My mother and Edgar left this morning for Texas with a large order of Pilates Apparatus from their Studio. Naturally, we were very interested in the hurricane that is making landfall in Louisiana and headed directly towards their final location. So on went CNN and after a couple minutes of weather information, mandatory evacuation notices, and history about Katrina, they went live to several people on location.
As each person checked in they repeated about the same things, "everything is going well", "people are moving out nice and orderly", and "this isn't that bad". Each time they would cut back to the studio person who would immediately tell you what could go wrong. As if to say, "Wait, there are still good reasons to panic!"
Now I understand the need for ratings, but do you really want to over-hype something that our country has a very recent history of handling poorly? The increased bombardment of “what ifs” and nightmare scenarios only increase the possibility that people are going to see it as hyperbole and ignore it, or when the storm doesn’t live up to the extreme conditions, take the news less seriously next time. This means fewer people watching next time. So whatever gains you may have gotten with the “we all could die” stuff will be wiped out next time.
So please, just give us the facts and move on. We’ll do the panicking on our own.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Saturday, August 30, 2008
6 things the Palin pick says about McCain
by Jim VandeHei, John F. Harris
Politico.com
The selection of a running mate is among the most consequential, most defining decisions a presidential nominee can make. John McCain’s pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says a lot about his decison-making — and some of it is downright breathtaking.
We knew McCain is a politician who relishes improvisation, and likes to go with his gut. But it is remarkable that someone who has repeatedly emphasized experience in this campaign named an inexperienced governor he barely knew to be his No. 2. Whatever you think of the pick, here are six things it tells us about McCain:
1. He’s desperate. Let’s stop pretending this race is as close as national polling suggests. The truth is McCain is essentially tied or trailing in every swing state that matters — and too close for comfort in several states like Indiana and Montana the GOP usually wins pretty easily in presidential races. On top of that, voters seem very inclined to elect Democrats in general this election — and very sick of the Bush years.
McCain could easily lose in an electoral landslide. That is the private view of Democrats and Republicans alike.
McCain’s pick shows he is not pretending. Politicians, even “mavericks” like McCain, play it safe when they think they are winning — or see an easy path to winning. They roll the dice only when they know that the risks of conventionality are greater than the risks of boldness.
The Republican brand is a mess. McCain is reasonably concluding that it won’t work to replicate George W. Bush and Karl Rove’s electoral formula, based around national security and a big advantage among Y chromosomes, from 2004.
“She’s a fresh new face in a party that’s dying for one — the antidote to boring white men,” a campaign official said.
Palin, the logic goes, will prompt voters to give him a second look — especially women who have watched Democrats reject Hillary Rodham Clinton for Barack Obama.
The risks of a backlash from choosing someone so unknown and so untested are obvious. In one swift stroke, McCain demolished what had been one of his main arguments against Obama.
“I think we’re going to have to examine our tag line, ‘dangerously inexperienced,’” a top McCain official said wryly.
2. He’s willing to gamble — bigtime. Let’s face it: This is not the pick of a self-confident candidate. It is the political equivalent of a trick play or, as some Democrats called it, a Hail Mary pass in football. McCain talks incessantly about experience, and then goes and selects a woman he hardly knows, who hardly knows foreign policy and who can hardly be seen as instantly ready for the presidency.
He is smart enough to know it could work, at least politically. Many Republicans see this pick as a brilliant stroke because it will be difficult for Democrats to run hard against a woman in the wake of the Hillary Clinton drama. Will this push those disgruntled Hillary voters McCain’s way? Perhaps. But this is hardly aimed at them: It is directed at the huge bloc of independent women — especially those who do not see abortion as a make-or-break issue — who could decide this election.
McCain has a history of taking dares. Palin represents his biggest one yet.
3. He’s worried about the political implications of his age. Like a driver overcorrecting out of a swerve, he chooses someone who is two years younger than the youthful Obama, and 28 years younger than he is. (He turned 72 Friday.) The father-daughter comparison was inevitable when they appeared next to each other.
4. He’s not worried about the actuarial implications of his age. He thinks he’s in fine fettle, and Palin wouldn’t be performing the only constitutional duty of a vice president, which is standing by in case a president dies or becomes incapacitated. If he was really concerned about an inexperienced person sitting in the Oval Office we would be writing about vice presidential nominee Mitt Romney or Tom Ridge or Condoleezza Rice.
