Cleared for Access

Mind Monkey is now up and running.

2005-03-19T14:19:00.000-06:00

The new site, Mind Monkey, is now up and running. It's not perfect, but it's at a point where I'm going to start using it instead of Cleared for Access for my posts. I may or may not eventually move these posts over; for now, it's linked as the Archive. So come on over to Mind Monkey, and let me monkey with your brain meats.

Fnord.

New site is coming along.

2005-03-16T15:54:00.000-06:00

Just a quick note: the new site is slowly taking form. Once I'm satisfied with the basic layout, I'll switch over to there. Still haven't decided whether to archive all the old posts there or leave them here, but I'm leaning toward leaving them here. The new site will be a new blog, although it really won't cover anything different. Just a different name. Stay tuned.

Fnord.

Hatred and depression all wrapped into one

2005-03-16T15:42:00.000-06:00

The US Senate today did something that the oil industry has been trying to do for twenty years...they voted to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil drilling. Words can not express the hatred and contempt I feel for those who voted for this shameful, despicable act, nor can they do justice to the feeling that the Bush administration really does want to rape this planet for all it's worth before it drags this country screaming into Hell.

This is just the latest assault against the environment in a string of attacks that started the day that asshole took office. From scientists being gagged for daring to speak out against the president's environmental policies, to producing shoddy environmental documenation, and capping it with the laughable "Clear Skies" initiative...gah. I just can't express how much I despise the man and his supporters. ANWR is salt in the wound.

Eisenhower (who created ANWR) and Roosevelt (arguably one of the most conservation-minded presidents of the twentieth century) must be rolling in their graves. If I were a Republican, I'd be ashamed of how the party had raped the memory of past Republican presidents. No wonder my father became a Democrat. What the hell is this country coming to?

Fnord.

New domain coming

2005-03-14T16:39:00.000-06:00

Because blogger.com is Teh Suck, I have registered my own domain finally and will soon be moving over there. Details to follow. Most likely I'll just provide a link to this site once the new one goes live instead of trying to recreate posts there.

Stay tuned, same time and same bat channel...for now.

Fnord.

California edges closer to the Massachusetts model

2005-03-14T16:27:00.000-06:00

A San Fransisco County superior court judge today ruled California's ban on gay marriage violates the state constitution. The case will be appealed and the state supreme court will have to rule, if they choose to take up the case. This mirrors the situation in Massachusetts over a year ago when that state's supreme court ruled that the state constitution, as written, protected gay marriage.

This is good news, of course. There is a proposed constitutional amendment pending in the state legislature that would ban gay marriage, making the court case moot, but I hope the state's voters are progressive enough to reject it if it actually winds up on the ballot. It's far from a sure thing, though. California is pretty blue, but the voters can be surprising. The same state that was the first to legalize medical marijuana also voted to deny illegal immigrants education and health benefits (since stalled in court) and voted in the notorious "3 Strikes" law (currently being reworked, if memory serves).

Still, this is a positive sign. While it gives the fundies more ammo against "activist judges," it also provides another much-needed chance for people to see that gay marriage won't bring about the Apocalyse. This is the new civil rights battle, and it's interesting to bear witness to these moments in history.

Fnord.

Just thought I'd throw this out there...

2005-03-09T12:00:00.000-06:00

As if we didn't need more proof that the White House is in the hands of people who just should not be making speeches, I give you this bit from DailyKos. Enjoy.

Fnord.

The brains of the Insurance Institute seem to be missing

2005-03-07T09:25:00.000-06:00

You may have seen the report on Friday that Consumer Reports, based on tests conducted by the Insurance Institute, named the Ford Focus the best small car of the year. Today, CR rescinded that honor in light of the II's side-impact crash test results, which gave all small cars a rating of poor unless they were retested with optional equipment, at the request and expense of the manufacturer.

I have a couple observations about this. For one, no small car is going to do well when t-boned by an SUV. Small object hit by large object = small object suffers. Even with safety features like side-impact airbags, you're probably going to get a couple bruises (or worse) if you're in said small car. In that sense, yes, they are "poor" choices when it comes to accidents.

However, if you look at how the II tested the cars, you'll see their tests are bubkus compared to the indusry-standard governmental crash tests. They take a big, 3100 lb weight, and smash it into the car at 31 mph. That's it. Guess what? I don't think any car would do well if run over by a boulder, do you? Contrast this to the government method, which takes a block of similar weight but lower to the ground to (get this) simulate an actual vehicle. Boulder simulation vs. vehicle simulation...hmm.

Anyway, the Ford Focus (to use the example from the article) gets an "Acceptable" rating, or 3 stars, in the government crash tests. Maybe it would be nice to know that, if I were in a Focus and a huge rock rolled down a hill and smashed into the car, I'd be likely to survive. But I don't think this is a vital point when most people go car shopping. Personally, I'll take the knowledge that I'd likely survive a t-bone in said car over the boulder.

Bottom line? I think II is dumb, and CR is over-reacting. And no, I don't drive a Focus.

Fnord.

Martha, Martha, Martha!

2005-03-04T13:13:00.000-06:00

I periodically check CNN.com during the day to keep up on what's going on in the world. I only actually read one or two articles, since most don't interest me, but it's nice at least having a hint of things happening outside of my office.

But today...ever since I got in this morning, the only thing CNN has been covering as their headline news item is Martha Stewart getting out of jail. Oh look, Martha's out! Look, now she's driving home! Aw, she's feeding her horses, how sweet! And now she's baked a cake! We love Martha, she's so fascinating and important!

Good god, people. She's a convicted felon who just got out of jail after serving a pansy term. She's richer than she was before she went in, and her financial prospects look good. She's got a talk show and a reality show coming out, and the merger of K-Mart and Sears will probably put more of her crap into people's homes than ever before. Her magazine will undoubtedly take off because of the "new, softer Martha."

I just don't understand this insanity that seems to have all the media outlets in its ironclad grip. I can understand covering her release, but to continue making it the main story for half the day? Give it a rest, people...there are far more important things going on in the world than Martha Stewart.

Fnord.

Holy crap this is awesome!

2005-03-04T10:07:00.000-06:00

This video was forwarded to me by Sam over at The Escapist. You should go watch it. Now.

I especially like the parade of rabbits with various numbers on their chests.

Fnord.

Three cats

2005-03-03T09:24:00.000-06:00

A friend came across this image while doing a Google image search on tattoos. I honestly don't want to know how it came up, but it's damn funny. A shame I don't get images like this attached to the mass of porn spam that's been finding its way into my work email box the past few weeks.

Fnord.

Sometimes I love Republicans

2005-03-01T13:14:00.000-06:00

I was going to rant about this teenage turnip twaddler who cut me off today at lunch (two turn lanes, moron, means you don't swing into the other one while turning), but then a friend sent me this link.

Hahahahahahaha!

Seriously, this kind of stuff makes me bust a gut. As my friend said, "Rioting...there would be rioting." I can't believe this fruit seriously thinks he could bring this about. For one thing, broadcast TV is completely different from cable. Broadcast is over public airwaves, thus the government technically can regulate it "for the common good." Cable is limited access, however, meaning unless you break the law, the only way you gain access to it is through subscription. Which brings us to satellites. Yes, they're broadcast in a sense, but it's not over public airwaves; once again, you need a subscription to (legally) gain access.

Not to mention, of course, that going after cable would be going after the cash cow of the media companies. You think you've got a powerful lobby on your side, composed of a bunch of fundies with sticks up their asses? See what happens when you go after the media's pocketbooks. Even your Republican friends will jump ship faster than you can say "indecent" when their financial backing suddenly vanishes.

Oh man...anyway, thanks, Senator Stevens. You gave me a good laugh.

Fnord.

Sex in the news

2005-02-25T11:11:00.000-06:00

Two amusing sex stories in the news, and they both involve court! First up, we have the story of a man suing over his ex's pregnancy. Not so special, until you get to the part about how she got pregnant. Apparently she saved his seed after oral sex, and then used it to impregnate herself. He can sue based on the fact that he engaged in an act that would not normally lead to pregnancy, and thus is "traumatized." But wait, it gets better! The court did decide, however that he can not sue the woman for theft of his sperm because it was considered "a gift." That's right, a gift.

While that sinks in, I'll move on to the next story which is equally entertaining and has even dumber actors. A few years ago, a 17 year old girl visiting South Padre (TX) on spring break got it into her head that she wanted to participate in a contest happening nearby. The prize was appearing in a video game, and all you had to do was flash your boobies. Since Mommy and Daddy had recently given her a boob job for Christmas, she decided this would be the perfect outlet to show off her new assets. So, she took her fake ID, filled out the consent form, told the producers she was legally of age, flashed her boobies, and was eventually put into the game. Flash forward a few years. Said teen, now 20, feel remorse that thousands of guys are now staring at her surgically enhanced 17 year old chest. So, she does what every good, moral, upstanding citizen does: she sues. Claiming the game is child pornography and that it humiliates and degrades her, she's suing for emotional distress.

So let me get this straight. She's 17 at the time, with a fake ID. The game producers made absolutely no secret about what they were doing. She filled out a consent form, lied about her age, gleefully shook her goods, and then three years later complains? God I love America. The game company rightly claims that the above facts invalidate all her claims of being trapped in a contract, since she willingly and knowingly committed fraud prior to and upon entering it. Hopefully the judge will see the light and throw this case out, but you never know.

Fnord.

Delusional in Deutchland

2005-02-23T17:45:00.000-06:00

As reported in Der Spiegel, Bush's much ballyhooed "town hall" meeting with everyday Germans has been quietly nixed by those involved. The official explanation is scheduling conflicts, which is polite diplomatic talk for "we didn't want to deal with it, but neither side wants to take responsibility." The talk, though, is that the Administration insisted on dropping it because the Germans refused to host a scripted, controlled event. They felt that an open forum should be just that, and stated, "Don't get upset with us if they [audience members] ask angry questions."

Since Bush just couldn't have it on public record that people were *gasp* angry about his policies, he just does what he does here in the States: sticks his head in the sand, convinced that everything is hunky-dory. After all, if he doesn't hear about it, it didn't really happen, right?

Fnord.

Humor break

2005-02-23T11:15:00.000-06:00

A friend introduced me to Craig's List today and the "Best of..." section. This one still has me laughing. I don't recommend reading it in an environment where you need to keep your composure.

Fnord.

My home state, she washes away

2005-02-23T08:56:00.000-06:00

Poor California. Especially SoCal. An area that normally gets maybe 15 inches of rain a year has been deluged with over twice that in the first half. They now stand less than 4 inches away from the all-time record set in the 1880s, and the current storms still haven't finished having their way with the state. I honestly expect the record to be broken this year, and I wonder what the outcome of all this will be (aside from the obvious monetary value of the damage). Some possible predictions:

1. People who built in floodplains will howl for every single drainage channel in the state to be sealed with concrete. Sadly I see this as a serious possibility, since stupid people who build in floodplains also tend to be very vocal.

2. Cities will put a moratorium on building in foothills. This would be good, since the housing creep into the hills has not only created unstable hillsides, but intruded upon the territory of wildlife. Coyotes and mountain lions do not mix well with suburbanites, and its the wildlife that generally loses in the end.

3. The frenzy of brush clearing on the hillsides to prevent fires will slow. Some of the damage is probably due to the fires of the past few years denuding the hillsides, but I also think some people overreacted to the danger and, by eliminating the fire danger, opened themselves up to mudslides. Brush is on the hillside for a reason, people, and in a dry environment like SoCal, it's all that stands between you and tons of earth crashing down on your house.

Those are my predictions. We'll see what happens.

Fnord.

Don't stop here, this is bat country!

2005-02-21T11:14:00.000-06:00

In case you missed the news, writer and journalist Hunter S. Thompson committed suicide yesterday in his fortified compound near Aspen. Personally, I think this is a cover-up for the real cause of death.

So long, Dr. Thompson. Journalism wouldn't be the same without you.

Fnord.

Heh.

2005-02-16T13:16:00.000-06:00

Although I'm 99% certain the headline was intentional, it's still pretty funny.

Fnord.

Art as terrorism...

2005-02-16T10:28:00.000-06:00

I just don't get this. Well, ok, I do on some weird conservative, what-if mindset. One would think, however, that the items would be promptly returned once the situation was explained. Then again, this is the Federal government we're dealing with. Obviously fake passports just can't be tolerated.

Fnord.

I have been pwned.

2005-02-15T15:52:00.000-06:00

Never let it be said that the Internet can not change someone's opinion.

My rant on Valentine's Day has been tried in the court of public opinion, both in comments and off-line commentary, and judged to be quite lacking. A straw man I have created, a false target for my disappointment. It also seems that when people sense you attacking something sacred, no matter how said attack is directed, they take it personally. At any rate, my peers have judged me lacking in foresight and wisdom in my assaults against V-Day, unjustly accusing those who partake of it as unromantic, and being an ass about the whole deal in general. I submit to the decision, and raise the white flag.

Perhaps I was too harsh on the holiday. I don't enjoy hating it; indeed, I look forward to the day when I can actually enjoy it. But, as has been pointed out to me several times in the past 24 hours, it seems my current outlook on this holiday is detrimental to my well-being, filling me with anger, hate, and tempting me to the dark side. So never again will I say anything bad about Valentine's Day. Never again shall I be publicly bitter about this holiday, regardless of my reasons. I shall keep my rants to myself, and stoically soldier on as I do the other 364 days of the year. That which does not kill me only makes me stronger.

Fnord.

It's St. Harlequinn's Day!

2005-02-15T09:41:00.000-06:00

Go fill yourself with bitterness and hate! And perhaps read this rant before you do, so you realize what it's all about.

Fnord.

A cheap card and two wilted roses.

2005-02-14T17:54:00.000-06:00

This evening, while picking up some groceries at the neighborhood supermarket, I saw what passes for romance in this tawdry day and age. A middle-aged man, not unsuccessful from his dress, was in line ahead of me buying a cheap card and two wilted roses for his wife. I know it was for his wife, as this is what the card told me. If it wasn't for Valentine's Day, I'd bet my left nut this guy wouldn't have been in the store at all.

This is but one of many reasons why I detest Valentine's Day, and why today has been hell for me. Everywhere I looked, I saw reminders of the holiday. The radio played Valentine-themed 80s music for the retro lunch hour. Even Google had a cutsie heart made of roses replacing one of the o's. This "holiday" is a sham, a claptrap celebration, a carefully contrived piece of malarky and an excuse for people who otherwise wouldn't give a rat's ass to be "romantic." I hate it. It's the antithesis of romance and love; a vile candy covered with chocolate, delivered by a plush gorilla wearing a shirt that reads "I love you a bunch," and shoved down your throat.

