Because five kilotons of puppies is a lot of puppies, but still preferable to five kilotons of .

Also I like that instead of, oh, calling in the police, immediately evacuating the area and searching it, they call in a professor of "symbology".

Also an academic gets access to the Vatican archives, rips a page out of an ancient manuscript (possibly by Galileo? I can't pay attention to this), and carries it with his bare hands? Did he fold it up and stick it in his pocket, too? I have, like, about fifteen minutes of archival training and that's making me twitch.

ETA: Seriously, GET YOUR OILY, GREASY, GROSS FINGERS OFF THAT 500 YEAR OLD DOCUMENT YOU HORRIBLE HEATHEN.

Politicians can be jerks

2009-12-09T20:47:00.002-07:00

The public option is dead. Shocking.

Remember that part where every idealistic fool this side of Sarah Palin was raving about how Obama was going to bring hope and change? How everything was going to be better and soon the government would be issuing us our own personal rainbow-shitting unicorns?

Huh, funny how that's working out so far.

WTF of the day

2009-12-08T19:02:00.001-07:00

Both Dusty Springfield and Petula Clark were British, not American.

On rape, and personal responsibility.

2009-12-07T18:47:00.004-07:00

So in the blogosphere, there's this going on. Long story short: young woman writes to an advice columnist, saying "I went to a party, I got drunk, I went back to some guy's room, he promised me he wouldn't touch me, then he touched me [it's not clear exactly what happened], and then his roommate got back and kicked us out."

The columnist says: "Yes, it was, and you were not only his victim but your own, because it's kind of stupid to go to a party alone and get drunk and go home with a guy who pinky-swears he won't hurt you."

Certain women on the internet proceed to freak the hell out (as women sometimes do. Note: fellow women, please stop being retards). Because, you see, if you point out that a woman's actions may have helped to enable a rapist, you are a rape apologist and think all women should be raped and are living in a "rape culture" (whatever the hell that means; rape is used as currency or something?) and are otherwise worthy of being flogged by the clearly-superior Womyn.

See, there's a certain brand of "feminist" (I'll explain the quotes in a moment) that thinks that feminism means never holding a woman (sorry, womyn, let's not be patriarchal) accountable for her actions. Go out to a party or with a guy, get completely wasted thereby intentionally incapacitating yourself, go back to his room alone - no problem! If anything happens, it was completely unavoidable. There is absolutely nothing, not a single thing, that the woman could have done differently to ensure her own safety.

Well, newsflash for you all: the world is not a nice place. People, by their very nature, are assholes. Human beings are self-centered, violent, hateful, ignorant, and pretty much overall worthless. Usually, society keeps us from acting our nature, at least on an individual level. Most people will keep the change when the cashier accidentally hands over a ten instead of a one, but most people won't walk up to a random stranger and assault them for no reason.

Some people will.

As a consequence, you need to keep an eye out for yourself. Your safety is your responsibility. The police and the fire service are there to help one things go wrong, but there is no one in the world who owes you so much as a smile, so if you want to stay safe, you're all on your lonesome. You need to make sure that you lock your doors, and that you don't leave valuables out in the open, and that you don't go off and intentionally make yourself vulnerable.

This applies to men, and women. You are on your own. No one owes anyone anything, and if a man goes to a party and gets completely drunk and gets his nose broken by another man in a fight, is the victim utterly blameless? No, because he got drunk. He intentionally removed any hope of controlling the situation.

So. Feminism is, in theory, about equality. The radical notion that women are people too.

You can have equality, or you can get symapthy for college chicks who get drunk and are shocked when a boy wants sex. You cannot get both. This is my problem with a lot of modern "feminism" - they say they want equality but really they want a double standard. Women should be able to rip their shirt off to let their baby suck on their teat whenever and whereever they want. Women should get as much time off for maternity leave, and then for the next eighteen years, as they want. Women should get special train cars so they don't need to deal with obnoxious weirdos on the subway. Women shouldn't ever be held accountable for their actions if someone else victimizes them.

No. You get equality, or you get handled with kid gloves. You do not get both.

Also, while we're here: Rape is not a women's issue at all. It's a crime, just like any other violent crime.

Platypus fact of the day: the non-furry parts

2009-11-23T21:37:00.002-07:00

The platypus, being a creature that spends much of it's time in water, has adorable webbed feet, like many animals. He uses is front feet to paddle, alternating strokes like you would with a kayak paddle. The rear feet and tail steer. (Guess how many mammals swim this way? Did you guess "only one?" If so, you're correct!) He's kind of like a duck in that sense.