There is no plausible way that McCain could say that he picked Palin, who was only elected governor in 2006 and whose most extended public service was as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska (population 8,471), because she was ready to be president on Day One.
Nor can McCain argue that he was looking for someone he could trust as a close adviser. Most people know the staff at the local Starbucks better than McCain knows Palin. They met for the first time last February at a National Governors Association meeting in Washington. Then, they spoke again — by phone — on Sunday while she was at the Alaska state fair and he was at home in Arizona.
McCain has made a mockery out of his campaign's longtime contention that Barack Obama is too dangerously inexperienced to be commander in chief. Now, the Democratic ticket boasts 40 years of national experience (four years for Obama and 36 years for Joseph Biden of Delaware), while the Republican ticket has 26 (McCain’s four yeasr in the House and 22 in the Senate.)
The McCain campaign has made a calculation that most voters don’t really care about the national experience or credentials of a vice president, and that Palin’s ebullient personality and reputation as a refomer who took on cesspool politics in Alaska matters more.
5. He’s worried about his conservative base. If he had room to maneuver, there were lots of people McCain could have selected who would have represented a break from Washington politics as usual. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman comes to mind (and it certainly came to McCain’s throughout the process). He had no such room. GOP stalwarts were furious over trial balloons about the possibility of choosing a supporter of abortion rights, including the possibility that he would reach out to his friend.
Palin is an ardent opponent of abortion who was previously scheduled to keynote the Republican National Coalition for Life's "Life of the Party" event in the Twin Cities this week.
“She’s really a perfect selection,” said Darla St. Martin, the Co-Director of the National Right to Life Committee. It is no secret McCain wanted to shake things up in this race — and he realized he was limited to a shake-up conservatives could stomach.
6. At the end of the day, McCain is still McCain. People may find him a refreshing maverick, or an erratic egotist. In either event, he marches to his own beat.
On the upside, his team did manage to play to the media’s love of drama, fanning speculation about his possible choices and maximizing coverage of the decision.
On the potential downside, the drama was evidently entirely genuine. The fact that McCain only spoke with Palin about the vice presidency for the first time on Sunday, and that he was seriously considering Lieberman until days ago, suggests just how hectic and improvisational his process was.
In the end, this selection gives him a chance to reclaim the mantle of a different kind of politician intent on changing Washington. He once had a legitimate claim to this: after all, he took on his own party over campaign finance reform and immigration. He jeopardized this claim in recent months by embracing ideas he once opposed (Bush tax cuts) and ideas that appeared politically motivated (gas tax holiday).
Spontaneity, with a touch of impulsiveness, is one of the traits that attract some of McCain’s admirers. Whether it’s a good calling card for a potential president will depend on the reaction in coming days to what looks for the moment like the most daring vice presidential selection in generations.
Politico.com
The selection of a running mate is among the most consequential, most defining decisions a presidential nominee can make. John McCain’s pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says a lot about his decison-making — and some of it is downright breathtaking.
We knew McCain is a politician who relishes improvisation, and likes to go with his gut. But it is remarkable that someone who has repeatedly emphasized experience in this campaign named an inexperienced governor he barely knew to be his No. 2. Whatever you think of the pick, here are six things it tells us about McCain:
1. He’s desperate. Let’s stop pretending this race is as close as national polling suggests. The truth is McCain is essentially tied or trailing in every swing state that matters — and too close for comfort in several states like Indiana and Montana the GOP usually wins pretty easily in presidential races. On top of that, voters seem very inclined to elect Democrats in general this election — and very sick of the Bush years.
McCain could easily lose in an electoral landslide. That is the private view of Democrats and Republicans alike.
McCain’s pick shows he is not pretending. Politicians, even “mavericks” like McCain, play it safe when they think they are winning — or see an easy path to winning. They roll the dice only when they know that the risks of conventionality are greater than the risks of boldness.
The Republican brand is a mess. McCain is reasonably concluding that it won’t work to replicate George W. Bush and Karl Rove’s electoral formula, based around national security and a big advantage among Y chromosomes, from 2004.
“She’s a fresh new face in a party that’s dying for one — the antidote to boring white men,” a campaign official said.
Palin, the logic goes, will prompt voters to give him a second look — especially women who have watched Democrats reject Hillary Rodham Clinton for Barack Obama.