There are other reasons I hate V-Day. For one, I have never had a good Valentine's Day. I've completely forgettable ones, and ones I only wish I could forget. Bad memories abound with this holiday, and it serves them up to me on a tarnished platter. For another, it's just a crappy holiday. Seriously, think about it; it's only purpose is to make Hallmark rich and to stress out every guy in the western world. It also serves to remind women that many guys are only interested in getting in their pants (why else would places like Victoria's Secret do so much business this time of year?)

Here's an idea. Instead of giving in to the sordid debacle that is Valentine's Day, boycott it. Refuse to enrich the card and flower companies on this day, and instead do something romantic on different day. My god, what a concept; romance that occurs on day other than February 14th. I know, it's a radical idea. You'll be surprised, however, how popular it is.

Fnord.

Sweet art day, or at least morning

2005-02-11T09:13:00.000-06:00

I blogged about this woman's art before (somewhere in the archives, I'm too lazy to link the blog entry right now). Here's a new work in progress, which I will channel Napoleon Dynamite in describing as "sweet." Go look.

Fnord.

Dear god...

2005-02-10T10:50:00.000-06:00

What I've been talking about regarding "Jeff Gannon" is just the tip of the iceberg, apparently. For some detailed digging into his background and the controversy surrounding this guy, go see DailyKos. Yes, it's a pretty partisan website, but their info here looks good. You can also go read the Salon article.

Yikes...I mean Fnord.

This just keeps getting better.

2005-02-10T09:10:00.000-06:00

In the continuing saga of Bush-friendly reporters doing fluff pieces on the President, we now learn that a man with questionable journalistic credentials was/is a member of the prestigious White House press pool. The "reporter" in question, James Gluckert, operated under the assumed name of "Jeff Gannon," and repeadedly lobs softballs at Bush during his press conferences.

But wait, it gets better!

In 2003, Gluckert was denied press passes for both the House and Senate, because he couldn't provide any viable journalistic credentials. Apparently the White House is willing to accept diplomas filled out with crayon, though, because he's been a member of the WHPP for years.

Think it couldn't get worse? Think again!

The final kicker is that Gluckert works for a news agency wholly owned by a GOP activist, who also runs a GOP consulting group, GOPUSA. (Funny side note: Talon News bills itself as "spin free" and "unbiased," but proudly proclaims "Read our news on GOPUSA." Even FoxNews covers their biases better than that.) So, we've got a man with questionable credentials and motives who has access to the most prestigious press pool in the nation, taking up a spot that could have been filled by someone a) more qualified, and b) far more impartial. Hell, impartial period. This is the guy who asked Bush, after the inauguration, "how he could deal with Democratic congressional leaders "who seem to have divorced themselves from reality."" Scott McClellan must love this guy.

Fnord.

The Cookie Caper continued...

2005-02-09T13:51:00.000-06:00

The two teen girls who were taken to court by their stick-up-her-ass neighbor won't have to pay anything out of their own pockets. A local radio station raised more than enough money to cover their fines, with the extra going to charity. This in and of itself is good news. What's funnier, however, is that the woman has made herself such a target that she constantly gets calls and doesn't have a moment's peace, and "may have to move out of town." Hey lady, here's a free clue: if you hadn't made such a stink about this in the first place, you could be living in peace and quiet. I hope you learned your lesson.

Fnord.

Bush's Mistress Hypocricy

2005-02-09T09:18:00.000-06:00

President Bush yesterday declared that the U.S. needs to do more to fight racism, since (to paraphrase him) freedom abroad can't happen until we have freedom at home. That's just swell, Mr. President. It makes me so proud to hear you spin platitudes like, "We cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time," and "We need to teach them about the heroes of the civil rights movement, who by their courage and dignity forced America to confront the central defect of our founding."

So, why don't you practice what you preach, Mr. President, and stop pushing for a constitutional amendment that advocates discrimination, bigotry, and hate? Oh, that's right...because you're a pansy and the Fundamentalists have you by the family jewels. Mustn't upset the base to do what's right. Heaven forbid we follow in the footsteps of another president, LBJ, who dared to confront his party to help set this country in the right direction.

Fnord.

Things like this make me hate America.

2005-02-08T09:04:00.000-06:00

Two high school girls were fined close to $1000 each for causing a neighbor to suffer a panic attack. Bet you can't guess why...

1. Did they prank her?
No, although they did scare her, in the woman's estimation.

2. Did they try to extort money from her by pretending to murder her 52 cats?
No, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn this lady had lots of cats.

3. Did they seduce her husband and she walked in on an orgy of wild teen sex?
I don't know if she's even married, but I suspect if this was true, the headline would have been very different.

4. Ok, I give up. Why were they fined?
They were fined because...

...they left cookies on her doorstep around 10:30 at night, with the message "Have a nice night!" written on a paper heart.

Oh, the insidious mind of a teen! The woman was so distraught at finding this late-night gift, she had to go to the hospital the next day because she thought she'd suffered a heart attack. The girls, by the way, had baked the cookies for their neighbors because they didn't want to go to a dance that same night (there may have been drinking and cussing at the dance, so they didn't want to go.)

As if this wasn't bad enough, the judge, instead of throwing the case out as it should have been, instead fined the teens the woman's medical costs because "10:30 is too late for kids to be out." Never mind that the girls baked more than one batch, and all the other recipients (who also received their cookies at night) were very thankful and thought it was a sweet gesture, so much so that they wrote thank you letters.

God...it's things like this that make me want to shoot people.

Fnord.

Halftime and third quarter.

2005-02-06T19:14:00.000-06:00

Fscking Blogger ate my post! Augh! Screw this live blogging crap. I'm done.

Fnord.

Second quarter.

2005-02-06T18:23:00.000-06:00

6:24: A Honda pickup? God...
6:25: Brady sacked. Huh. New England punts again.
6:29: Holy monkey, McNabb just threw a long bomb that was on target. Nice play.
6:32: Touchdown Eagles.
6:35: And they throw MC Hammer back...awesome.
6:38: So, did Degree pay Nike for the use of the Swoosh/check mark?
6:39: Announcers claim Philly is "dominating," right before the Pats make a big play. Heh.
6:42: Was that a dead ball or a fumble? What the heck? Looks like they're calling it a fumble and recovery by Philly. I smell a challenge.
6:44: That Cadillac commercial was waaay too long.
6:45: Fumble called back. Good call.
6:46: Wow, was a run...25 yard power drive by the Pats.
6:47: Fumble by Brady, who's got it? Eagles...heh, the guy's out of the pile and the officials are still looking for it.
6:50: Ugh, short punt...29 yards.
6:51: Monkeys! Scanning their asses! Awesome!
6:55: Whoop, a little slippery on the field. Branch just fell on his ass.
6:57: Rodman in the bathtub...not attractive.
7:00: Touchdown New England.
7:02: Nice run, but a holding call on Philly and an injury on New England's side mar it.
7:10: Half ends with a nice run by Philly, but it doesn't mean anything since New England gets the ball next.
7:11: What the hell do pirates have to do with driving around in a circle?
7:12: Ah, local commercials. Yay.

First quarter.

2005-02-06T17:37:00.000-06:00

5:36 pm: The commercial with the Mustang convertible in the North Dakota winter is the first one to make me laugh so far. Dead guys are always funny...especially when you combine them with a North Dakota accent, eh? Ya, you betcha!
5:39: The Fox "arrow" makes an appearance. Interesting.
5:41: McNabb fumbles. What a great start for the Eagles.
5:42: Bud Light commercial with the plane...thought it was going to be obvious, but the pilot was unexpected. Good one.
5:44: Fumble call reversed due to McNabb's knee. Looks like they're going to punt instead. Good call.
5:47: Irma gave me a monkey wearing a fez to open my bottle of beer. Mmm.
5:50: Pepsi commercial with the truck: amusing.
5:51: Dancing Japanese tourists...get funky, oji-san.
5:52: Bill Bellichek goes to the wrong bench. Awesome.
5:55: FedEx commercial would have been better if it had a monkey, but still pretty funny.
6:00: Another good Pepsi commercial. What's with the GoDaddy.com ad? Funny, though.
6:07: Nice pass/run by McNabb and Owens. Penalty on New England makes it even better. Wow.
6:09: McNabb gets sacked for a 16 yard loss. So much for the amazing gains last play.
6:10: Interception in the end zone, 30 yards runback, penalty on New England and the ball gets called back. Lucky break for the Eagles, since McNabb threw a horrible pass.
6:13: McNabb is picked off again, and this time it sticks.
6:15: The cattle prod was a nice touch.
6:18: What the hell is up with McNabb? He keeps throwing these crazy bombs that almost get picked off. Sheesh.
6:21: When you can't get anymore yards, just get down. Stupid Philly turns it over again.
6:22: Quarter over...jigglies!

Super Bowl Sunday blogging

2005-02-06T17:32:00.000-06:00

Yes, I'm a geek. I'm sitting at a friend's place watching the game, and I decided to blog it. So I'm going to be commenting on the game, on a variety of things. After the game, or at some point in the game, I will post what I have so far.

Pregame thoughts:

The commercials...they are Teh Suck so far.
Those blind and deaf kids singing? Oh man, they should not have done closeups of those poor kids. Some were swaying to the music...and some where not.

Posting. More to follow...

Porkchop Prophecy

2005-02-03T09:06:00.000-06:00

Joe over at Povert has posted a link to Flapping Crane's latest skit. It's pretty disturbing, but damn funny. You should go watch it. I wouldn't recommend trying this at home, kids...these are professional actors.

Fnord.

A prayer for 2005.

2005-02-03T08:43:00.000-06:00

The 23rd Sigh

Bush is my shepherd; I dwell in want.
He maketh logs to be cut down in national forests.
He leadeth trucks into the still wilderness.
He restoreth my fears.
He leadeth me in the paths of international disgrace for his ego's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of pollution and war,
I will find no exit, for thou art in office.
Thy tax cuts for the rich and thy media control, they discomfort me.
Thou preparest an agenda of deception in the presence of thy religion.
Thou anointest my head with foreign oil.
My health insurance runneth out.
Surely megalomania and false patriotism shall follow me all the days of thy term,
And my jobless child shall dwell in my basement forever. Amen.

-Author Unknown

Fnord.

Vitamin C and a peep show, too

2005-02-02T15:45:00.000-06:00

A strip club owner up in South Dakota has created a nude juicebar/movie theater, all in efforts to thwart various attempts at shutting him down. The tale of this entrepreneur's adult entertainment joint is pretty amusing, whatever you think of girlie bars. The fact that he's still in business and is able to draw in crowds should be a sign to all the protesters that maybe, just maybe, their county isn't as pure and innocent as they'd like to think.

Fnord.

Cornstarch as sexual enhancement

2005-01-31T09:16:00.000-06:00

So. Apparently some women get too aroused during sex, resulting in excess lubrication. A Canadian woman has decided this is a big enough problem that it must be addressed, so she's developed a product called AbsorbShun, which is essentially powdered corn starch. The idea is the corn starch will absorb the excess moisture, resulting in added friction and everything else that comes with dryness.

Pardon me for asking, but wouldn't this be horribly uncomfortable for both parties involved? Not to mention the mess it would make. I still can't decide whether this is a joke or not. I thought it was at first, but the website looks vaguely legit, and there's no hoax disclaimer anywhere, not even buried in their disclaimer section. Take a look, if you're brave enough.

By the way, a friend passed this on to me. Yes, I have bored and disturbed friends. Gonna go read about monkey porn now...far more normal.

Fnord.

Yikes

2005-01-28T13:27:00.000-06:00

This would fall under the "People Very Different from Us" category. I don't want to know what kind of problems these poor kids are going to have later in life.

http://www.houstonpress.com/issues/2005-01-27/news/feature_1.html

Fnord.

I can't imagine the smell...

2005-01-28T09:44:00.000-06:00

CNN has an article today about a massive hill of cow manure that somehow caught fire, and has been smoldering for the past three months. I wasn't aware that piles of cow dung could just spontaneously combust, but apparently they can. Maybe it's like flour dust in that regard. That's not all, though...apparently, smoldering piles of dung are not uncommon in the Midwest. This one has gained news attention only because of its size and the length of its burning. Chalk this one up as yet another "factoid I could probably live my life without and still feel complete."

Fnord.

This just cracked me up.

2005-01-27T13:41:00.000-06:00

A state senator in Oklahoma wants to outfit fighting gamecocks with tiny boxing gloves to promote cockfighting without the bloodshed. The visual picture this brings to mind just cracks me up. Full article is here, although you'll need to watch an ad to read it if you're not a member of Salon.

Fnord.

The damn liberal media

2005-01-27T08:28:00.000-06:00

Poor President Bush. He's so beset on all sides by hostile media wonks and pundits he has to pay them to support his policies. This calls for a constitutional amendment banning liberals from working in the media. After all, they're destroying the careful fair and balanced reporting that Fox News has worked so hard to create.

Only a week in to his second term, and I can already smell the latest scandals brewing. Clinton was a virginal saint compared to this bozo...but then we already knew that fro his first term. Middle America, reap what thou hast sown!

Fnord.

Ghosts and tawdry love letters

2005-01-25T09:33:00.000-06:00

With as much death as the tsunami wrought, it was inevitable that ghost stories would soon start pouring forth from the affected countries, much like the waters themselves poured in. Stories of cabbies picking up doomed beachgoers, screaming voices echoing from ruined hotels, and the dead calling relatives on the phone begging for help are signs of post-traumatic stress syndrome, according to doctors.

But are they really? The most believable and long-living ghost stories inevitably involve violent death of innocent life. Sometimes you'll hear stories about ghosts of soldiers or murderers, but usually it's those who "died before their time" that seem to hang around. I'm not going to debate the existence of ghosts; you either believe in them or you don't, and common explanations for their existence is "unfinished business," "sorrow," and the like. I will say, though, that there does seem to be something to them, and it wouldn't surprise me if a horrible disaster like the tsunami produced more than a few new haunts.

Enough about ghosts. On a much more lighthearted note, everyone's favorite amateur porn star, Paris Hilton, is back in the news. This time, a slew of her love letters to ex-boyfriend Nick Carter of Backstreet Boys fame/infamy have fallen into the hands of a gossip rag. Poor Paris. If she thought the fallout from the video was bad enough, now she has to contend with people reading her "mushy missives, scrawled in a childish, blocky hand." She needs to just drop out of sight for a while and let people forget about her.

Fnord.

Monkeys on TV

2005-01-24T10:08:00.000-06:00

Why can't we have reality TV shows starring monkeys, and revolving around their daily lives and those of their caretakers? Oh, right...because this is the US, and if it doesn't involve scandal, sex, backstabbing, or crude jokes, then it can't be reality TV.