The bill of the platypus, however, is very different. For one, it's not a beak. A bird opens its beak and there's its mouth in the middle. A platypus's bill is not divided equally: it's mouth is on the bottom. This is because the bill proper is a sensory organ. Yes, Mr. Platy's nostrils are located on the top front of the bill, but he doesn't hunt using scent. No, he hunts underwater, with his eyes and nose and ears all tightly sealed up, and he ueses electroreception to find his food.

You know the three general types of animals that use electroreception underwater? Sharks, rays, and of course our baffling friend the platypus.

Platypus fact of the day: venom

2009-11-20T18:35:00.002-07:00

The platypus is one of only a handful of truly venomous mammals. Both males and females start life with little 'spurs' just above each hind leg, but the females don't produce venom and the spurs basically fall off within the first year of life. The male produces venom, and can articulate the spur to a 90-degree angle to attack.

The venom isn't powerful enough to kill most animals, though it is apparently extremely painful to humans. Because of this it's not likely used strictly as a defensive mechanism, and the fact that venom production increases around mating season indicates that it may just be used to fight other males for dominance.

And of course, we're not entirely certain how their venom works; many venoms cause tissue to die, whereas the platypus skips that.

Platypus fact of the day: genes and girly parts

2009-11-19T17:57:00.004-07:00

part one of a new daily feature

Humans, of course, have two pairs of sex chromosomes: XX or XY. The noble platypus has five pairs (ie, a male platypus is XYXYXYXYXY, while a female platypus is XXXXXXXXXX). However, being the platypus, their chromosomal system is weird, and may or may not be more similar to the ZW system, found mostly in birds, where the female has a 'Z' and 'W' chromosome and the male has two 'Z's.

We do not know how those chromosomes functionally turn your little embryonic 'pus into a male or female. Pretty much all other mammals have a gene called SRY, which codes for a certain protein that makes boys into girls: everyone starts out female, in a sense, but if you have that Y chromosome, SRY starts being produced. Unless you're a platypus, in which case you lack the SRY gene, and we haven't a clue how it works.

But if you do turn out to be a girl platypus, congratulations! You're a girl! You have...well, an ovary and a half, really. Technically, you have two, but unlike even your few fellow egg-laying mammals, only your left one ever fully develops. Why? Because you're a platypus, that's why. You also get two uteruses, though presumably, the right one is pretty much useless.

You produce milk, like all other mammals, but unlike most of them you lack teats. Instead, you have pores on your abdomen which you secrete milk from, and it pools in little grooves in your skin, so your little one can lap it up.

And if you're a very nice platypus, someday genetic research on you, you lovable weirdo, may save some human ovaries.

Attn: Netflix robots

2009-11-14T15:21:00.003-07:00

Appropriate "more like this" suggestions for the movie Carrie: The Evil Dead, Fallen.

Debatable appropriate "more like this" suggestions for the movie Carrie: In The Bedroom.

Deeply inappropriate "more like this" suggestion for the movie Carrie: Bolt.

An important point about weight gain/loss

2009-11-13T22:55:00.003-07:00

Inspired by a combination of things I've read recently:

You are not fat because of your genes. You are not fat because of your self-diagnosed (or medically diagnosed) thyroid condition. You are not fat because of the alleged toxins in your food. You are not fat because your deity of choice hates you. You are not fat because of your friends.

You are fat because you regularly consume more calories than you burn.

If you change this, by altering your dietary and exercise habits (ie, stop with the McDonalds and TV, and start with the fresh vegetables and running) so that you burn more calories than you take in, you will lose weight.

Eat healthier food. Eat reasonable amounts of that food (look it up; you don't need a quarter pound of fatty, low-grade meat for lunch). Leave the TV off in the morning and go for a run before work (it's easy, you don't need a gym or an exercise plan, just some decent shoes and the slightest trace of willpower), or after work, or on your lunch break (because you're bringing a salad from home instead of running out to McDonalds). Continue doing so.

Congratulations! You're beginning to move from 'fat' to 'not fat'! Can we please move on as a society now?

Did you know...

2009-11-12T11:39:00.002-07:00

If Jupiter were to gain a significant amount of mass (ie, pull in more stuff), it would in fact decrease in size? Because science is *weird*.

Getting to work today

2009-11-10T16:20:00.002-07:00

So first there was some alarm clock trouble, and then some 'I am incapable of ingesting a liquid without spilling all over everything' trouble. I finally got out of the house already late.