The risks of a backlash from choosing someone so unknown and so untested are obvious. In one swift stroke, McCain demolished what had been one of his main arguments against Obama.
“I think we’re going to have to examine our tag line, ‘dangerously inexperienced,’” a top McCain official said wryly.
2. He’s willing to gamble — bigtime. Let’s face it: This is not the pick of a self-confident candidate. It is the political equivalent of a trick play or, as some Democrats called it, a Hail Mary pass in football. McCain talks incessantly about experience, and then goes and selects a woman he hardly knows, who hardly knows foreign policy and who can hardly be seen as instantly ready for the presidency.
He is smart enough to know it could work, at least politically. Many Republicans see this pick as a brilliant stroke because it will be difficult for Democrats to run hard against a woman in the wake of the Hillary Clinton drama. Will this push those disgruntled Hillary voters McCain’s way? Perhaps. But this is hardly aimed at them: It is directed at the huge bloc of independent women — especially those who do not see abortion as a make-or-break issue — who could decide this election.
McCain has a history of taking dares. Palin represents his biggest one yet.
3. He’s worried about the political implications of his age. Like a driver overcorrecting out of a swerve, he chooses someone who is two years younger than the youthful Obama, and 28 years younger than he is. (He turned 72 Friday.) The father-daughter comparison was inevitable when they appeared next to each other.
4. He’s not worried about the actuarial implications of his age. He thinks he’s in fine fettle, and Palin wouldn’t be performing the only constitutional duty of a vice president, which is standing by in case a president dies or becomes incapacitated. If he was really concerned about an inexperienced person sitting in the Oval Office we would be writing about vice presidential nominee Mitt Romney or Tom Ridge or Condoleezza Rice.
There is no plausible way that McCain could say that he picked Palin, who was only elected governor in 2006 and whose most extended public service was as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska (population 8,471), because she was ready to be president on Day One.
Nor can McCain argue that he was looking for someone he could trust as a close adviser. Most people know the staff at the local Starbucks better than McCain knows Palin. They met for the first time last February at a National Governors Association meeting in Washington. Then, they spoke again — by phone — on Sunday while she was at the Alaska state fair and he was at home in Arizona.
McCain has made a mockery out of his campaign's longtime contention that Barack Obama is too dangerously inexperienced to be commander in chief. Now, the Democratic ticket boasts 40 years of national experience (four years for Obama and 36 years for Joseph Biden of Delaware), while the Republican ticket has 26 (McCain’s four yeasr in the House and 22 in the Senate.)
The McCain campaign has made a calculation that most voters don’t really care about the national experience or credentials of a vice president, and that Palin’s ebullient personality and reputation as a refomer who took on cesspool politics in Alaska matters more.
5. He’s worried about his conservative base. If he had room to maneuver, there were lots of people McCain could have selected who would have represented a break from Washington politics as usual. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman comes to mind (and it certainly came to McCain’s throughout the process). He had no such room. GOP stalwarts were furious over trial balloons about the possibility of choosing a supporter of abortion rights, including the possibility that he would reach out to his friend.
Palin is an ardent opponent of abortion who was previously scheduled to keynote the Republican National Coalition for Life's "Life of the Party" event in the Twin Cities this week.
“She’s really a perfect selection,” said Darla St. Martin, the Co-Director of the National Right to Life Committee. It is no secret McCain wanted to shake things up in this race — and he realized he was limited to a shake-up conservatives could stomach.
6. At the end of the day, McCain is still McCain. People may find him a refreshing maverick, or an erratic egotist. In either event, he marches to his own beat.
On the upside, his team did manage to play to the media’s love of drama, fanning speculation about his possible choices and maximizing coverage of the decision.
On the potential downside, the drama was evidently entirely genuine. The fact that McCain only spoke with Palin about the vice presidency for the first time on Sunday, and that he was seriously considering Lieberman until days ago, suggests just how hectic and improvisational his process was.
In the end, this selection gives him a chance to reclaim the mantle of a different kind of politician intent on changing Washington. He once had a legitimate claim to this: after all, he took on his own party over campaign finance reform and immigration. He jeopardized this claim in recent months by embracing ideas he once opposed (Bush tax cuts) and ideas that appeared politically motivated (gas tax holiday).