The world would be a better place if we watched more monkeys. I know that in some parts of the world monkeys are considered pests, but the majority of the world's population does not have direct contact with them. If everyone had to watch some monkeys for five minutes at the start of their day, I think we'd be one step closer to a civilized planet. After all, everything is better with monkeys. At least in moderation.

Besides, when is the last time you said the word "monkey" without a smile?

Fnord.

New notebook

2005-01-22T09:41:00.000-06:00

My new notebook arrived yesterday, and I've finally got it mostly in order. It's pretty, and so far has done everything Ive asked it to. It still has some junk on the HD that I'll eliminiate one day, but for now it's mainly cleaned of all the extra crap that new computers always come with if purchased from a vendor.

My only gripe about it is the Dell power supply. It has this weird three prong plug that does not seem to be industry standard. Thus, I'm finding it difficult to find a portable surge protector that will work with it. Dell's website is no help, either. I found a hint on the Belkin website that their two prong will work with Dell three prongs, but I should probably call Dell first to make sure.

Because I despise the new versions of AIM, I installed Trillian on this machine for my IM needs. It has some definite advantages over the standard AIM client, although isn't quite as customizeable. The Pro version probably is, but I really don't feel like spending money on a chat client, thanks. One thing it does have that's really neat is a link to a wikipedia. So, in chat, some works will be linked. If you mouse over a linked word, it gives you a popup box full of information/trivia about that word. Generally pop culture, internet culture, and mythology (apparently lots of internet slang is also the name of some ancient diety, commonly Egyptian.)

Fnord.

I'm the Prez! Kiss the Devil!

2005-01-21T14:30:00.000-06:00

Although everyone knows I have absolutely no love for our president, every now and then he does something that I do agree with. His Preserve America initiative, for one, is a pretty good idea. His support for the UT Longhorns is also something I can get behind. Sadly, the "Hook 'em Horns!" sign that every UT student and alum knows and loves is not a universally known sign.

Actually, it is a universally recognized sign, but not always as a symbol of sports fandom. I wondered how long it was going to take before someone (or a whole country) questioned Bush's use of the Hook 'em sign.

"Hi, my name is President George W. Bush, and I want you all to BOW DOWN BEFORE YOUR DARK MASTER! KISS THE DEVIL, KISS THE DEVIL!! BLEH, BLEH!"

Fnord.

Courage, redux. And laptops.

2005-01-21T09:06:00.000-06:00

CNN reported today that Sgt. Benderman, the soldier I talked about a few days ago, has been charged with desertion and intentionally disobeying orders for his refusal to go to Iraq for a second tour of duty. Benderman is now a conscientious objector, but was unable to get the military to consider his case before being ordered to ship out. Instead of obey and go against his nature, Benderman stuck to his guns.

I still think he's courageous.

In much better news, my new laptop is on its way and should be here sometime today. I was a little surprised when I got the email that it had shipped early, but absolutely thrilled when I checked the tracking. As I write this, my laptop is somewhere in Austin on a UPS truck, slowly making its way to my office building. Sadly, I won't get to play with it until I get home, but I think I can wait a few more hours. :)

Fnord.

Scenes of the surreal

2005-01-20T08:40:00.000-06:00

I'm not sure about any of you, but if I were to go for my morning beach walk and find hundreds of giant squid washed up on the shore, I'd think that perhaps it would be a good idea to go home and go back to bed. While not unheard of, apparently, it's definitely unusual for such things to happen. It doesn't help, of course, that R'lyeh, the damned city of Cthulhu, is supposedly in the Pacific. Then again, Dagon was more of the fish-god, and he's not in the Pacific, so who knows. Either way, good evidence for going to bed.

In other scenes of the surreal, Bush's inauguration begins today. I'm not going to go into details about this one, because thinking about it makes my stomach churn and my head throb. But it is surreal. Protests are planned, and I have to wonder how big they'll be compared to four years ago. You would think he'd get the hint that perhaps, just maybe, some of the population is virulently opposed to his policies when he's the only president in recent memory who's been egged at his inauguration.

But then again, it's Bush, so it wouldn't surprise me if he declared himself His Holiness God-King Emperor Bush on the podium.

Hmm...on second thought, I think I'll take the squid.

Fnord.

Some people should not be encouraged.

2005-01-19T11:05:00.000-06:00

There are some scary things on the web. Scary people, too. When you combine them into one, you get a masterpiece of disturbing proportions. This website is a case in point. People like this guy shouldn't be encouraged by giving him interviews and publicity. Let him live his life as he sees fit, by all means, but please let him live it anonymously. For the sake of the children. And the puppies.

Fnord.

On being a coward

2005-01-18T09:55:00.000-06:00

I haven't read Salon very often since the election. Not entirely sure why, but I think it has something to do with feeling that Salon was part of the reason I felt so depressed after the election. I still think Salon is a decent news outlet, but they tended to pump stuff up about Bush so much that it seemed impossible to me that the man could win. I got so worked up over the election that it really affected me when Kerry lost.

I'm not saying this was necessarily a bad thing. But, in the interest of regaining my sanity, I stayed away from Salon and just let my mind work out issues on its own, without War Room telling me of the latest Bush outrages, or Sidney Blumenthal reporting the latest GOP dirty tricks. But eventually I would come back, it was inevitable. It's still full of anti-Bush stuff, but I pretty much avoided it and focused on one article: the story of a concientous objector to the Iraq War.

You can read the story itself; I'm not going to discuss the ins and outs of that. What I choose to focus on here is the idea of cowardice. From the article, many people have called Sgt. Benderman a coward for refusing to return to Iraq. I don't see it that way. As it stands, he will likely face a court martial for directly disobeying an order. For a career military man with a long family history of military service to risk such a blemish on his record for his own convictions is anything but cowardice in my eyes. It takes a great deal of courage to stand up for what you believe to be right in the face of overwhelming opposition, especially when you know that by doing so you are almost certainly screwing yourself in the process - at least in the short term.

No, the cowards are the ones who either oppose the war but meekly go along with it, or the gung-ho armchair generals who shy away from going over themselves, or protect their kids from going over (*cough* congressmen *cough*). I would call those who label Sgt. Benderman a coward cowards themselves, for refusing to recognize his courage...simply because it flies in the face of what they themselves think.

Fnord.

Big Mac Attack

2005-01-11T13:37:00.000-06:00

The newest Apple products have just been announced, and they're an odd bunch. (Note: I'm not putting in links, except to Apple's website. It's sort of fubar'd right now, so I don't have direct links...go there and figure it out.) First up is the new Mac mini, a lunchbox shaped and sized "headless" computer with no keyboard, mouse, or monitor. Designed to travel between destinations that already have such things, the Mac mini is like a mutation between a lan partybox, laptop, and iPod. It kind of reminds me of what Michael Graves would make if he designed a computer. Personally, I think it's pretty spiffy, even if it does have an odd appeal to it. Now, if they could only do the same thing for PCs...

The other big product is the iTampon, aka the iPod Shuffle. Roughly the size of a pack of chewing gum, the flash-based player has no screen and minimal controls. It's designed to just play your music randomly (hence the shuffle name), but you can set it to play in order. It plugs directly into a usb port. Again, it's nifty, although in this case Apple is imitating a competitor. Creative made something like this two years ago, called the MuVo. The latest incarnations of that player are still selling well. I'm sure this new iPod will sell, simply because it's an iPod. But, unlike the Mac mini, I don't think it's all that special.

Not that I would pass it up if someone offered one to me for free.

Fnord.

Yates' Conviction Overturned

2005-01-06T09:02:00.000-06:00

I was dumbfounded by this one. Andrea Yates, the crazy lady who drowned her five kids in a bathtub a few years back (because "Satan made her do it") has had her murder convictions overturned. Why? False testimony from a prosecution witness. Ok, I can understand that, even if the woman is guiltier than a cat with canary feathers in its mouth. After all, if I were convicted of murder based on false testimony, I'd certainly want a new trial.

But that's not quite the case here. Oh no, it gets better. The false testimony, apparently, was from a psychiatrist who claimed he had consulted the producers of the crime show Law & Order on an episode that mirrored the Yates case. After the jury convicted her, though, it was discovered that no such episode existed. But this is still, apparently, considered false testimony, never mind that the woman admitted killing the kids. The end result is that her conviction has been overturned, all because some dumb-ass made up testimony about consulting on a TV show.

This is unbelieveable. Now taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill for a whole new trial for a woman who is admittedly guilty. I'm sure they're going to use the insanity plea, too, which means this nutcase will get off with a relative slap on the wrist. I'm not bemoaning the idea of the insanity plea, by the way. I don't think it's very civilized to send someone to jail for a murder they don't understand they committed. But Yates knew *exactly* what she was doing. "Satan told me to kill them," she says, which she promptly did. She's crazy, yes, but she's crazy like Charlie Manson is crazy, not like the guy sitting on the street corner talking to flowers. Ugh...sometimes our society just doesn't make sense.

Fnord.

Reflections

2004-12-21T08:47:00.000-06:00

It seems to be the season for reflections. Two of my friends have done this (here and here), so I decided I'd jump on the bandwagon as well.

So...it's been four and a half years since I left New Mexico, and seven and a half since leaving California. It's hard for me to visualize that much time passing, since my days in San Diego still seem so recent. I talk to people about events that happened "recently," then realize they happened in the mid-90s. My sense of time has greatly narrowed, or expanded...hmm...not sure which term fits better. How about I just say, "everything seems to have happened recently," and leave it at that.

There's no way I could have imagined I'd be where I am back when I packed my car up in 1997 and headed for the Land of Enchantment. I didn't know a soul in Las Cruces when I arrived, but I met some fantastic people. When I left for Austin in 2000, I was leaving behind those same people, but at the same time made many new friends. Still, my life turned out a lot different than I had expected it to. Before I decided to go to New Mexico, I took several long walks along Torrey Pines beach. It never occurred to me that Texas would be my eventual destination. It also never occurred to me when I moved here from NM that I'd end up staying beyond grad school.

I can't say I'm exactly happy with my life currently, but I find no real faults with it. I've got a good job, good friends, a roof over my head (even if the apartment it covers is an overpriced rathole), and a new car. I don't want for food, and I always have a little money left over each month to have some fun. I have it a lot better than many others, and for that I'm thankful. But I still don't feel settled. I still feel like things could be so much better. I'm fine with this, however, as it gives me a goal. I've achieved some major milestones in my life, and it's time to set new ones.

This is starting to sound like a drunken New Year's Eve post. Since I don't want to do that just yet, I'll leave off here. Things could be better, but they could be worse. I have no plans on going down, so I guess I've gotta climb.

Fnord.

(My god that's a cheesy post.)

Holy Christmas Miracle Weeping Teapot

2004-12-20T15:26:00.000-06:00

I don't know how many of you do stuff on eBay, but I do know that eBay is a source for not only wacky items but wacky stories, too. From the woman auctioning off her gradfather's ghost, to a 10 year old grilled cheese sandwich with the image of the Virgin Mary (and only one bite taken out of it), eBay is definitely a source of humorous fodder.

Now, I give you this auction for the Holy Christmas Miracle Weeping Teapot. It's very amusing...I don't know if the story is true, or merely a means for the seller to unload a defective piece of crockery, but it will nonetheless bring a smile to your face. Every auction should have a witty description like this one.

And hey...if you believe her, go ahead and bid. Or don't, and just wish her well (like I'm doing.)

Edit: according to the seller's Live Journal, someone has paid for her tuition. Understandibly, she's very happy. And this makes me believe that perhaps the story on the auction is true. Or she's an excellent bullshitter. I'll tell myself it's the former, though, since it's the season and all.

Fnord.

The Holiday Madness

2004-12-20T08:49:00.000-06:00

No, I'm not talking about typical shopping madness, parties, decorating gone wild, or anything else most people jokingly associate with holiday madness. I'm talking about the syndrome that seems to force people to do crazy things come holiday times. Case in point: the woman in Missouri who stole a fetus. If you haven't heard about this, the crazy lady strangled a 23 year old pregant woman, removed the baby (via some bizarre cesaerean section out of a horror movie), and fled. In her hometown, she claimed it was her own, while in reality she had had a miscarriage at some recent point.

Ok, maybe the trauma of losing her baby through a miscarriage was enough to drive her into temporary insanity, but this...man, words just fail me. Why not adopt? Why did she not turn to her husband and let him know she'd lost the baby, instead of hiding that fact and committing this act? We'll probably never know...people this crazy, like the woman from Houston who tried to drown her kids, or the other midwestern woman who murdered her kicks by bashing their heads in with a brick, don't have enough grasp on reality to explain their actions.

But is there something else? Is there some sinister force that makes people do these things during the holidays? I know they're stresssful, but come on. When you flip out this badly, there must be warning signs beforehand. I don't think normal people just decide to murder someone and steal the fetus. As sadly common as miscarriages are, this is not the typical response. I'm at a loss, though, to explain what this force might be. Thoughts?

Fnord.

The problems with posting around the holidays.

2004-12-13T09:17:00.000-06:00

I have discovered a new phenomenon in my life: fear of giving away a Christmas present. Not the actual giving of the present, mind you, but fear of giving someone too big a hint about what I'm getting them. Let me elaborate: lots of funny things have happened to me recently, but I can not post about them because they all involve things that are related to gifts I'm giving. I know not many people read this, but many know about this blog, and my luck would have them decide to read on the day I post a funny story about looking for foo when they asked for foo. And no, I'm not just writing this to say, "hey really, I can be funny, just not now." I post this because I've already deleted one post upon near-completion, and trashed another half-baked idea. All because of Christmas present ideas.

So. Hence the lack of interesting posts lately. Just thought you'd like to know.

Fnord.

I so want this for Christmas...

2004-12-08T11:22:00.000-06:00

Words just escape me...I'm overcome by the sheer...um...majesty....of this.

When you're done, take a look at the other items. Most of them are damn funny.

Fnord.

Midwest "Red State" Cultural Values

2004-12-07T11:03:00.000-06:00

I found this rather amusing bit of irony on the web today. You can read about most of it here, but I;'ll give a quick run down for the lazy people. Recently, President Bush profiled a good ol' couple of decent Americans who have benefitted from his tax cuts, and who praised his leadership in both the economy, the war on terror, and the cultural war. Funny thing about the husband, though...he was just arrested for child molestation.

So much for that cultural war. If that's the side he's fighting for, I'll stay over here, thanks.

In more amusing news, this time from News of the Weird: there's apparently a new game gaining in popularity in the Midwest. In this game, players take turns throwing beanbags at a platform with a hole in the center. The idea is to score points by getting your bags into the hole, landing the bags in appropriate places on the platform, and knocking your opponents' bags off the platform. Sort of like shuffleboard, but with thrown beanbags. Sounds innocent enough, until you learn the popular name of the game:

Cornhole.