The side street I normally take, which cuts through the fairly low-traffic plaza area, was closed. Aargh. So, I turn right instead, am unable to get into the left-turn lane, so I wait it out and do the crosswalk thing. I proceed to get caught behind one of those street-sweepers.

My normal speed while commuting is, I think, about 15 miles an hour. Apparently street-sweepers go at about 13 miles an hour, which takes up so much of the lane and is so wobbly I need to actually get into the left lane to get around him, and I can't find a big enough break that will allow me to. So I hang back to avoid the noxious fumes and dirty spray and wait and wait and wait and wait and finally the light way back behind us changes, so I can sprint past the street sweeper, and while I'm there turn left to get over the block I need to be to get to work.

Then there's a garbage truck! Which I can't get around because it's in the middle of the narrow street! And also there's two cars behind it, and also the little robo-arm that grabs the garbage bins appears to be freaking out; it just keeps raising and slamming back down as the truck sits stationary in the middle of the street.

So instead of my normal ~8 minutes it took me about 15 minutes to get to work, and I was grumpy.

Phreaking Phillies

2009-11-01T22:15:00.003-07:00

Game 4 of the World Series. You're trailing the series 2-1.

In the bottom of the eighth you tie the game up, 4-4.

Top of the ninth. Two outs. No one is on base. Two strikes.

And then, somehow, inexplicably, amazingly, you lose by three.

My. God.

Today

2009-11-01T18:22:00.003-07:00

Today I:
*Went to Target to buy necessary things (including marked-down candy, flannel bedsheets, and drano)
*Wrote the first 1,928 words of my NaNoWriMo novel (which will be terrible, and I still have no idea what it's about)
*Finished the above in time to watch the Phillies game
*Debated whether or not I want to watch the Phillies game based on the outcome of the last two
*Decided that I would feel responsible if the Phillies lose and I don't watch, because the single area of my life where I am completely and totally superstitious is baseball

This is more than I have done in the past several days combined. I hate being sick, and greatly prefer not being sick.

A man worth listening to

2009-10-22T20:11:00.003-06:00

I would love to have the opportunity to shake this man's hand.

Some historical reflection

2009-10-15T22:20:00.003-06:00

Did you hear about the Louisiana justice of the peace who refused to sign a marriage license? He refused because he was concerned that the parents, who are of different races, would have a child.

He's not racist, he just doesn't believe in mixing the races "like that".

A few points:
1. If you don't believe in 'mixing races' and go so far as actively preventing it, guess what? You're racist.
2. It is no longer 1950.
3. He's concerned because, in his universe, people don't like interracial children:

Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.

"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell said. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."

So, uh...I've got some bad news, I guess?
4. Seriously, it's not 1950.
5. Nor is it 1967, when we stopped doing stupid shit like that.
6. Says the justice:

"I've been a justice of the peace for 34 years and I don't think I've mistreated anybody," Bardwell said. "I've made some mistakes, but you have too. I didn't tell this couple they couldn't get married. I just told them I wouldn't do it."

Well, my read on it is slightly different, in that I read the situation as you're being a dick who's blatantly breaking the law because you're racist. And saying "no, I won't marry you because I'm a racist dick" is indeed mistreating people.
7. My god, am I actually compiling a list of "things that are wrong with denying people a marriage license based on race"? In 2009? Nearly a year after we elected a black president? What the hell?
8. He also says:

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

..."Piles and piles?" He lets black people use his bathroom, therefore he's not racist? What the hell, does he think we'd otherwise assume he's got his own little Jim Crow setup at his house? Or that if he happens to have black visitors (which, somehow, I imagine isn't as frequently as he's trying to express) he makes them go piss in the backyard? The "I'm not racist, I have ________ friends" argument isn't particularly meaningful to begin with, but his phrasing is just baffling.

...

2009-10-13T18:54:00.000-06:00

I adore The Onion.

I don't question God. The Lord is my Shepherd and I shall put none above Him. Which is why I know that if it were part of God's plan for me to stop viciously condemning others based solely on their sexual preference, He would have seen fit—in His infinite wisdom and all—to have given me the tiniest bit of human empathy necessary to do so.

It begins again: NL East Champions x3

2009-10-04T20:21:00.002-06:00

I know exactly what I want to happen in this post season (hint: it involves another parade in Philly), and I know exactly how I want it to happen (think pinstripes, falling down). However, I do not want to jinx anything, so I'll say no more beyond Go Phillies!