Spontaneity, with a touch of impulsiveness, is one of the traits that attract some of McCain’s admirers. Whether it’s a good calling card for a potential president will depend on the reaction in coming days to what looks for the moment like the most daring vice presidential selection in generations.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Now With More Labeling!
I love to make grand and exorbitant breakfasts and it was during one of these recent culinary quests that I got to wondering why most people eat cereal as their first meal of the day. We all know that in the morning your body needs protein, yet breakfast cereal, because TV, radio, and print ads, is what is most available in the United States. Why? Why on earth should someone load themselves up with something that will only drag them down? Sure it’s easy and cheap, but those are the worst two reasons to do anything (High School relationships aside).
So off I went to the local grocery store to take an overly observant trip down the cereal aisle. What I found is that shopping for breakfast cereal is a self-realization process. Everything ever learned by sociologists, psychologists, and marketing people is on display for all to see. There are huge boxes with large glossy pictures and descriptions of all of the wonderful things that the product will do for you. “Lower your cholesterol” “Good for your heart” “Now with More Fiber!” scream out at the hapless shopper while proclaiming that they are made with “Whole Wheat”, “Clusters”, and “Real Fruit” and all part of a balanced breakfast (once you eat a banana, drink a glass of orange juice, and swallow a multivitamin). All you have to do is find one that appeals to you and then you get to question your value system, intellect, and upbringing.
Now walk down the produce isle. How many signs do you see extolling the virtues of the fruits and vegetables? Are there any? Probably not. Instead you will find unassuming food in large crates adorned with small stickers telling the cashier what code to punch in to ring up the item. This has lead me to believe that the more a food product tells you that it’s healthy, the less chance it actually is.
This same thinking is echoed when someone tells you that they are trying to eat healthier. They usually are just choosing the same items with a “Low-Fat”, “30% Less Sugar”, or “Now with more Vitamin C” instead of switching over to something that involved a couple million years of evolution instead of several months of lab alterations. It is if we think that our scientists can better nature with a couple of beakers and a white coat. The natural world has produced its first plants over 475 million years ago. Kellogg made his first breakfast cereal about the same time as we started driving automobiles. Moreover, it is what we as a species spent the last 50,000 years eating. Now I’m all for science in areas where we need some help, but healthy food is not one of them. And our audacity to believe that we can create a better breakfast through marketing is not only ridiculous, it’s laughable.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to do further research on my recent purchase of Double Chocolate Cookie Crisp.
So off I went to the local grocery store to take an overly observant trip down the cereal aisle. What I found is that shopping for breakfast cereal is a self-realization process. Everything ever learned by sociologists, psychologists, and marketing people is on display for all to see. There are huge boxes with large glossy pictures and descriptions of all of the wonderful things that the product will do for you. “Lower your cholesterol” “Good for your heart” “Now with More Fiber!” scream out at the hapless shopper while proclaiming that they are made with “Whole Wheat”, “Clusters”, and “Real Fruit” and all part of a balanced breakfast (once you eat a banana, drink a glass of orange juice, and swallow a multivitamin). All you have to do is find one that appeals to you and then you get to question your value system, intellect, and upbringing.
Now walk down the produce isle. How many signs do you see extolling the virtues of the fruits and vegetables? Are there any? Probably not. Instead you will find unassuming food in large crates adorned with small stickers telling the cashier what code to punch in to ring up the item. This has lead me to believe that the more a food product tells you that it’s healthy, the less chance it actually is.
This same thinking is echoed when someone tells you that they are trying to eat healthier. They usually are just choosing the same items with a “Low-Fat”, “30% Less Sugar”, or “Now with more Vitamin C” instead of switching over to something that involved a couple million years of evolution instead of several months of lab alterations. It is if we think that our scientists can better nature with a couple of beakers and a white coat. The natural world has produced its first plants over 475 million years ago. Kellogg made his first breakfast cereal about the same time as we started driving automobiles. Moreover, it is what we as a species spent the last 50,000 years eating. Now I’m all for science in areas where we need some help, but healthy food is not one of them. And our audacity to believe that we can create a better breakfast through marketing is not only ridiculous, it’s laughable.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to do further research on my recent purchase of Double Chocolate Cookie Crisp.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Entry for August 27, 2008
"People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." - Bill Clinton
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Hey Look, I’m a Proud Corporate Shill!