Yep. Just can't beat those Midwest values. ;)

Fnord.

Things to be thankful for...

2004-12-02T08:59:00.001-06:00

The holidays can be rough on some people. I hear that suicides reach their peak around this time of year, and I can believe it. All I can say is just be glad you're not Lauri Waterman, who was murdered by two of her 16 year old daughter's 24 year old ex-boyfriends. Check here for a series of links, including ones to the girl's LiveJournal. I couldn't read those links, by the way, since apparently you have to be a member of LiveJournal to do so, but the quick summary is good enough for me.

All I can say is, "Dude, that is fscked up."

Fnord.

Darwin Award Nominee

2004-11-30T09:44:00.000-06:00

For those of you unfamiliar with the Darwin Awards, they are a wondrous award given post-humously to those glorious individuals who selflessly remove themselves from our gene pool in spectacular ways. In other words, idiots who kill themselves, and we are thankful their idiot genes will not be passed on to future generations of humanity (or passed on anymore than they already have been). Most of them are even true, although not all are.

Anyway, I found one on CNN of all places. Some guy decided, for whatever reason, to stick a lava lamp on a hot stove. The lamp exploded, shooting a shard of glass into the man's heart and killing him. Why was he heating a lava lamp on the stove? Who knows. Maybe the bulb was burned out, and he just really wanted to watch the pretty blobs. And no, before you ask, he apparently was not drunk or stoned at the time.

Fnord.

Pissed Off Progressive, Part Deux...

2004-11-19T09:57:00.000-06:00

Over at DailyKos, they're discussing the kind of dirty fighting I advocated in my post yesterday. The idea on the table is to bring to vote a constituional amendment banning abortion, using it as a wedge issue against the GOP as they've used countless issues against Democrats. The reasoning is that it will cause a rift in the GOP, with social conservatives supporting it and moderates having to vote against it. Wishy-washy Bush would finally have to take a stand, inevitably alienating a good chunk of his supporters in the process regardless of which side he ultimately chooses.

Of course, with over 60% of Americans believing that abortion should remain legal in some form, the amendment would go down in flames. The aftermath, however, would be glorious, as social conservatives would scream bloody murder about being "betrayed," and thus weakening the GOP. The revolution will not be televised, my friends.

In other news, Congress just upped the debt cap. Our country's maximum debt is now 70% of our entire economy. The vote - which passed by 4 - was mainly along partisan lines, with some crossover. Good going, Bush...let's make the dollar weaker while we pass the buck on to future generations to pay for your ill-conceived tax cuts.

Fnord.

Time to redefine myself.

2004-11-18T13:26:00.000-06:00

I don't think I can consider myself a true Democrat anymore. I'm not talking about changing my party affiliation, mind you, but I feel Democrats have just kind of...well, lost their way. They're arguing about the same old issues and going about it the same old ways, and it just isn't working. The last election showed us that. Republicans have successfully labeled the DNC as bad. We're the new communists, determined to tax you all to death and give the money away for free to welfare moms and pornographers. Oh, and terrorists...because everyone knows terrorists wanted Kerry to win.

So what do we do? We change ourselves. We reinvent ourselves. We adopt a new label and defend it with every ounce of energy. At the same time, we work to turn the tables on the GOP. We must turn the term "social conservative" into a synonym for bigot, racist, extremist...anything to show them for what they honestly are. It's time to stop fighting fair, and start fighting on Karl Rove's level. It's time to get pissed off, damn it, and fight fire with fire.

It's time to get Progressive on their ass.

That's right. I now define myself as a PoP: a Pissed off Progressive. I'm tired of the religious right worming their way into my life and that of my friends. I'm tired of seeing gays turned into second class citizens. I'm tired of seeing blind faith triumph over logic and reason. I get angry when I see our civil liberties getting trounced in the name of "homeland security." So it's time to take a page from history, become as "strong as a bull moose," and fight for what we believe is right for this country.

Fnord.

A real "yellow dog democrat"

2004-11-15T14:47:00.000-06:00

Wish I had come across this picture before now. On the other hand, though, it does serve to bring a smile to my face.

And yes, I would have put it in the blog directly, but the site seems to be having issues right now.

Fnord.

Art is good.

2004-11-11T11:08:00.000-06:00

Sam over at The Escapist pointed me to this nifty website of a friend of his who does original art. The main art page is here, although much of it (according to him) is a little out of date. I've seen some of her more recent work, but only have a link to this one. I don't know how long it will be up, so it if dies I'm sorry. Here is another site of her work; some of it she didn't draw, but colored and inked. You should be able to tell which ones she drew herself.

Anyway, take a look. If I can find more links to her more recent stuff, I'll post them.

Fnord.

Same old Shrub.

2004-11-10T14:14:00.000-06:00

I was temporarily bouyed by the news that John Ashcroft was resigning as Attorney General. A man who once lost a senate race to a dead guy, Ashcroft was one of the most inflammatory and controversial AGs the US has had in recent memory. From his draping of a semi-nude Lady Justice statue to the so-called Patriot Act (not to mention his god-awful singing), Ashcroft has been a bone in the craw of many a progressive.

However, I just heard about Bush's favored replacement: Alberto Gonzales. So what, you might think. A Hispanic in the position would be good. Normally, I'd agree with you. Gonzales, however, has been serving as the White House counsel. In that role, he penned the infamous memo stating that the Geneva Conventions don't apply to the US and the war on terror.

Do we really want someone who claims the rules of modern warfare designed to ensure the decent treatment of POWs to be sitting in the post of AG? Could we find a better fox to guard the henhouse? The Middle East has rightly been up in arms over the torture scandals in Iraq. The last thing we need now is to further antagonize the area and provide even more terrorist recruitment material.

But then, I really shouldn't be surprised at this turn of events. After all, with Emperor Bush at the helm, what do we care what the world thinks?

Fnord.

WoW and other musings.

2004-11-09T11:08:00.000-06:00

After swearing I'd never play another massively-multiplayer online roleplaying game (mmorpg) again, I've been sucked back into that horrible timesink by the beta of World of WarCraft, Blizzard's mmorpg set in the WarCraft world (duh). The game is pretty much everything the other two mmorpgs I've played were not, and while they're still tweaking things, I have high hopes for it.

Yesterday, while on the UT campus doing some research, I saw a young woman wearing a pair of sweats that had the words "Search and Rescue" emblazoned on her shapely derriere. This doesn't seem like the kind of thing you would normally want people searching and rescuing, unless you don't have one - like myself. She, on the other hand, was in no danger of such a situation. I know it's trendy these days to have athletic gear with words printed on the ass, but this struck me as a particularly odd example.

One last random thought: people in Texas just don't seem to be able to enjoy cooler weather. It's been in the 70s and low 80s lately, yet almost every building I've been in the past week has had the A/C cranked to obscene levels. Whatever happened to just enjoying the weather as it is, especially after our summer? Sheesh.

A culture of gay bashing.

2004-11-05T15:34:00.000-06:00

I don't get gay bashing. Why do some people have this overwhelming urge to persecute, judge, attack, and otherwise hurt a particular group of people who are doing nothing wrong? It's not like they're eating babies or skinning small animals to bathe in their blood. They're not standing on street corners and proselytizing about the gay life style. Hell, most of them prefer that their sexuality not be an issue, no more than heterosexuality is.

Yet there's a culture of gay bashing that seems to be gaining ground in the country lately. Some of it has been powered by the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision on gay marriage early this year, but it's gone beyond that. Eleven states passed initiatives or measures banning gay marriage; several of those go even further, banning civil unions. To make matters worse, the language on these things is so vague as to apply to all such agreements, whether the participants are gay or straight, male or female. Since when did persecution of a minority gain legal approval?

Before you accuse me of blowing this out of proportion - defense of marriage and values and all that - let me just point out a particular instance of this: Terri Leo. Mrs. Leo is a fundamentalist on the Texas State Board of Education who wanted a recent textbook to not only define marriage explicitly as between a man and a woman, but to claim that gay marriage was illegal and immoral. Also, she wanted the book to explicitly condemn homosexuality as deviant, and to call for the repeal of hate crime legislation protecting gays from violence. She won out on the first part; the text book in question now refers to a couple as a "man and a woman" instead of as "adults." As far as I know, her other proposed changes were not implemented, thank God.

How can this kind of mindset exist in our country? How can a state official so openly condemn this? Who's next on the hit list? Bhuddists? Mormons? Goths? Whatever happened to "love thy neighbor?" I sometimes wonder if some self-described Christians actually read the same Bible this self-described Pagan did in his Christian youth. Last I checked, Jesus pretty much condemned violence against those who disagree with you, instead preaching tolerance and love. So where is the love in denying a group of people the ability to care for one another?

You know what? Screw it. If you want to define marriage as between a man and a woman, fine. Go ahead and play sematics. However, if you do that, then civil unions need to exist that give gays the same rights and priviledges as a married couple. Anything less is pretty much discrimination by my read of the Constitution. Denying gays the benefits that come with marriage would be the same as denying African Americans or any other group the same thing. Last I checked, this country still stood for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And that means happiness for all, damn it, not just a select group of fundamentalists with sticks up their asses.

Fnord.

I'm sick of this...

2004-11-04T15:01:00.000-06:00

Being sick, that is.

No, I'm not talking about the elections. I've come to terms with the fact that Bush won and Republicans increased their majorities in Congress. I'm bouyed by the thought that 48% of voters rejected Bush, and that so many people have fallen into the progressive camp. Yes, the DNC is broken. Yes, we need to fix it. And yes, I think we can do it. The midterm elections would be a good place to start. Bush now owns his own mess, and the American populace is going to get a good look at what his brand of conservatism really means. Time will only tell what they think of it, but given opinion polls that do not ask for party affiliation, I suspect most will find it a bitter pill to swallow.

No, what I am tired of is being sick. I picked up a cold over the weekend that won't go away. It hangs on, annoying me by not keeping me in bed but making me feel miserable enough that getting through the work day really sucks. The election and other life events have not put me in the best positive mood for fighting off disease, either, but I'm trying, damn it.

Songs are a good way of expressing one's feelings. Right now I have Quiet Riot's "We're Not Gonna Take It" running though my head. Fellow progressives, now is not the time to sit down and weep. You had your day of mourning. Now it's time to continue to work for the betterment of our country. Bush and Co. think they have a mandate, but they don't. They did their worst, and we're still standing. I'd wager we're mostly still pissed off, too.

Time to harness that energy once again. Go get a box of kittens.

Fnord.

P.S. If this post is a little incoherent, it's the drugs talking...I swear.

A ray of Austin sunshine.

2004-11-03T09:09:00.000-06:00

With all the gloom of the national races, I almost forgot about the local Austin races. Thankfully, Austin voters seem to not have their heads up their collective asses. A few bright spots this morning:

1. Kerry handily won Travis County. Not that this matters, but it makes me feel good.

2. Capital Metro's rail referrendum passed, opening the door for light and commuter rail in the city. Yay!

3. One of the local Republicans involved in the Texas redistricting fiasco, Jack Stick, has gone down in defeat. Another, Todd Baxter, is still locked in a hotly contested fight that will only be decided by recounts, provisional, and absentee ballots.

4. A Democrat who fled to Oklahoma during the same redistricting mess, Pete Rose, survived a challenge from an ultra-conservative Republican.

5. Perennial Austin favorite US Representative Lloyd Doggett crushed his Republican opponent in his new district, despite Republican attempts to gerrymander him out of office. Another Texas Democrat, Chet Edwards, survived as well.

6. A slew of Democratic judges in Austin were reelected, and Travis County elected our first African Amercian sheriff. Also, our DA, who is currently prosecuting Tom DeLay, also survives.

So it's not all bad news. I still wish the overall results were different than what they appear to be, but oh well. Like Burt Reynolds in Deliverance, we'll survive this backwoods assault on our dignity.

Fnord.

I just don't get it

2004-11-03T08:16:00.000-06:00

T-minus one day.

What is wrong with this country's populace? How did a president who got us involved in the most unpopular war in recent memory (and who's botched the job, to boot), raped the environment, trampled our civil liberties, and divided the country like nothing since the Civil War manage to eek out re-election? This has got to be the biggest used car sale in history. We knew it was a lemon, we test drove it, we told ourselves we weren't going to buy it...and yet, when we get back to the dealership, we find ourselves signing the purchase order.

Or maybe, I should be asking, what is wrong with the Democrats? We had a vulnerable president and an environment ripe for booting out the incumbent. Bush's numbers are in the toilet, our deficit is beyond gross, the economy is sputtering. It was 1st and goal on the 5 yard line. Not only did we fail to get in the end zone, but we missed the field goal attempt. How did we blow it?

Either way, I just don't get it. Whether the populace was bamboozled or whether Democrats just dropped the ball, I still don't understand how Bush is still our president. Even worse, Republicans strengthened their hold on Congress. It's like 1992, only in reverse. Now, Bush and Co. are going to take this election as carte blanche to do whatever the hell they want. I fear for the next four years. Here are a few predictions...

1. Bush will privatize social security. Granny will keep her money, while the rest of us get bent over a table.

2. Iraq will only get worse, and Bush will be forced to reinstate the draft. More soldiers will die, morale will plummet, and Iraq will be the new Vietnam.

3. The environment will be pillaged. Poorly written laws like Clean Skies will pass and Big Energy will fill our air, water, and forests with pollution. Our natural parks will continue to degrade due to budget cuts.

4. The economy will show signs of anemic growth, promting more tax cuts. The budget deficit will balloon to obscene proportions that Bush will ignore because he'll be dead by the time it crushes our country.

So where does that leave us? Hanging on as best we can, I guess. The Democrats in Congress will have to work extra hard to keep the worst of the GOP abuses from passing, and can pretty much forget getting anything passed on their own. The country is going to have to brace for an inevitable disaster of some sort; either Iraq, or another terrorist attack on our soil. I've lost faith in the American public...only something of horrific magnitude is going to get them to open their eyes to the boondoggle they've unleashed by re-electing Bush.

Good job, America. You've elected a president as stupid as you are. You two fully deserve each other. When you're finally ready for a divorce, come look up the progressives you shunned. We'll be over here, building a bomb shelter.

Fnord.

Damn rule-breakers

2004-11-02T08:50:00.000-06:00

Election Day! Go vote, damn you!

Speaking of which...while I was voting this morning, I noticed a car parked in a handicapped space with several Bush-Cheney bumper stickers. Normally I'd just shake my head and ignore this, but this particular handicapped spot was within 100' feet of a polling place. In other words, these people were breaking the law.