Regardless, when I was back in Philly in September, I was struck by the number of people wearing Phillies shirts or jerseys or caps, or sporting bumper stickers, or so on. Which was, quite frankly, awesome. It's about time that the city be able to truly rally around a sports team without shame or the knowledge that you're rooting for a lost cause. Because literally, for people in my age group from that area, being able to rejoice with other people at a championship is brand new, and I think we're all enjoying it too much to let it go.

This week, read a book. Any book.

2009-09-29T18:57:00.004-06:00

The last week of September is, in addition to an exciting time in baseball, also an exciting time in bookworld, because it's Banned Books Week. What does that mean? I'll just cheat and let the ALA start:

Banned Books Week (BBW) is an annual event celebrating the freedom to read and the importance of the First Amendment. Held during the last week of September, Banned Books Week highlights the benefits of free and open access to information while drawing attention to the harms of censorship by spotlighting actual or attempted bannings of books across the United States.

Intellectual freedom—the freedom to access information and express ideas, even if the information and ideas might be considered unorthodox or unpopular—provides the foundation for Banned Books Week. BBW stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of unorthodox or unpopular viewpoints for all who wish to read and access them.

It means that opinions should be allowed to be heard, and not suppressed because they're inflammatory or uncomfortable. It means that libraries should be a place where a member of the community, any member of the community, should be able to go and get information, whether it's biased or not (and there should be librarians to help them work through which is which).

Books are constantly being challenged in this country, in both school and libraries. Some of them are new kid's or YA books; some are time-honored classics. Some come with understandable controversy (Of Mice and Men, Lolita). Some controversies come with a heavy dose of irony (almost any children's book about non-heteronormative families), some are completely missing the point (1984, Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451). And some are just completely inane (Charlotte's Web, Winnie The Pooh).

The common thread is that all of them have come under attack by people who think that they should be able to control what you or your child has access to, or should read in class. These people skip right past 'I'd prefer my child not read this' and 'I personally find this objectionable, so I'll return it to the library and be done with it', and leap right into 'this is wrong.' They speak in moral absolutes and strive to impose their morality on everyone around them. They insult everyone around them by assuming that they know better, or that you are unable to safely judge what is best for yourself or your child.

The problem isn't likely to every go away, sadly. People will always be reactionary and judgemental. But there's a simple way to counter this particular effect: read. Read books. Get a library card and use it. If a book is challenged within your community, check it out for yourself before passing judgement. Be involved, and point out that youdon't want someone else deciding what you may or may not read. You're an adult living in the self-proclaimed land of the free and home of the brave, so be brave and work for your own intellectual freedom.

And also, be nice to your librarians, be they in a stuffy academic library, corporate library at your workplace, or the public library in your town or county. They work for you, they want you to have as much information available as possible, and they're often faced with people who specifically want to keep information locked away and unavailable. So give 'em a smile next time you're in the library - it'll be appreciated.

Happy 09/09/09!

2009-09-09T18:46:00.003-06:00

It's not quite as cool as Pi Day or Mole Day, but today's still pretty nifty!

It's also nifty because of this. Picture number three in particular is neat. The Globular Star Cluster Omega Centauri may not have the most poetic name, but - well, it gives me the excuse to say with complete honesty, "My god, it's full of stars!" which is worth a lot.

To the idiot on the internet who are WRONG

2009-08-28T11:07:00.002-06:00

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE IS NOT A LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT.

Citing it in a debate is roughly as worthwhile as citing the little trivia blurbs under the lid of your bottle of Snapple. Yes, it's a brilliantly written document of unprecedented importance, and yes it's full of good ideas like "all men are created equal" and the general idea that tyranny is bad and that if you're living under a tyrant you have not only the right but the absolute obligation to tell said tyrant to go to hell. That does not mean that it's valid as legal precedent, or that the words contained within that document are federal law, or anything of that sort.

This nearly made me put my fist through the table during seminar (Lincoln, I think) at St. John's and now I need to yell at the internet about it too.

So I'm joining the Coast Guard

2009-08-27T18:41:00.003-06:00

(no, for real, I am.)

Apparently, when you take the ASVAB - the test you need to take to join any service - you can't wear earrings. Not even little tiny stud earrings.

For the sake of sanity I'm assuming the guy who made me remove them was joking when he said it was a safety issue, because I cannot for the life of me imagine a way that earrings could be a safety hazard while taking a computerized test.

Health care

2009-08-14T10:05:00.003-06:00

Why is it that people are so eager to believe that a government-run insurance agency would cheerfully sentence Granny to death because her blood pressure meds cost a lot, but don't suspect for a second that the private, for-profit corporations currently providing health insurance would do so?