There’s something that I don’t understand, and it’s probably I’m not cool, but why the hell would someone advertise for a company when they are not getting paid for it? Let me back up: I went to the mall for something and noticed that it was infested with tween ridiculousness posing for each other in a “who can look more like everyone else” contest. Amused, I observed said nervous and skittish creatures for a good ten minutes and noticed two things. 1) I don’t know how anyone makes it through those years of sublime awkwardness and intellectually insulting social grooming, and 2) if you stare at young kids for too long you may appear to be "creepy".
The thing that stood out from everything else was that each of these children was sporting some sort of obscenely placed label somewhere on their person. Now this is something that I try very hard not to do. I may have a small logo on my breast pocket, but never anything else. Anything more than that comes off as either too showy or just pathetically lower-class.
We as a society, through our marketing and impulse-buying culture, end up infantilizing adults, so that they have no deeper understanding of themselves than the brand names that define them. It’s like we’ve forgotten to teach our children that the purpose of advertising is to make people buy what they don't really need. So if you’ve decided to purchase something with a big advertisement on it that you can wear around, you are basically telling the world that you’re both easy to manipulate and not very deep.
Now that I have a son I am more aware of how we indoctrinate as mindless spenders, hell-bent on finding happiness through our stuff. Daily or weekly purchases sustain us until we are able to get the newest, shiniest, toys with the larger price tags. Children’s clothes are festooned with labels, as if clothing companies assume that other toddlers will think your toddler is cool because he’s got Tommy Hilfiger overalls. From there on out all the child sees are labels: Labels on him, his parents, and the world around him. He sees that others are plastered in logos and identifies those as part of their personality and the normal way to happiness.
The simple act of consuming something of decadence, superior quality, or limited quantity should not be the reason for happiness. Alternately, if you cannot enjoy something without alerting others of your consumption, you are deriving your pleasure not from the thing but from the sole exclusion or inclusion of others. True pleasure comes from slow, deliberate, deep enjoyment. And when you define yourself as someone who can be happy without the trappings of materialism, you are finally free to live for yourself.
The thing that stood out from everything else was that each of these children was sporting some sort of obscenely placed label somewhere on their person. Now this is something that I try very hard not to do. I may have a small logo on my breast pocket, but never anything else. Anything more than that comes off as either too showy or just pathetically lower-class.
We as a society, through our marketing and impulse-buying culture, end up infantilizing adults, so that they have no deeper understanding of themselves than the brand names that define them. It’s like we’ve forgotten to teach our children that the purpose of advertising is to make people buy what they don't really need. So if you’ve decided to purchase something with a big advertisement on it that you can wear around, you are basically telling the world that you’re both easy to manipulate and not very deep.
Now that I have a son I am more aware of how we indoctrinate as mindless spenders, hell-bent on finding happiness through our stuff. Daily or weekly purchases sustain us until we are able to get the newest, shiniest, toys with the larger price tags. Children’s clothes are festooned with labels, as if clothing companies assume that other toddlers will think your toddler is cool because he’s got Tommy Hilfiger overalls. From there on out all the child sees are labels: Labels on him, his parents, and the world around him. He sees that others are plastered in logos and identifies those as part of their personality and the normal way to happiness.
The simple act of consuming something of decadence, superior quality, or limited quantity should not be the reason for happiness. Alternately, if you cannot enjoy something without alerting others of your consumption, you are deriving your pleasure not from the thing but from the sole exclusion or inclusion of others. True pleasure comes from slow, deliberate, deep enjoyment. And when you define yourself as someone who can be happy without the trappings of materialism, you are finally free to live for yourself.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Silent Racism
I’ve lived in the South off and on throughout my life, but this is the first time that I’ve really immersed myself in what I would consider the “Deep South”. There is still a very distinct divide between the races here, although no one is allowed to talk about it. Instead they just watch each other through the corner of their eyes, cautiously check on each other to make sure everyone is doing what they are supposed to, and always make sure to treat each other with purposeful distance.
The public areas are still segregated, with some general overlap and a couple of people who have crossed the race lines. A high percentage of the older generations still act as if things could go back to “the way things were” at any moment. It’s an odd, discomforting feeling to be around those who see each other so disdainfully, yet wont ever voice that opinion. The silence truly is deafening.
Maybe I am sensitive because I have seen a different way. While living in several other places within the US, I noticed that the racism or bigotry was more socioeconomic - with persons of one class looked down on another. These classes usually were inhabited by a single race, but were not defined by that characteristic. Here in Anderson, SC, the classes are very specific and divided sharply across race lines. Socioeconomic classes only apply to those in the middle-upper to upper class people.