So I reported it to the monitor inside, who came out and confirmed that yes, they were doing something naughty and illegal. Sadly, when I called the 800 number to report this, the number was busy. The monitor told me she'd keep an eye on it and try the number herself in a bit, as I had to get to work. I could report it now, but they're probably long gone.

This just annoys me. These people probably knew exactly what they were doing, but are hiding behind their handicapped placard. I'd bet that, had I/we seen them, they would have indignantly pointed at that blue and white pass and told us to go Cheney ourselves. Probably not in that language, but similar. I have to wonder...if even my quiet neighborhood has crap like this going on, what can we expect to see in other parts of the county?

Sigh...I'll be glad when this is over. Go vote.

Fnord.

The bulge beckons...

2004-10-29T10:56:00.000-05:00

4 days.

I'm not much of a conspiracy nut. While I do believe Bush's advisors manipulated him into going to war with Iraq, and that he has now become a willing tool of his inner circle, I don't believe many of the outrageous claims that are floating around in left space about the war. I also didn't put a whole lot of stock in the so-called "Bush Bulge," that unidentified lump visible on his back during the first presidential debate. It was an amusing story, and it gave me a laugh, but it just seemed like democratic wishful thinking.

Bush's explanations for the bulge were just as funny. From a "badly tailored shirt," to having his bizarrely-coiffed French tailor point out similar bulges in suit jackets, it seemed he was trying to make light of the conspiracy without playing it up. Understandable. Given that, though, I wonder if he'll respond to the images produced by a NASA scientist of the bulge? Images that clearly show something is on his back? I'm not saying it's a wire, but it's something.

Will the president finally admit to something being there? Doubtful, since that would prove he was hiding something. They'll either dismiss the photos, or make up yet another weird excuse (if they do, I hope the tailor makes another appearance.) But it makes you wonder...why didn't they just come clean beforehand? What really was under his jacket?

Fnord.

Cable access madness.

2004-10-28T10:37:00.000-05:00

5 days.

A friend sent me a link to a horrible cable access show called Dungeon Majesty. You can watch it here, but I warn you to be prepared for a horribly geeky guy running four women through a Dungeons and Dragons game. The "Natural 20 Dance" is particularly disturbing. I honestly could not watch the entire thing, because it made me want to claw my eyes out and wash my brain with lye. Not because the women are unattractive (they're actually not bad looking) but because...well, words just fail me.

Fnord.

Pop Idol Princesses

2004-10-26T08:00:00.000-05:00

7 days.

I just don't get Ashlee Simpson. She's a made-for-tv pop star, already wrapped up and stuck with a pretty bow. She was a hack from the start, only gaining popularity because of name recognition and a pretty face. On Saturday Night Live last Saturday, she was revealed to be a fraud as well in a well-publicized and ridiculed gaffe that exposed her lip-synching. Now, she's claiming acid reflux made her lose her voice, and that's why she had the vocal track.

Just how dumb does she think the public is? Her fan base is composed of cynical, unfeeling teens, a group notoriously unforgiving when it comes to mistakes by their idols. Ashlee's career is pretty much over at this point, no matter what they try to do to salvage it. She's been revealed as not only a hack but a bad dancer to boot (wtf was with that little "hoedown" she did?) She may sputter along for a while, but in the music biz, something like this is poison. Here's guessing her next album will bomb, and then we won't be seeing anymore of Ms. Simpson anymore.

This is good. Real musicians aren't made by record companies overnight. Real musicians make themselves, by writing their own music, singing their own songs, and working their way through the club circuit. They're forged in the fires of intimate venues, small fan bases, financial difficulties, heartless local critics, and an industry that would much rather steal their soul than elevate them to heaven. The good ones make it through, though, and produce real music. They're the ones that are still around after several years and several albums. They've played on stage while sick, sang while hoarse, and toured during a family crisis. They're the real musicians, not posers like Ashlee Simpson.

So to all real musicians, I take my hat off to you. You're what makes the music industry great. To posers like Simpson, I give you the finger. Go back to living in your sister's shadow, hack. If you really want respect, then quit your current gig, move to someplace like Athens, San Diego, or Austin, and start fresh. Write your own music, sing your own songs, and play clubs. Then, and only then, will people take you seriously.

Fnord.

The Statesman endorses...Bush?

2004-10-25T13:01:00.000-05:00

Say what?

The Austin American-Statesman, official paper of the official Music Capital of the World and probably the most progressive city in Texas, endorsed George Bush for president. Words do not begin to explain this bizarre action, given that the Statesman has been, as of late, leaning slightly left. It's bad enough that they've pretty much bitchslapped the progressives of this city with the endorsement, but they did it in a horribly wishy-washy way. They tepidly stand behind Bush's foreign policy, then attack him on domestic issues. Yet still, they endorse him for president, quoting Churchill in the process: "When you're going through Hell, keep going."

That's all fine and good if you find yourself in Hell by some strange twist of fate. But when you find yourself in Hell because your inept tour guide took a wrong turn in Albuquerque, you don't keep going, you dump your travel agent and get out (thanks to Mojo Banjo for that great observation.) That's not to say that I think Kerry is going to pull out; on the contrary, Kerry has said just the opposite. What I do believe is that he'll find us a quicker route out, unlike "stay the course" Bush.

Well, I see where that route is taking the US Express, and I don't like it. Here's hoping we manage to pull the switch at Election Day Station and get this train back on track.

Fnord.

Trees.

2004-10-25T10:59:00.000-05:00

8 days.

You know how it feels to jump off a cliff and hit the bottom? Metaphorically speaking, of course. You fall, you hit bottom, you stand up and dust yourself off and wonder how that happened. Then you move on. Sometimes, it's more of a hill you fall down, and instead of just plunging straight down, you bump, roll, and tumble down, getting a few more bruises along the way. But once you hit bottom, it's the same result.

And then there's the metaphor of the forested cliff. Not only do you jump and hit bottom, but along the way you hit trees. Each branch smacks you upside the head as you fall, breaking your momentum somewhat but making sure you pay for it. By the time you land, you're not only beaten and bruised, but you're left with the thought that trees just bitchslapped you. That's sort of how I feel right now. Just staring up at the sky through the branches, feeling all the aches in my body.

But it's inevitable that you stand up, and keep walking. Maybe you'll hit another cliff, and with a wild hair up your ass, you'll jump off again. Why not, it's there, right? And the cycle will repeat, but every time you get back up and keep slogging away. Those same trees that beat the hell out of you can also shade you. I'm reminded of Oingo Boingo's song, "[It] Only Makes Me Laugh." You can go here for the full lyrics, but I'll leave you with the important line from that song.

When I fall down the hole and I hit the bottom,
It only makes me laugh,
It only makes me laugh.

Fnord.

News flash: Bush supporters clueless.

2004-10-21T15:28:00.000-05:00

I don't like to generalize about the population, although it may seem like I do when I rant about "republicans." When I do this, I'm usually referring to either the leadership of the GOP, or republican policy wonks/hacks. I usually do not attribute this to the rank-and-file, whom I instead view with pity that they continue to follow without questioning their leaders' information or motives.

Until now.

According to this report, Bush backers are about as adverse to facts and the truth as Bush himself is. Bush backers are more likely to believe erroneous reports, dismissing facts that contradict what they either believe to be true or what the administration says is true. Like Bush himself, they work on absolute faith and loyalty, and do not question.

Is this due to simple ignorance, or an active dislike of news? Or is it something else, such as unwavering faith? I think it's all three, personally. A good chunk of Bush's supporters don't really care what's happening outside of their own life and world. Problems in Europe or even another state might as well be happening on another planet. They also tend to distrust news sources, partly due to republican claims of a "liberal media bias," and partly due to a simple pragmatism. Finally, many latched on to Bush's performance immediately after 9/11, using it to create an idealized image of the president that persists to this day. When confronted with his mistakes or errors of judgement, they dismiss them as "not my president." After all, their president is a strong man uniting the country; why should they believe otherwise?

I don't know whether to pity these people, or dismiss them, or what. I'm an intellectual, I freely admit that, and thus suspect to many. But I also think that people don't like being lied to, regardless of their intelligence. No one likes to be considered a sucker. So, my question is: what happens to these people if/when they finally realize that this is exactly what has been going on?

Fnord.

Fiction in 15

2004-10-21T09:31:00.000-05:00

12 days.

So a friend of mine over at The Escapist has been posting lots of little bits of fiction. I've linked to a few. The first ones were just generally creepy bits, influenced perhaps by the season. Lately, however, he's been setting the stage for a major story he's planning on writing, and now most of his "Fictions in 15" have been backstory for this effort. They're all very interesting, and well-written. You should go read them. Leave comments, too. Just don't leave philosophy quotes...he hates that.

I'm finding it difficult to be interested in politics today. Nothing good is happening. I don't read the candidate's speeches anymore, nor do I follow their appearances. I don't pay attention to polls, since moment to moment polling in this race has pretty much shown it to be a tie, no matter how either side tries to spin it. I'm optimistic that Kerry will win in the end, so I don't feel a need to try and satisfy my inner political wonk. At least not today.

Fnord.

Our President no longer lives in reality.

2004-10-20T09:22:00.000-05:00

13 days.

Kerry has been making the claim that Bush lives in some sort of fantasy world for weeks now. Given much of the evidence of the past year, it's not hard to believe. But part of me just refused to fully accept it, to acknowledge that our president was so far removed from reality that he honestly lived in his own fantasy world. My God, I thought, he's not really a stupid man. Stubborn, yes...a bit naive, sure...but is he really as bad as Democrats say?

The answer, sadly, is yes. Pat Robertson - Christian Fundamentalist Poster Boy - reports that he had a discussion with Bush just before the outbreak of the Iraq war. He found Bush to be calm, a man "on top of the world." Robertson warned him about the war, saying he had deep misgivings about it, and that Bush needed to prepare the American people for American casualties.

Bush's response? "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."

The mind just boggles. Simply boggles. If it were a "disgruntled" ex-administration member, this probably wouldn't get much press. But it's Pat Robertson, a man who believes The Almighty has decreed a Bush win in November. He's as far up Bush's ass as any other Bushie, yet he says Bush told him we weren't going to suffer any casualties. I'm simply flabbergasted. Lord, please save me from your followers.

Fnord.

Alan Keyes: off the deep end.

2004-10-19T14:31:00.000-05:00

I love Alan Keyes, I really do. Not because he stands for anything I believe in, but because he's such a lunatic. He says the greatest things that make politics fun again, like comparing corruption to a "smelly toad sitting in the corner," or calling Mary Cheney a "selfish hedonist." You can't make this stuff up.

Anyway, he's at it again, and as Salon points out, perhaps he makes these statements simply to gain a little attention and press, even if it's bad press. After all, he's getting beaten up so horribly in the polls by his Democratic opponent, Barak Obama, that Obama is no longer actively campaigning for himself. He doesn't need to; Keyes is pretty much doing his job for him, and might as well go paint Obama's name on the office door while he's at it.

Here are Keyes' comments on the "inevitability" of incest among children raised by gay parents, in case you don't want to go through watching an ad for Salon:

"If we do not know who the mother is, who the father is, without knowing all the brothers and sisters, incest becomes inevitable,' Keyes told the Marquette Park rally held to oppose same-sex marriages. 'Whether they mean it or not, that is what will happen. If you are masked from your knowing your biological parents, you are in danger of encountering brothers and sisters you have no knowledge of."

Fnord.

Why politicians can't give an honest answer.

2004-10-19T09:42:00.000-05:00

14 days.

You ever wonder why politicans can't give you an honest answer to a question, unless it's a question that is so ridiculously simple a two year old could understand it? Case in point: if someone asks Bush, "Why do so many scientists oppose your environmental policies?", he would undoubtedly say something about how he works to protect the environment and business without ever mentioning those scientists.

Ok, perhaps that's not a very fair example, but you can probably understand my point. Unless someone asks Bush, "Do you believe in God?", or asks Kerry, "Do you believe the President screwed up in Iraq?", you're not likely to get a simple yes or no response. You'll get a very nuanced answer that may or may not answer the question. Why? Why is this?

An audience member asked Jon Stewart, host of the Daily Show, that very question on Friday night's edition of Crossfire. As well as Jon performed on that show, he kind of dropped the ball on this question. Some friends and I discussed this on Sunday night. The answer to this question, it turns out, is because they're afraid to. Not personal fear, mind you, but political fear. In this day and age, they know their opponents are ready, willing, and able to deconstruct what they say and assemble the original words into a mockery of an answer, completely misrepresenting what they said. They spin it, in other words.

Is this honest? Hell no. It saddens me when I see it happen...and, while Bush and Co. are far more likely to do it than the Democrats (pretty much guaranteed to, actually), Kerry is not immune, either. It's become a basic principle of politics that you mangle the other guy's words. It's shameful, it's disgraceful, and it makes all politicians look like wishy-washy, shifty weasels. Some of them are, of course, but the good ones get thrown in with the bad because of this.

Keep this in mind when you listen to the candidates talk about what the other guy says. It's incredibly easy to look up text of speeches or interviews on the web these days. Instead of taking them at face value, go see what the other guy actually said. More often than not, I'd bet, you'll find something very different.

Unless, of course, you're Bush talking about al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

Fnord.

Monday morning musings...

2004-10-18T10:02:00.000-05:00

15 days.

Just over two weeks left until November 2, election day, when tens of millions of Americans will head to the polls and choose the next leader of this country. I'd be lying if I said I was not anxious about this. Since the debates have ended, I've been avoiding reading about the campaigns. They're all just spin and fluff at this point anyway, the GOP side more so than the DNC. The latest Bush charge (Kerry will reinstate the draft!) is ludicrous, but there's no point in getting worked up about it. At this point, voters who support Bush don't or won't care about the facts, and voters who support Kerry will not fail to be indignent when it comes to why people can't see through Bush's lies.

I don't see a big reason to go into this, but I will say a few things. First off, the extraordinarily hefty New York Times article by Ron Suskind brings up some great points, but I think Kevin Drum of the Washington Monthly has the best take on the issue: all the evidence supports the idea that Bush is actually very indecisive, not stubborn. At first I thought Drum was smoking crack, until he made this point: "[Bush] sure does go to nearly neurotic lengths to avoid hearing anything that might cause him to doubt his own beliefs. That's hardly the sign of a man with genuine confidence in himself, is it?" Good point. If Bush truly belived he was right, he wouldn't avoid facts and arguments that could prove him wrong.

One last thing. Need more evidence that the administration had absolutely no idea how they were going to win the peace in Iraq? How about a Powerpoint slide that sums it up as, "To be provided"? Might as well have put the following in...would have made as much sense.