Let's review some basic facts

2009-08-08T10:35:00.002-06:00

In case you've been living in a cave for the past three years, Barack Obama is half-black. His mother might have been whiter than freshly-fallen snow, but that does not change the fact that for all appearances, and somewhat culturally, Mr. Obama is black.

I think, given that Mr. Obama is not white, we can safely assume he's not a Nazi, given that a fundamental belief of the Nazi party by and large wasn't a tremendous fan of people who did not fit their specific definition of whiteness.

Some crazies apparently think that the logo for Obama's proposed health care program resembles the Eagle/swastika Nazi logo. To this I say:
1. Actually no it doesn't so do shut up.
2. Even if it did - which, again, it doesn't - here's some bad news: The Nazis had freaking awesome symbology. That's part of how the rose to power - they looked powerful, and unified, and overall pretty damn sharp. Their symbols and uniforms were brilliant, and so arguing that Obama's doodle looks like it...well, if it's true that would mean at most that it's a snappy looking logo.

Getting my money's worth

2009-07-30T16:19:00.002-06:00

I just applied for my two $40 coupons good towards a tv converter box.

Percent chance that I will actually use them, as I do not own a TV nor really desire to and if I buy one I'll buy a tiny new one: ~1%. There is always technically the chance that I'll decide to buy a used TV at Goodwill or off Craigslist or something. But I've gone five years now quite happily without a TV, so, you know, my urge to drop a couple hundred bucks - or even fifty - on something that does a teeny tiny part of what my computer does is minimal.

But if the government is financing everyone else's idiot box habits, then I want my slice of the pie, too. So there.

White (black?) collar crime, NJ style

2009-07-24T20:12:00.002-06:00

Oh boy:

Two New Jersey assemblymen, three mayors, and rabbis hailing from Brooklyn to the Shore were among dozens of people arrested yesterday as part of a federal investigation into international money laundering and homegrown political corruption.

Yeah. Man is this rich. Forty-four arrests in total.

The investigation began with the FBI's looking into an alleged money-laundering operation led by a number of rabbis that reached from the Shore town of Deal to Brooklyn, N.Y., Switzerland, and Israel.

A Brooklyn man, Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, allegedly tried to entice people to give up a kidney for $10,000 so he could sell the organs for $160,000 each, according to acting U.S. Attorney Ralph Marra.

I don't actually have the slightest clue what these two paragraphs have to do with each other, but...a kidney? Really? That's fantastic. I can't express how much I hope it turns out to be true that there were rabbis - preferably orthodox* - that were trying to start some insane international organ-selling ring based in Hoboken.

Reasons to hate American number Idunnowhat

2009-07-21T14:28:00.002-06:00

These people are just trying to sound important when they say that they actually vote, right? They don't actually do it, right? And, uh, it is against the law and morally wrong to kill them, right?

Man on the moon

2009-07-20T18:33:00.003-06:00

Forty years and a few hours ago, two human beings landed in a strange looking vessel on the moon.

A few hours after that they crawled out the door of that vessel, down a ladder, and dropped a few feet to the surface of the moon. They looked up, and they saw a dark sky marred only by the glow of the Earth looming above them.

You can't put a price on awesome like that. That's human exploration in it's purest form. We went because, as President Kennedy said, it wasn't easy. It was hard. Things went wrong. Lots of things went wrong, from Liberty Bell 7's hatch blowing out and sinking, to the hatch not opening on Apollo 1. Some very talented, smart, and dedicated men lost their lives for it. But ultimately, we succeeded - not because America was a superpower, but because when brilliant, scientific minds get going on something they're not going to stop until they figure it out - and there we were. Two men on the moon...

...and one circling above.

And that, my friends, is why we've kept going, and why we need to keep going. It's awesome. Literally awesome; it inspires awe. We said to hell with gravity, extreme temperatures, and absolute vacuum. We saw something we wanted and we went for it, and we kept going until we got there, and is the response to victory to simply stop?

No. We keep exploring. We set our sights on Mars, on the next solar system over, on things constantly bigger and better.

Because it's awesome.

And that's the way it was

2009-07-17T19:07:00.002-06:00

Walter Cronkite, legendary newscaster, has passed away at the age of 92.