It would almost appear that the local population does not realize that heightened race awareness is more important in changing racial inequality than judging whether individuals are racist. This inability to discuss the issue only increases when it cannot be openly discussed and creates a taboo of racial discussion - creating more segregation.
I know that there will always be racism, and while I refuse to fall into the trap of perpetual white guilt, there needs to be a recognition of our history and our differences. I am saddened by the elephant in the room that is racism here in the South, but do not know how I can combat this behavior. I treat people as equally as I can, talk about race openly, and believe to be honest about any prejudices I have. I’m frustrated that I can do more than this because I’ve seen better. And I don’t know whether to pity or envy those who have seen no different. Injustice comes in all forms, but it is always at its worst when it is silent.
The public areas are still segregated, with some general overlap and a couple of people who have crossed the race lines. A high percentage of the older generations still act as if things could go back to “the way things were” at any moment. It’s an odd, discomforting feeling to be around those who see each other so disdainfully, yet wont ever voice that opinion. The silence truly is deafening.
Maybe I am sensitive because I have seen a different way. While living in several other places within the US, I noticed that the racism or bigotry was more socioeconomic - with persons of one class looked down on another. These classes usually were inhabited by a single race, but were not defined by that characteristic. Here in Anderson, SC, the classes are very specific and divided sharply across race lines. Socioeconomic classes only apply to those in the middle-upper to upper class people.
It would almost appear that the local population does not realize that heightened race awareness is more important in changing racial inequality than judging whether individuals are racist. This inability to discuss the issue only increases when it cannot be openly discussed and creates a taboo of racial discussion - creating more segregation.
I know that there will always be racism, and while I refuse to fall into the trap of perpetual white guilt, there needs to be a recognition of our history and our differences. I am saddened by the elephant in the room that is racism here in the South, but do not know how I can combat this behavior. I treat people as equally as I can, talk about race openly, and believe to be honest about any prejudices I have. I’m frustrated that I can do more than this because I’ve seen better. And I don’t know whether to pity or envy those who have seen no different. Injustice comes in all forms, but it is always at its worst when it is silent.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Your Soul Saved at Half the Price This Exit!
This last week I traveled from the South to the Northern Midwest and back again, stopping liberally along the way. I have done several cross-country trips over the last few years and have noticed the same thing no matter where I go - people love to advertise their religion. To me, this is an extremely odd phenomenon. Personal beliefs, spirituality, and faith are private matters and really shouldn’t be discussed with everyone traveling on I-75. Yet there they are anyway, trying their hardest to show you how much they believe as you fly by at 70MPH. So if I may, I would like to address these people for a moment:
Erecting billboards proclaiming that Jesus is the King of Kings next to signs for Budweiser proclaiming they are the King of Beers probably takes away any reverence you hoped to instill in passing motorists.
Painting a hymn on the side of your fertilizer barn kinda undercuts your message.
There's nothing like a fifty-foot cross made of aluminum siding to say, "I'm a recovering alcoholic with unresolved issues".
It you feel the need to build a 60ft fiberglass Jesus bursting out of a lake, maybe your belief in him really isn’t as solid as you pretend.
I know you love your God, but trying to tell the world using the same methods as insurance companies and restaurants brings your personal beliefs and spirituality down to a base level. Or to quote the Bible, “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” (Matthew 6:5-6). Anything else cheapens your beliefs and lowers them to petty advertising and shows you as desperate for social approval.
Erecting billboards proclaiming that Jesus is the King of Kings next to signs for Budweiser proclaiming they are the King of Beers probably takes away any reverence you hoped to instill in passing motorists.
Painting a hymn on the side of your fertilizer barn kinda undercuts your message.
There's nothing like a fifty-foot cross made of aluminum siding to say, "I'm a recovering alcoholic with unresolved issues".
It you feel the need to build a 60ft fiberglass Jesus bursting out of a lake, maybe your belief in him really isn’t as solid as you pretend.