1. Invade Iraq
2. ?????
3. Democracy!

Fnord.

Truth standard.

2004-10-15T15:49:00.001-05:00

Go here. Read it. Then ask yourself if we can really believe what the President is saying in these last few weeks.

Fnord.

"Marygate," Take 2

2004-10-15T13:11:00.000-05:00

It's amazing to me how quickly some people forget. Case in point: the continuing flap over "Marygate," or Kerry's mention of Cheney's lesbian daughter during the debates. Both Cheneys express outrage and indignation, somehow claiming that Kerry's innoculous remark has harmed thier daughter. Media reaction has been mixed; some outlets, like the Wall Street Journal, have pretended that this is major news, something no one else knew until Kerry outed her (Cheney daughter gay? gasp!). Others, like CNN, have called it a whole bunch of nothing.

The Cheneys, in their rush to condemn Kerry, have somehow overlooked a genuinely nasty and vicious comment about Mary by one of their own party: Alan Keyes. Keyes is currently running a very-uphill fight against Democratic darling Barak Obama. During a Sept. 1 interview, he had the following choice words to say about Mary Cheney:

"The essence of ... family life remains procreation. If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principal excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism." Asked whether that meant Mary Cheney "is a selfish hedonist," Keyes said: "That goes by definition. Of course she is."

So where was the outrage from the Cheneys then? About the closest thing I could find was a comment from Mary's sister, Liz. "I guess I'm surprised, frankly, that you would even repeat the quote, and I'm not going to dignify it with a comment," she told a CNN interviewer. That's it. No labeling it as "tawdry," no saying of Keyes that he's "not a good man," and no "angry fathers" in sight.

So, Mr. and Mrs. Cheney: do you honestly believe Kerry was attacking your daughter, or are you just trying to score politcal points while hiding from members of your own party who honestly have attacked your daughter?

Yeah, I thought so. Next issue, please.

Fnord.

The Arrogance of Evangelical Christian Republicans

2004-10-15T10:26:00.000-05:00

Just a quick rant here. It always amazes me how arrogant evangelical Christians for Bush can be. They stand up before their congregations, pounding the lecturn and looking like crazed prophets, and proclaim loudly that God is behind Bush. Former professional football player turned megachurch pastor Ken Hutcherson even said that during a rally to be held today at the Mall in Washington, DC, against gay marriage, he will "let everyone know God is in control" of the Nov. 2 elections.

How the %&@$ do these people "know" that God is on their side? Do they honestly believe He talks to them? That's the height or arrogance, hubris, and vanity; last I checked, those were not traditional Christian values. It's things like this that make me fervently hope for a Kerry victory in November. Maybe...just maybe...these people will then get off their high horses and put their energy toward helping others instead of attacking them.

I think Abraham Lincoln said it best, when he hoped not that God was on our side, but that we were on God's side.

Amen...I mean Fnord.

Some advice for Lynne Cheney.

2004-10-15T09:04:00.000-05:00

So the Cheneys (meaning Dick and Lynne) are up in arms about Kerry's comments mentioning their lesbian daughter, Mary, at Wednesday's debates. They claim it was a "cheap, tawdry trick," and that Kerry is "not a good man." The vice president claims to be steaming mad, an "angry father."

Please.

I think Elizabeth Edwards, John Edward's wife, said it best: Lynne Cheney is ashamed of her daughter's sexuality, and while she may love her, she doesn't like having Mary's sexuality brought before the public. Well guess what, Mrs. Cheney...your own husband made your daughter a political issue months ago. Your own family seeks to hide her away during public events, even when she attends them. The other campaign daughters don't hide; indeed, they're right out in the open. Hell, Mary even works on her father's election campaign.

Here's some advice for you. Stop hiding your daughter. Stop being ashamed of what she is. Stop pandering to the president's base. This is exactly what Kerry was talking about...gays should not be ashamed for who they are, and to push them out of society, to marginalize them, does more harm than good. Gays will never be able to enjoy the freedoms we do if the people you seem to be so afraid of offending (i.e., religious conservatives) are able to yank your chains so much that you keep your own daughter - your flesh and blood - hidden away. Get off your indignant high horse, stop fighting to shield Mary, and instead fight to have her accepted.

Oh, and let Mary comment. Official word from the campaign is she's "declining comment." Considering how "outraged" you and your husband are, I think she deserves to have her own voice heard. After all, it's her the remarks were directed at, not you. Does she "decline comment" because she sees no harm in Kerry's remark? Does she "decline comment" because she's fully in support of them, contrary to what your base wants?

You say you love your daughter, and I have no reason to doubt it. I'm sure you do. So stop being afraid of what religious conservatives will think about her sexuality, and start defending her right to be who she wants to be. Your anger is directed at the wrong source; you should be more outraged with the segment of the population wants to marginalize her, rather than Kerry, who only wants to help her and other homosexuals live a normal life.

Fnord.

Presidential Debates, Final Round

2004-10-14T08:38:00.000-05:00

Final presidential debate. I watched it at the Alamo Drafthouse Village here in Austin for free with my girlfriend and another friend, which was a great experience. The Alamo staff made an attempt to pretend the audience was bipartisan while telling everyone to be civil, but given Austin's political leanings and the type of person who goes to the Alamo, it was obvious within the first few minutes who the packed crowd supported. Bush received derisive laughter, catcalls, or even the occasional hiss while he spoke, while Kerry generally got cheers and applause. Overall, though, the audience was very civil and never disruptive enough that you couldn't hear what either candidate was saying. So, on to the observations.

1. Irony, thy name is Bush. Bush made several attempts at trying to slap Kerry with a derisive label that more that aptly described himself. The first time, he claimed Kerry "exaggerated." Kerry didn't even both to touch that one. Ted Kennedy the conservative senator from Massachusetts? Please...that's been debunked so many times I'm surprised Bush dragged that hoary argument out from underneath whatever rug it was hiding. The second time, he claimed Kerry had no fiscal responsibility. Kerry jumped all over that one, saying, "Listening to the President lecture me on fiscal responsibility is like Tony Soprano lecturing me on law and order." That may not be the exact quote, but it's pretty damn close.

2. Education, Bush's answer to everything. At least twice (not counting the actual questions on education), Bush turned a question around and somehow attempted to answer it by touting his educational programs. Problems with illegal immigration? Education! Problems with outsourced jobs? Education! Oddly enough, while speaking about education spending, he said "Only a liberal would think a 43% increase in spending wasn't enough." Kerry slapped him upside the head, replying that it was not the percent increase that mattered, but the results. Here's a point Kerry didn't make, though, and perhaps should have: is an increase in education spending ever enough, given our place in the world?

3. Mitch McConnel and the minimum wage. Kerry attacked Bush for not supporting any kind of increase in minimum wage. Bush replied that he had, too: he had talked to Senator Mitch McConnell about a minimum wage bill...and then let the matter drop. Whatever happened to that bill? Where did it go? What was the result? Bush wouldn't say, but his absolute silence on the issue spoke volumes.

4. Kerry: compassionate conservative? Kerry said he would use the "pay as you go" rule to fund his programs, meaning for everything he spent he'd find a source to pay for it at the same time, instead of deficit spending. Kerry also had great answers on abortion and religion, saying that while he is Catholic, and personally doesn't believe abortion is the right answer, he also firmly believes in not legislating his beliefs onto other people. I don't know about you, but that sounds far more "compassionately conservative" than anything Bush has said.

5. The environment didn't come up once. This greatly surprised me, and I was really hoping to hear Kerry nail Bush to the wall on his abyssmal environmental record. Oh well.

6. Both candidates did their share of dancing. Kerry danced around the flu vaccine question. Bush danced around the homosexuality and abortion questions. Both did a certain amount of political maneuvering on others, but I guess that's to be expected.

7. Bob Schieffer, the moderator, was iron-fisted with the timer. He didn't let either candidate talk over him, and solidly controlled the debate. His questions, overall, were pretty good, but he lobbed a couple of softballs at the candidiates. In particular, his last question about the "strong women" in the candidates' lives was pure fluff (even if Kerry got in a great jab at Bush by saying all three of them - Kerry, Bush, and Schieffer - had married up, and some more than others.) His question on immigration, while topical to Arizona, was odd. He claimed he had received more email on it than any other question. On immigration? Come on, Bob, you can't be serious.

8. Bush's jabs seemed very mean-spirited. He attacked Kerry as being "liberal" so many times I lost count. He attacked CBS's credibility (with a CBS anchor moderating, no less) when he questioned Kerry's use of media sources to back up an argument. He talked about the dividing of America as if it wasn't his fault in the least. He just didn't come off as a very nice or respectful person.

9. Kerry fell into rote repetition a few times. I was a bit dismayed to hear him talk endlessly about his "plan." I wish he had at least used different language, since it seemed a little stale.

10. Bush took the entire debate to bring up Kerry's opposition to the first Gulf War. Granted, this was a debate about domestic issues, but Iraq came up an awful lot for a domestic debate. I'm surprised Bush didn't try to hammer on this earlier.

All in all, I say Kerry got the better of Bush, although it was a good debate. Bush continued to spout discredited factoids about Kerry, while Kerry either avoided some of his bigger humdingers, couched them with a brief caveat, or quoted a news source. Bush seemed a little more desperate with his incessant labeling of Kerry as "liberal," while Kerry was more calm and collected. At least Bush wasn't ranting at the audience; Furious George only made a few peeks out from his shell this time, unlike the town hall debate. Kerry remained on the attack the entire debate. Bush tried, but his attacks came off as feeble, exaggerated, or Kerry was able to delfect them.

So now it's the final sprint...we shall see what the fate of the nation is in less than 20 days (hopefully - knock on wood).

Fnord.

Shenanigans in Nevada

2004-10-13T13:08:00.000-05:00

Seems as though some GOP backers in Nevada have decided that the only way to ensure Bush and other Republican candidates win in the state is to prevent Democrats from voting in the first place. I'm not going to comment on why they feel this burning desire to subvert democracy, and what that says about their priorities. I'll just quickly mention two incidents in question.

First, there's the AP report that the former head of the Nevada GOP, Dan Burdish, tried and failed to get over 17,000 registered Democrats purged from the polls. He claims they are ineligible under Nevada state law because of an inactive status, but Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax essentially told Burdish to piss off. What Burdish somehow overlooked in the law he was using to bludgeon democracy was that he could only challege voters in his precinct, and then only if he had personal knowledge they were inactive. In the GOP's defense, most of the state's Republicans apparently think Brudish is as nutty as they come (maybe why he's no longer their head), and this story would be amusing on its own.

However, this isn't the only attack on the democratic process happening in Nevada. Local news station KLAS reports that a voter registration organization backed by the Republican National Committee has been caught tearing up voter registration cards belonging to Democrats. This is absolutely despicable and makes me sick to my stomach. I'm sure most Repubicans would find this as repugnant as I do, but when combined with the above story, it really makes you wonder. What would drive someone to take such a horrible action that flies in the face of the very foundation of this country? How can you claim to be for democracy and do something like this or sanction it, even if indirectly? Words honestly escape me.

Update: Joe over at Povert posted a link to a news story about even more fraud committed by this company (Voter's Outreach of America), this time in Eugene, Oregon. Local station KVAL has the scoop. Jesus Christ, have these people no shame? They should change their name to something a bit more truthful, like "Voter Fraud for a Republican Empire."

Fnord.

It's not politics, it's news...

2004-10-13T10:39:00.000-05:00

From the "We Only Report What We Want You to See" Department:
By now, I'm sure you've heard about the flap over Sinclair Broadcasting's plan to force their 60+ network affiliates to air an anti-Kerry documentary during the last ten days of the campaign. This is the height of hypocrisy, since this is the same media outlet that called Ted Koppel's April 2004 Nightline segment "political" because it included reading the names of American soldiers killed in Iraq, and subsequently told its stations not to broadcast the segment.

Yesterday morning, CNN anchor Bill Hemmer interviewed Sinclair vice president for broadcast relations Mark Hymen about the anti-Kerry show. Aside from comparing critics of the decision to Holocaust-deniers, Hymen also spouted out a defense of the decision that could have come straight from the GOP. He argued that the vets in the film deserved to be heard, and Kerry had a responsibility to answer their charges. In other words, these people are absolutely truthful, Kerry is guilty, and he needs to explain himself. When Hemmer tried to ask him about the political motivations, Hymen started sounding like a broken record, and kept trying to elicit sympathy for the POWs.

You can check out the full transcript here. The interview is about 1/3 to 1/2 way down the page. Liberal media bias, indeed. Can you imagine the uproar that would occur if some media mogul insisted his stations broadcast Michael Moore's movie Farenheit 9/11 in the last weeks of October? Or the expose on Fox News, Outfoxed?

Fnord.

Fantasy Academics

2004-10-12T13:21:00.000-05:00

A friend of mine sent me a curious link to a story on FOXNews.com about how UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan's comments about the Iraq war being illegal were a "serious blunder." At the bottom of the column is a blurb about the authors. One of the authors, one Dr. Nile Gardiner, is listed as "a fellow in Anglo-American security policy" at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington DC think-tank.

Sounds impressive, no? Well, actually...no. Curious as to what "Anglo-American security policy" actually is, I did a Google search on the term and pulled up hundreds of links. Understandibly, the first two were links to the Heritage Foundation website. But as I started scanning them, I noticed an interesting pattern: every single one of them also contained some variation on the phrase "Nile Gardiner, Fellow of..." On the fourth page, I finally found a link to a Salon article by Joe Conason (who seemed dubious about this academic field), but it, too, was directly quoting something Dr. Gardiner had said.

After going through six pages of links without finding one not associated with this man, I finally did a new seach, this time excluding his name. The results can be found here. In a nutshell, if you ignore the spelling error links, you get nothing. Nada. Zip, zilch, and bubkus.

In other words, this academic field, in which our friend Nile Gardiner is a fellow, doesn't exist outside of one man: Dr. Gardiner himself. How does one become a Ph.D. of an imaginary academic discipline? Did he just wake up one morning and think, "Hey, I know something about America, and something about Britain, and I have opinions on how we should handle security matters, so I'll just declare myself an expert?" Granted, Dr. Gardiner does have a Ph.D. in British Imperial History, and as his degree is from Yale University, I'm inclined to believe it exists. But Anglo-American Security Policy? Well, hell's bells! If Dr. Gardiner can do it, anyone can! I hereby declare myself Dr. Citizen Coyote, Fellow in Monkey-Coyote Security Policy. I don't think my new field has many job openings, but by God I'll somehow make one if I can't find one.

Anyone know where I can get a diploma made up quick and cheap?

Fnord.