I wasn't even born when he retired, but I certainly realize what a tremendous influence he had on America. He was a reporter's reporter: every night he sat down in front of a camera and said what happened. Sometimes he did let his emotions show: he expressed his amazement and excitement at the Apollo 11, he shed a tear at Kennedy's assissnation, and - most famously - he laid bare his concerns about Vietnam, but only after plainly stating that what followed was his opinion, not fact.

He did not understand the idea of a newscaster as a celebrity and clearly wanted no part of that. He wanted to spread information, nothing more, and he did so magnificently. With his death, we perhaps lose the last of his breed: honest, trustworthy, hard-working television reporters, who see TV as a medium to communicate and inform for the greater good. Generations of Americans grew up trusting him, maybe more than any other public figure, and that's something not likely to ever happen again.

Rest in peace, Mr. Cronkite.

Dear Sky

2009-07-14T17:44:00.002-06:00

Please rain. Even just a little bit. But please, please, please provide us with some manner of cloud cover and precipitation.

What I did today

2009-07-10T16:35:00.002-06:00

Today at work, I counted bits of brightly colored paper. For the entire 3.5 hours. (Well, no. Also I looked up an email address for my boss).

See, the organization I'm working for hosted Big Public Party on the 4th of July. To get into this party you had to purchase a ticket, and of course turn it over at the gate.

Now, for reasons which I'm not entirely certain on, those tickets now need to be counted. Guess who gets to do that? Me! So, yesterday afternoon I started counting. I counted 2,100 little pieces of paper.

Today I got to work and was told that not only was I supposed to be counting the tickets but also separating the two different types of tickets. So, I sorted through the previously-counted 2,100 tickets. Then I kept sorting, and counting. And sorting. And counting. And counting and sorting. And so on.

So that's what I did this morning. But I also met a lovely dog, and got a pair of nice capris for cheap at REI this afternoon, so overall I say a win.

Tornados suck

2009-07-09T15:18:00.002-06:00

For reference, here's what a train can do to a typical, modern automobile:

The moral: don't screw around with trains, because trains are big and heavy and if you get in your way they will stomp the life out of you, continue on over your corpse, and not really even notice that they've done so, because they can move quite quickly and even when they're not, they're still really quite large.

Now here's what a tornado can do to a freight train:

The moral: sometimes nature just says 'screw you' to human progress and ingenuity, grabs a freight off the tracks and throws it, just like an elementary school bully knocking a couple first-graders out of the lunch line.

Classical Spin

Oh ho ho, what have we in Arizona?

What in the everloving hell is this?

That Rick Perry ad

Here's your Hanukkah pork!

Newt Gingrich is a loathsome little troll

Wish I could say this for real

Priorities

Dear Daily Mail: Stay away from my state please.

While we're airing our grievances...

Justice should not see any national borders.

Tasty

Today is just *fabulous*

On the road again

Robots in disguise. Misogyny, not so much.

Back from the dead for a very important birthday message

An excerpt

Grumble grumble.

Drink me

Also

Welp...

Why computer literacy is important.

NaNoWriMo

Solve one problem, cause another.

I gave him my money and now he won't give it back!

Movie review: Red

Attn: media. Re: everything you say sucks

This is just weird and creepy and kind of gross

Toy Story 3

Today in history

Some points about the "Ground Zero mosque"

Engrish

Well, okay then.

A random thought about the space program

How you know you work with an older demographic

Movie review: The Karate Kid (2010)

"It's only rape if he's not my religion"

At last, our long national nightmare is reaching it's middle

Copy, paste

Ye olde bigge toppe

Dear gas-guzzling morons:

Congratulations! It's a representative democracy!

...really?

Ah, for the simple days of alien invasions

Food for thought

Om nom nom

Things of interest, interest in things

What.

I no longer live in New Jersey

My nerd thoughts on Doctor Who, let me tell you them. (Spoilers)

Papers, please

Really?

Science! (not really)

A true cat story

Script Frenzy

The waves! They burn!

Springtime

Alice in Wonderland

My thoughts on a very important issue

Phrase I never want to see used again:

A minor point regarding homosexuality and the bible

Thoughts on the whole "fat people on a plane" thing.

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus

Wrong answer

Haiti

Choices, choices

New Mexico

Mr. Beck

THE NEW PRODUCT COME INTO THE MARKET

A weird and unlikely combination

Thoughts upon watching Angels and Demons

Politicians can be jerks

WTF of the day

On rape, and personal responsibility.

Platypus fact of the day: the non-furry parts

Platypus fact of the day: venom

Platypus fact of the day: genes and girly parts

Attn: Netflix robots

An important point about weight gain/loss

Did you know...

Today is just fabulous