I know you love your God, but trying to tell the world using the same methods as insurance companies and restaurants brings your personal beliefs and spirituality down to a base level. Or to quote the Bible, “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” (Matthew 6:5-6). Anything else cheapens your beliefs and lowers them to petty advertising and shows you as desperate for social approval.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Travel Often or Die Wondering
“Every body perseveres in its state of being at rest or of moving uniformly straight forward except insofar as it is compelled to change its state by forces impressed” - Newton
Over the last two months I have traveled over 7,500 miles and visited several countries, with many of those miles up and down the US in different vehicles with plentiful stopping. During my recent travels, I have had an abundance of time to see the East coast and Midwest in great detail. What I’ve realized is twofold. First, my equilibrium is in a constant state of motion. I cannot sit still, and that is how I like it. The force that is usually required to slow an object is rarely ever great enough to adversely affect my momentum.
This need for motion has led to a never-ending quest to do and see everything - and I think that this is healthy. Seeing more than your own town is not only a good idea, it’s essential for gaining a perspective greater than your neighborhood has to offer. And in these times of increasing paranoia and increasing globalization it is absolutely necessary for all of us to get out and see the world.
The second thing that I learned was there is large percentage of Americans that never travel. According to the US State Department, only 20% of Americans have passports. (In contrast, 40% of Canadians hold passports). In 1857 Mark Twain quipped, “Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one’s lifetime.”
That means that a considerable amount of US citizens have never seen a major museum, a good ballet or symphony, or immersed themselves in a different culture. They have never been to a major metropolitan city in the U.S. or anywhere in the world where millions of people from all races live together comfortably and normally all the time. And so they are afraid - of everything. This leads to a downward spiral of fear, unsubstantiated hatred, and blind religious fervor (see my next blog “Your Soul Saved at Half the Price, This Exit!”).
From these realizations and thousands of miles on the road and in the air, I have come to the conclusion that what our country needs right now is for more of us to get out and see the world. I think what they will find is people just like them, with slightly different customs, religions, and foods, who hold many of the same values and manners. They will find that everything else is just politics.
Over the last two months I have traveled over 7,500 miles and visited several countries, with many of those miles up and down the US in different vehicles with plentiful stopping. During my recent travels, I have had an abundance of time to see the East coast and Midwest in great detail. What I’ve realized is twofold. First, my equilibrium is in a constant state of motion. I cannot sit still, and that is how I like it. The force that is usually required to slow an object is rarely ever great enough to adversely affect my momentum.
This need for motion has led to a never-ending quest to do and see everything - and I think that this is healthy. Seeing more than your own town is not only a good idea, it’s essential for gaining a perspective greater than your neighborhood has to offer. And in these times of increasing paranoia and increasing globalization it is absolutely necessary for all of us to get out and see the world.
The second thing that I learned was there is large percentage of Americans that never travel. According to the US State Department, only 20% of Americans have passports. (In contrast, 40% of Canadians hold passports). In 1857 Mark Twain quipped, “Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one’s lifetime.”
That means that a considerable amount of US citizens have never seen a major museum, a good ballet or symphony, or immersed themselves in a different culture. They have never been to a major metropolitan city in the U.S. or anywhere in the world where millions of people from all races live together comfortably and normally all the time. And so they are afraid - of everything. This leads to a downward spiral of fear, unsubstantiated hatred, and blind religious fervor (see my next blog “Your Soul Saved at Half the Price, This Exit!”).
From these realizations and thousands of miles on the road and in the air, I have come to the conclusion that what our country needs right now is for more of us to get out and see the world. I think what they will find is people just like them, with slightly different customs, religions, and foods, who hold many of the same values and manners. They will find that everything else is just politics.
Saturday, August 09, 2008
John Wayne Was a Pussy
John Wayne received a deferment claiming that he had a wife and three kids to support while other actors, younger and older, in similar circumstances hurried to enlist and fight for their country. While promising to enlist he ignored additional summonses from his draft board until his studio could intervene on his behalf. Unfortunately, he is held up as the great American man in many people’s eyes.
This type of coward always overcompensates for their spinelessness and unashamedly supports military interventions so they will feel like patriots and men of courage. To further the fake front, it is equally important to label people who avoid service or dissent against a war as cowards and traitors.
By waving the flag and calling for war, they become courageous, strong, and patriotic. By denouncing those who disagree, the dissenters become cowardly, unpatriotic, and weak. Perfect examples of this are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, who avoided combat by any means while depicting a true war hero, John Kerry, as an effete namby-pamby.