Blog Postings

2004-10-12T10:38:00.000-05:00

A couple of interesting tidbits from some other blogs. First, more fiction from The Escapist. I'll just post the link instead of the actual story this time, so you can leave comments on the site. Second, a very esoteric political joke from defective yeti. If you're familiar with editing symbols, you'll have a better chance of getting it. To save you some pain, I'll give you a hint: focus more on the symbol itself, rather than the end result.

Fnord.

Creepy bit of fiction.

2004-10-11T16:23:00.000-05:00

This little bit of fiction is from a friend's site. I'm very impressed by how he managed to say so much with so few words. He claims he'll be writing more bits of fiction in the future. I'll post my favorites as they come up. You can check out the original post here.

The third step on the stairs always creaked at night. It wasn’t the sort of creak you would expect a settling house to make. It didn’t sound like pressure being released as the house cooled in the evening. The step always creaked at exactly 4:31am. Every night, for years I was awoken by the sound. I grew up knowing that if I were to ever look down those steps I would see something horrible. Maybe it was a ghost or some sort of subterranean creature who slipped up from his hole under the house every night to use the bathroom. The cause changed over the year, but the terror never abated. The only thing I was certain of was that if I were to actually see what made the step creak, my life would never be the same. I could never go back to the blissful ignorance of not having my worst terrors confirmed.

The years passed and I grew up. I went away to college, I graduated, met a nice girl, settled down, my life was good. Three months ago my parents died in a car accident. In their will they left me the house. My new family and I moved in. By that point in my life, I had put the creaking step out of my mind. I had banished it into the far reaches of my brain with the other boogiemen of my childhood.

Last night was the first we spent in our new home. We had just moved across the country back to this old house. And now that I think about it, maybe the reason why I chose to live so far away from my parents was an unconscious fear of this house. Who knows how the mind really works, after all. But last night I woke up at exactly 4:31 am. I heard the creak on the third step. The sort of creak that is only made when someone steps on it in just the right way. I know, as a child I had experimented with that step in the harsh light of day. I knew that it only creaked when you put pressure on it all the way to the left of the step, with all the weight a boy of 12 could muster.

But then I heard something else. Something I had never heard before. My old bedroom was at the other end of the hall, and so I had never known… but exactly one minute after the creaking step, when I was awake and in a cold sweat, I heard the doorknob to the bedroom twist. Was this something my parents had lived with their entire life? Hearing the creak of the third step and then knowing that SOMETHING was opening their door? I buried my head under the blanket, irrationally positive that it would protect me. I didn’t fall asleep again that night. And now, here it is the next day, 4:25 am, and I am sitting at the top of the stairs with a baseball bat. Waiting, and knowing my life will never be the same again.

Told ya.

Fnord.

Mad Cowboy Disease

2004-10-09T01:23:00.000-05:00

Wow, several blogs are really giving Bush hell for his first half debate performance. I noted that he seemed a bit shrill and pushy, but I appear to be in the minority of left-leaning blogs on this one. His outburst at Charlie Gibson seems to be the focal point. You can review it here. Then go take a look at Kevin Drum's blog and his comment about Bush being "off his meds." Pop on over to Atrios and see what he has to say. Finally, go read Wonkette's play-by-play and laugh until your eyes water. I know I did.

(As a side note, I had completely forgotten about Bush's "battling green eyeshades" comment. Must have been all those Canadian drugs...)

Fnord.

More thoughts on the debate...

2004-10-08T23:46:00.000-05:00

Going over my mental notes, I realized I had left out a few points I originally meant to cover. Here are a couple more things, mainly specific issues...

1. Canadian drugs, man! We're not talking Canadian Bud here, we're talking cheap prescription medicine for granny. One of the questions asked by the audience was why Bush had blocked the importation of Canadian drugs. Bush's answer ("I haven't yet, I'm just trying to make sure they're safe") was horribly weak and tepid. His suggestion that Canada gets Third World drugs was just utterly bizarre; frankly, if I were Canada, I'd be insulted by the insinuation that I couldn't control the quality of the medications in the country. Kerry's answer, on the other hand, was spot on and made perfect sense: "When I'm president, I'll let Canadian drugs in to the US."

2. The economy: don't blame me! Bush had a rather clever strategy for explaining the recession and job losses during his watch (although he never actually said job losses): blame Clinton. That's right, blame the other guy. Or blame the war, or "discretionary spending." Or space radiation. But whatever you do, for God's sake, don't blame me, 'cuz I didn't do it. Whatever happened to the buck stops here?

3. The audience had some great questions. Some of them were very pointed, and seemed pretty political for a crowd of "undecideds," but they all engendered lively debate between the candidates. Some more than others, and some definitely annoyed Bush. Like the Canadian drugs question.

Those are the big ones. I'm sure I'll think of more as I start poking around the blogosphere (and by the way, there's only one Internet, Mr. President) but I'll let them speak for themselves.

Fnord.

Presidential Debates, Round 2

2004-10-08T22:34:00.000-05:00

Round Two of the presidential debates are over, and this one was much closer. Not hard to do, considering Bush's terrible performance on the first go around. Overall, I would have to give the nudge to Kerry, although the margin was much closer. Some thoughts below, in my standard style.

1. Bush seemed a little shrill and defensive, Kerry seemed more passionate than before. Bush was much improved over his initial outing, but the momentum is Kerry's to lose right now, not the President's. This has been a rough week for the Administration, and it showed tonight. Bush came out swinging, to be sure, but it was with an air of desperation, as if he could sense the ropes behind him. His voice seemed more shrill than normal, and he was much pushier. He even ran over the moderator, Charles Gibson of ABC, at one point while Gibson was trying to ask him a question. Kerry, on the other hand, while not as relaxed as he was during the first debate showed a great deal of passion and enthusiasm. The momentum is with him, and it showed.

2. Kerry's attacks were more effective overall. Kerry kept up a barrage of attacks on the president and threw in several new ones. While he repeated many of his campaign's criticisms, he still somehow kept them somewhat fresh (although the novelty has definitely worn off.) He also threw the President a few shots out of left field that, while not catching Bush completely off-guard, showed that he was not fully prepared to address them. For his part, the President was most effective when he used "fresh" attacks on Kerry. Sadly, these were pretty scarce, as Bush relied mainly on Republican talking points or past strategies. Which leads me to...

3. Bush's talking points are growing weak. The Republican efforts to paint Kerry as a flip-flopper are stalling as Kerry and Edwards are able to answer the charges directly. So what is the new strategy? Pull out the hoary "most liberal senator" argument and attack Kerry's 20 year record. This is effective at Bush pep rallies and during stump speeches, but not during a debate when your opponent can parry and riposte. At one point, Bush attacked Kerry for several seemingly damning votes against popular measures. Kerry very quickly countered by clarifying that the votes were never as simple as Bush would like people to believe, and explained, briefly yet succinctly, that they were excellent ideas but bad execution. His quoting of Republican Senator John McCain's labeling of the Energy Bill as the "No Lobbyist Left Behind" bill was classic.

4. Bush will lose the election if he continues to try to make Kerry's record an issue. Every time he attacked it, Kerry swung right back by reminding viewers of Bush's own record on a smorgasbord of issues. Jobs. The economy. Health care. The deficit. The environment. Iraq. Bush kept saying, during his attacks, that Kerry could run but not hide from his record. Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones, however, and Kerry did a good job of hammering that point home.

5. Social issues, for the first time, received significant attention. Questions on stem cell research, abortion, and what the candidates would look for in a potential US Supreme Court nominee all were asked, and it was refreshing to hear the two men talk about something other than Iraq or the economy. Kerry danced around the abortion issue, while Bush took it head on with an answer that I'm sure appealed to his base. On the flip side, Bush danced around the stem cell issue while Kerry answered the question directly. Bush nearly dug himself into a hole on the judge question when he started talking about the Dred Scot case of the nineteenth century. He was arguing, in essence, against "activist" judges who let opinion color their view of the Constitution, and started using the Dred Scot case as an example of a set of "bad judges." However, he must have realized (or someone told him, see here and here) that this was a slipperly slope: by going that direction, he was essentially saying he wanted judges who would rule with an eye on personal preference, damn public opinion. Bush quickly abandoned the example and moved on.

6. Kerry effectively used Bush's own words against him on a number of occassions. Repeatedly, Kerry quoted Bush from the 2000 town hall debate, using what Bush said then to attack him now and turn the flip-flopper label back on the President. He also used Bush's own words to attack him as someone who repeatedly broke promises, both with the country and with his own administration.

7. Bush got bitchslapped on the environment. Never his strong point, Bush's fumbling attempts to defend his environmental record literally had Kerry laughing out loud, and with good reason. I expected Kerry to make hay of the President's efforts, and he did to a limited degree, but not as much as he could have. Was this a missed opportunity? Or is Kerry just that confident that Bush's environmental record speaks for itself without the senator's help? Nevertheless, Kerry offered a stinging rebuke to Bush's claim that his "Clear Skies" initiative would improve air quality, simply by stating that the Clean Air Act (passed under Clinton), on its own and left alone, would do far more than Clear Skies could ever hope to do.

8. Bush did manage to back Kerry up on his heels once or twice. Near the end of the debate, during an amusing question regarding mistakes (that Bush completely failed to answer), Kerry was finally forced to confront his "I voted for the $87 billion before I voted againts it" claim. Kerry did not do the greatest job at explaining this, but at least he admitted he'd made a mistake in how he initially presented his views on the matter. For what it's worth, the question was "name three mistakes you've made." Bush couldn't think of anything worth mentioning, but that was ok...Kerry was there to fill in for him.

As I said up top, while this debate was much closer (Bush was much improved), Kerry still came out the winner. He kept his campaign's momentum going, and Bush was unable to take it away. The Republican's efforts to swing the spotlight back on to his Democratic challenger was hit and miss, and dangerous when attacking the senator's record. The Bush camp's attacks are practically rote by now. Kerry is not blameless in this regard, but at least his attacks generally can't be refuted by a quick visit to www.factcheck.org. If Bush doesn't come up with a new, viable strategy soon, then the election will only be Kerry's to lose.

Fnord.

The Edwards Strategy

2004-10-08T09:12:00.000-05:00

It now occurs to me that Edwards' failure to answer some of Cheney's biggest lies or accusations during the debate was a planned strategy rather than a lapse of judgement or thought. After all, what's more effective: trying to answer your opponent's charges and/or lies in a 30/90 second rebuttal, or let it go, knowing that the factcheckers of the web would make hay of the mistake and, hopefully, so would the mainstream media?

If it was a deliberate strategy, it was a serious gamble of Edwards' part. There's no way of knowing whether or not the media will pick up on a story. In this case, however, it seems to have paid off. Cheney's errors have been all over the press since Tuesday night, doing more harm to his credibility than anything Edwards could have said in direct response. If it wasn't a deliberate strategy, it was a remarkable stroke of luck.

Fnord.

Delayed Synaptic Response

2004-10-08T08:53:00.000-05:00

My job requires me to go driving all over Texas at times, often through small podunk towns you might not normally give a second glance to while whizzing by on the freeway. Sometimes this is a bad thing (the whizzing) as you don't get to see some of the nifty houses tucked away on quiet small-town streets. And sometimes this is a very good thing, as you avoid the pitfalls of said quiet small-town streets. Example herein: Terrell, TX.

Now Terrell seems to have some streets designed to funnel water to a stream or other source of water drainage. As such, they are depressed and look like very shallow flood control channels. Yesterday, in the rain, I was driving on a street that crosses some of these drainage streets, but was not really paying attention to what was going on, other than the fact that it was raining, the road was straight, there were no cars in front of me, and I was indeed on the correct road to get to where I was going.

As I tooled along in the company truck, my conscious mind wandered while the lizard part of my brain saw the water flowing down a cross street and thought, "Ooh, water!" This somehow triggered a tiny fraction of my conscious mind to start thinking. Hmm, collected flowing water. Water collects in depressions. Flowing water indicates a constant depression. Depression equals dip oh shit what's my speed brain wake up emergency wake up wake up check speed...

At this point my full brain snapped to attention, finally taking in what my eyes, lizard brain, and non-distracted part had seen. The road was depressed about a foot on either side, and I was doing about 40. I had enough time to widen my eyes in surprise and grip the steering wheel before the front wheels lurched down, yanking me against the seatbelt. I started to brake some (not hard, though, since I was now fully aware of the water and situation) but it wasn't enough to do much. Within a second the front wheels hit the trip back up, sending everything in the cab (including me) airborn for a split second. The seatbelt, of course, kept me from going anywhere, but papers, pens, folders, fieldmaps, etc., shot skyward and flew about like poltergeists had gone wild in the cab.

Needless to say, I slowed way down for the next one of these depressed streets, and at a stop sign quickly managed to gather up the bits of detritus that the poltergeists, now bored, had left scattered about the cab. I couldn't help but laugh at myself, though. There was no real danger (as I was alone on the road) and the truck was easily able to handle the momentary abuse. Plus, it served to snap me out of my drifting mental state. Sadly, the trip was largely uneventful beyond this little bit of fun.

Fnord.

Dick Cheney: President of the Senate?

2004-10-06T13:07:00.000-05:00

As most people with any interest in politics knows, the Vice President has another job other than being VP, and that is to act as the president of the Senate. This isn't a voting position, unless needed as a tie-breaker. Otherwise, the president is just there to enforce rules of order and the like.

In the debate last night, Cheney made a big point of saying that, in his duties as president of the Senate, he rarely saw Edwards there. "In my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight," said Cheney. Pundits and blogs are making hay of the second part of Cheney's statement, so I won't go into that. But few are noting that Cheney told not one, but two whoppers in that statement.

"I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session."

If that were true, then Cheney would be listed as the president of the senate in the Congressional Record, found here. Guess how many times, in four years, Cheney is listed as the president of the Senate on Tuesday sessions?

Twice. That's right, in four years, Cheney has presided over the Senate a grand total of two times (on Tuesdays, according to the Record). Incidentally, this is the same number of times Edwards has served in the same capacity, as acting president of the Senate.

To read more, check out the Daily Kos.

Fnord.

Some additional debate thoughts

2004-10-06T10:23:00.000-05:00

A few additional thoughts that I didn't get in to my original post. I don't have my notes from the debate with me, so instead of editing my first post I thought I'd boost my post count and just add another.

First off, go check out this entry at Washington Monthly. Kevin Drum makes some very good points that I missed or didn't address in my previous post. Second, remember when Cheney told the audience to go to factcheck.com to get the facts on Halliburton and some other matters Edwards brought up? What he meant, of course, was factcheck.org. Check out the links...

Finally, I have to make mention of the moderator, Gwen Ifill. Unlike Jim Lehrer during the first debate, Ifill was, to put it bluntly, awful. She never seemed to be looking at the camera during her few on-screen shots, instead focusing too much on the teleprompter. This gave her a detatched look that was a little disconcerting. She also asked some damn inane questions, especially during the domestic policy section. Cheney had full rights to be puzzled when she asked him to comment on Edwards' ability to serve as VP. Did she expect him to attack Edwards' inexperience, knowing full well that Edwards has as much experience heading into this as George Bush did in 2000? Another example: she posed a bizarre non-sequiter to Edwards when she asked him if Kerry was trying to "have it both ways" on gay marriage, apparently because he comes from Massachusetts. Edwards seemed a little puzzled by the question as well, but answered it well by stating that no state had ever been required to recognize another state's marriage liscense, and that the Republican's attempts to modify the Constitution is a hollow, crass attempt to divide the American public. It really made me long for Jim, and I hope the next mod is better.

Fnord.

And they're neck and neck headin' into the back stretch...

2004-10-06T09:01:00.000-05:00

Vice President Dick Cheney and his Democratic opponent, Senator John Edwards, met last night in their one and only debate of the 2004 campaign. Unlike Friday's debate between Bush and Kerry, this one was much harder to call, and for all intents and purposes might as well be declared a draw. Both men made good points, both made mistakes, and both fought hard for their sides. The differences between them were evident last night. Here are my observations on the night, bearing in mind my stated Democratic bias...

1. Unlike Bush, Cheney is more than capable of handling off-the-cuff responses. He remained calm throughout the debate, never showed the desperation that Bush did, and refused to fall for the trap of overreacting to Edwards' jibes. However, the same calm, dour exterior that provided him this armor also made him come off...well, dour. At his best moments, he was a serious statesman. At his worst moments, he was a snide, surly curmudgeon.

2. Edwards seemed a little out of his element, but covered it well. The debate format did not favor Edwards, and I think it showed a little. Edwards seemed nervous at times and seemed to lose his concentration a little near the end, but he nonetheless covered it well. His occassional flubs of speech came off as honest mistakes, and he often waved them off with a quick laugh. He had a nice, folksy appeal that contrasted well with Cheney's dour exterior Edwards did have a hard time seperating himself from Kerry, however, something Cheney did not have a problem with in regard to Bush.

3. Both men were strongest when discussing position or policy. When speaking to the audience, each man displayed conviction in their speech; Cheney with a calm determination, Edwards with a heartfelt passion. Their speaking styles couldn't be more different, but it's hard to say who was more effective.

4. Cheney's attacks on Edwards and Kerry, while not rote repetition like Bush's, still failed to stick. Part of this was Edward's excellent responses to most of Cheney's attacks, and his ability to throw something back at the Vice President. Everytime Cheney tried to portray Kerry as indecisive, Edwards was right on him, repeating many of Kerry's successful points from the first presidential debate.

5. Edwards tried to remain on the offensive the whole night, but sometimes stumbled. He failed to call out Cheney on a number of points (such as the Massachusetts supreme court decision on gay marriage), and didn't always remain in control of the direction of the debate. His common habit of going back to a previous point sometimes stole precious time from his response to the current question, preventing him from making as strong a point as he could have.

6. Edwards did a masterful job of catching Cheney unaware on Halliburton, Cheney's own record, and Kerry's supposed 95 votes for tax increases. Surprisingly, Cheney failed to respond to Edwards' charges concerning Halliburton's favorable position going into post-war Iraq. He also had no response to Edwards' charge that Cheney supported eliminating the same defense initiatives that Republicans have attacked Kerry for not supporting. Finally, Edwards turned the GOP's own logic against them by countering the claim that Kerry voted to raise taxes 95 times with his own claim that Kerry voted to lower taxes 600 times. Neither is an accurate number, of course, but both count the innumerable "riders" that so often get attached to bills as seperate votes.

7. Cheney brought up an excellent point on small businesses that Edwards had no answer for. Cheney claimed that many small businesses file as individuals, not as businesses, and thus would be hurt by the Kerry-Edwards proposal to roll back tax cuts for people making over $200,000. I don't know if this is true, but Edwards had no answer for it and it made even this Democrat pause.

8. Edwards had a great idea on training Iraqi troops. He asked, "Why not take them out of Iraq to train them?" Why not, indeed? It would put them in a safer, controlled environment where they would not have to fear being bombed every day. It wouldn't even have to be the US; Kuwait has a good American military base that would work wonders. An argument against this could be that Iraqi police recruits pose a security risk. If the country's populace hates us that much that they would plant moles in the trainees, however, it's a clear sign that our efforts to win the peace are failing. In any regard, Cheney had no answer for Edwards on this.

9. Both men hedged their bets on gay marriage. Although it shocked my viewing companions, I was not surprised when Cheney thanked Edwards for his kind words on Cheney's lesbian daughter. Cheney has not made a secret of his very un-Republican views on gay marriage, but covered his ass by saying, as VP, he has to stand behind the President. Edwards, of course, carefully addressed a volatile issue as a Democrat while trying hard not to alienate more conservative voters. While their responses were not elegant, they avoided damage.

10. Cheney didn't thank Edwards at the end of the debate. A minor issue, but one that I thought displayed crass disrespect toward an opponent. As I said before, Cheney's attacks on Edwards took the form of snide comments as often as not, and his failure to thank his opponent helps caps his reputation as an ass. It may seem like a minor point, and probably won't get much play in the mainstream media, but it really bothers my desire for fair play. As Gomez Addams may have said, "Bad show!"

As I said, I think the debate was a draw. Edwards did not give the performance he could have (or should have), but he didn't do the ticket any harm. He strengthed it on many points, and did a good job of countering many of the GOP's campaign talking points. Cheney, for his part, did a decent job of staunching the blood loss from Bush's abysmal showing during his first debate, but was unable to validate many of the GOP's accusations of the Kerry-Edwards ticket, and gave the Democrats plenty of ammo for the domestic policy debate in a week and a half. Round three is coming up...stay tuned.

Fnord.

I am Learn and other musings

2004-10-05T09:57:00.000-05:00

A friend of mine recently sent me this link to I am learn, a blog written by a most...unusual "person." You see, Learn is not actually a person, but a program. A PERL script, to be more precise, that is given some topics to discuss and then let loose. Reading Learn's blog, you'll quickly pick out the patterns of speech, but it's surprising how lucid some of the entries are. Not to mention laugh-out-loud funny, as Learn's commentary is sometimes, quite unintentionally, a scathing bit of satire on the web community as a whole. Check it out.

Now I want to discuss the internet community!!!!!!! (Sorry, couldn't resist.) I don't really know what it is about us that compels us to write and post random thoughts and musings to a public space that is, for all intents and purposes, the world's largest bulletin board. I honestly don't expect many people to ever read this blog, yet I still post to it several times a week. It's sort of like a diary, but one you leave open on the street corner in hopes that someone will come by and read it.

Let's go back to the bulletin board analogy. Think about a bulletin board you've seen recently, perhaps at school or work. Try to remember all the random stuff stapled, pinned, taped, and stuck to that bulletin board, and what a jumbled mess it was. Now imagine that bulletin board stretching for 1,000 miles, every foot covered with papers, flyers, for sale ads, photos, concert promotions, free trip giveaways, and miraculous weight loss programs. You're not likely to take more than a passing glance at it, and you'd never try to read the whole thing. Finding a specific post, unless you knew where to look, would be impossible. Yet, obviously, people still stick things up on it.

That's how I picture the blogosphere of the Internet, and for some reason I'm proud and compelled to be a part of the mess.

Fnord.

One debate does not a president make...

2004-10-01T09:24:00.000-05:00

...or we'd have Kerry as president instead of Bush.

Last night, in the first of three presidential debates, Senator John Kerry finally grew some balls and beat President George Bush with them. The debate was a clear victory for Kerry, as he looked and sounded desicive, intelligent, practiced, and determined. Bush, on the other hand, looked confused, defensive, unprepared, and exasperated. Countless blogs have already dissected the debates, so I thought I'd just go over what I found to be the most interesting or telling apects of the debate.

1. Bush was defensive almost from the get-go. With the first question directed to the challenger, Kerry put Bush on his heels, and the President never really managed to fight back effectively. Every time he would challenge Kerry on something, Kerry fought back with a strong defense and/or a swipe of his own. Bush, on the other hand, failed to defend himself from Kerry's attacks more often than not.

2. Kerry argued with statements, Bush argued with sound bites. When Kerry presented an argument, he would state his position and defend it with factoids (not always accurate). Bush, on the other hand, would state his position and argue in spin. His attacks on Kerry often sounded like GOP talking points straight from a script, and his incessant hammering of those points only reinforced this image. Kerry's attacks (while based on campaign points) were generally modified on the fly to counter something Bush had said, and thus sounded more like arguments and less like talking points. Thus, they seemed to carry more weight.

3. Kerry answered questions directly, while Bush tended to do more dancing. This isn't to say Kerry answered every question effectively or to my liking, but he made an attempt to address them all. Bush did so at times, but he often would skirt the issue and argue something else. In one case, he failed to answer the question at all and consciously avoided it. I'm talking about the first question posed to him, the one about the likelihood of increased terrorist attacks if Kerry won. This has been a bugbear of mine for a while, and it's become a common GOP claim. Bush refused to answer, instead saying, "Well that's not going to happen, because the American people are going to reelect me." He then spent the rest of his two minutes giving a wholly forgettable stump speech.

4. Bush can not think on his feet. Both candidates paused at times before answering, but that's where the similarities end. Kerry, after his pauses, followed through with a concrete statement. Bush was as likely to follow his pauses with an "um," "ah," or "uh," and then stumble for crucial seconds before gaining a footing in his response. The net result was Bush came off sounding confused and timid, while Kerry came off sounding assertive and confident.

5. Kerry had a much better command of his podium presence. While Bush spoke, Kerry did one of three things (generally): he looked pensive, he nodded, or his scribbled on his note pad. He also smiled occassionally, and played with his eyebrow once that I saw, for whatever that's worth. Bush, on the other hand, had a whole range of behavior. He looked pensive, yes, and nodded once or twice, and he spent a fair amount of time scribbling on his notepad. He also fidgited, rolled his eyes, shood his head, looked around, and made faces. It's the equivalent of the Al Gore sigh from 2000, but only time will tell if it has a similar impact.

6. Final Osama bin Laden name dropping count: Kerry 7, Bush 5. I think this is the most mention of bin Laden's name from Bush in the past two years. The tally doesn't tell the whole story, though. Kerry quickly set out to say that Osama should have been our main target, and Iraq was a distraction. Throughout the debate, he pressed on the point that Osama was our target, and Bush failed to focus on him. Bush, on the other hand, couldn't seem to get away from promoting Iraq as our focus. The first time he mentioned the name Osama bin Laden, he started saying Saddam Hussein before correcting himself. Three of his mentions of Osama bin Laden's name were i rapid succession in the same sentence. Kerry zinged Bush on the issue of preemptive war, too...Bush claimed the Iraq war wasn't preemptive, because the enemy struck first. Kerry very quickly pointed out that it was bin Laden who attacked us, not Saddam Hussein. I think Bush probably would have avoided bin Laden's name had it not come up in debate, honestly.

7. Kerry caught Bush with his pants down on North Korea. Kerry made the argument that the Clinton policy of bilateral talks with North Korea were working. Bush tried a different approach when he entered office, and stopped talking to North Korea. In response, North Korea kicked out the weapons inspectors and started working on a nuclear program again. Bush responded by getting China, South Korea, Japan, and others to pressure North Korea, but still refused to talk directly to that country. End result: North Korea probably has the bomb now, and Bush's policy failed. Bush really coudn't defend this, other than stating that talking directly to North Korea is exactly what North Korea wants. But what does that matter now? Kerry's argument: Clinton's way seemed to be working, and since Bush's way failed, let's try Clinton's again.

8. Two words: nuclear f*cking weapons, as Dennis Leary would say. When asked what the greatest threat to America was, Kerry didn't miss a beat and answered "nuclear proliferation." Bush agreed (skillfully subbing "weapons of mass destruction" in place of "nuclear weapons," I might add), but added a very telling rider to Kerry's claim: "...in the hands of terrorists." Bush has no problems with the US developing more nukes. Kerry sees this as a big problem, and wonders why we're sending mixed messages about nuclear proliferation to the world. I do, too.

There are lots of other things I could talk about in discussing this debate, but I think I've rambled on long enough. End result: Kerry came out of the debate looking strong on foreign policy, an area that is Bush's strong point. While Bush still seems strong in this according to post-debate polls, Kerry did not lose ground. He handily won this debate, and goes into the town hall with Bush on the defensive. After that, it's the domestic policy debate, where Kerry excels. If he can keep up this momentum, I feel Bush's days in the White House are numbered in the double digits.

Fnord.

On gummi worms...

2004-09-30T14:57:00.000-05:00

While up in the Dallas area for work last week, my coworker and I stopped at a little country store/chocolate store/lunch counter known as "Mary of Puddin' Hill." It was about what you'd expect a kitschy, Texas tourist trap to be like: full of craptacular "country crafts," bored clerks, and old people. As I said, it also was a confectionary, and sold a delectable selection of chocolates and other candies, like fruit cakes.

And sour gummi worms. Or gummy, if you prefer. As a fan of sour candies, I thought perhaps I had found something good. Nothing could rival the infamous blue raspberry straws of my high school days, but perhaps close. Several minutes later, having stopped in the meantime to admire a portrait of Mary made entirely of Jelli Bellies, I walked out of Mary of Puddin' Hill with a drink from lunch, a chocolate truffle, and a bag of sour gummi worms.

The truffle was tasty, and quickly disappeared down my stomach. Not wanting to pollute the taste of the sour worms with chocolate, however, I put them aside until the long trip home to Austin. On our way back, I finally tried one of the delicacies. It was good...sort of like eating a sour gummi lifesaver...but not great. I had a few, then decided to put them away lest my taste buds explode and burn themselves from my tongue.

Upon getting back, I threw the bag of gummi worms into my car's center console, then promply forgot about them until today. "A gummy worm would taste good about now," I thought at lunch, and so opened the compartment and pulled out my stash.

The Texas heat is notorious for its intensity. While this past week hasn't been all that hot, apparently gummies don't require a high temp in order to cook. Upon pulling out the bag, I discovered that said Texas heat had baked the gummi worms into a solid, multicolored mass, glistening with a few unabsorbed sour crystals. After cautiously testing it to see if I could maybe pull something off, I finally gave up and merely threw the bag back into my center console. My plan now is to bring it inside when I get home from work, and put it in the fridge. Hopefully the cold will solidify it some more, and then I can cut it, like a pie. I seriously doubt it will be any good, but I feel compelled to try.

Fnord.