In my lifetime this tactic has been the republican and conservative strategy since Ronald Reagan, who also avoided combat, attacked Jimmy Carter, who served aboard nuclear submarines. These Reagan and Bush types not only portray themselves as he-men and strong, but their opponents as nerdy, shy, losers. We have seen this bullshit chest thumping and finger pointing over the last couple of years in both our government and in a medium percentage of the population. They spend all of the time that they could be working on the hard tasks and ideas, trying to make others who have done the hard work, look like pansies for not just throwing rocks at a situation.
So here I sit, a liberal with a who understands his weaknesses and thrives on facing difficult challenges; who will no longer put up with being told that I am not patriotic because I don’t support our coward of a president. My heroes do not exist in macho-bullshit stereotypes, but in those average people who choose to face life on their own. It is in them that true strength and courage will always exist.
This type of coward always overcompensates for their spinelessness and unashamedly supports military interventions so they will feel like patriots and men of courage. To further the fake front, it is equally important to label people who avoid service or dissent against a war as cowards and traitors.
By waving the flag and calling for war, they become courageous, strong, and patriotic. By denouncing those who disagree, the dissenters become cowardly, unpatriotic, and weak. Perfect examples of this are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, who avoided combat by any means while depicting a true war hero, John Kerry, as an effete namby-pamby.
In my lifetime this tactic has been the republican and conservative strategy since Ronald Reagan, who also avoided combat, attacked Jimmy Carter, who served aboard nuclear submarines. These Reagan and Bush types not only portray themselves as he-men and strong, but their opponents as nerdy, shy, losers. We have seen this bullshit chest thumping and finger pointing over the last couple of years in both our government and in a medium percentage of the population. They spend all of the time that they could be working on the hard tasks and ideas, trying to make others who have done the hard work, look like pansies for not just throwing rocks at a situation.
So here I sit, a liberal with a who understands his weaknesses and thrives on facing difficult challenges; who will no longer put up with being told that I am not patriotic because I don’t support our coward of a president. My heroes do not exist in macho-bullshit stereotypes, but in those average people who choose to face life on their own. It is in them that true strength and courage will always exist.
Monday, August 04, 2008
Mae Govannen
Mellyn,
I am a nerd - have always been and always will be. I do try to hide it, but it always ends up shining through. My favorite books and movies all fall into the sci-fi or fantasy realm, I have more computer certifications then any normal person (especially anyone who no longer does computer support) should, and am constantly reengineering everything that I can get my hands on. Worse than that, my blogs, lectures, and home decorations all have a decidedly nerd theme. I can quote Sagan, Tolkien, Heinlein, Vonnegut, Feynman, Carrol, Bova, and Shakespeare on command. Frankly, I wear my nerdiness like a Jedi wears his light saber (J. DÃaz).
That is not to say that I fit any stereotype. I don’t have glasses, play video games, watch that much TV, or would be caught dead dressed up at a convention. I have been known to be quite successful with the ladies and have a long history with organized sports. In high school I was in drama, the chess club, and some AP classes, along with playing football and being a captain of the soccer team. I had good friends, a sex life, and an active social life. Yet I started this blog post with a couple of words that will only be understood by .05% of the population - and I am proud of that.
And you know what; no one should be ashamed to be a nerd. Nerds rule the world, control information, run industry, invent things, send people and robots into space, split atoms, create tomorrow's technology, and are clever and witty. I am proud to be a nerd and think that the rest of the nerdly world needs to speak up - as soon as their SG1 torrent finishes downloading.
Curate ut valeatis,
Brian
I am a nerd - have always been and always will be. I do try to hide it, but it always ends up shining through. My favorite books and movies all fall into the sci-fi or fantasy realm, I have more computer certifications then any normal person (especially anyone who no longer does computer support) should, and am constantly reengineering everything that I can get my hands on. Worse than that, my blogs, lectures, and home decorations all have a decidedly nerd theme. I can quote Sagan, Tolkien, Heinlein, Vonnegut, Feynman, Carrol, Bova, and Shakespeare on command. Frankly, I wear my nerdiness like a Jedi wears his light saber (J. DÃaz).
That is not to say that I fit any stereotype. I don’t have glasses, play video games, watch that much TV, or would be caught dead dressed up at a convention. I have been known to be quite successful with the ladies and have a long history with organized sports. In high school I was in drama, the chess club, and some AP classes, along with playing football and being a captain of the soccer team. I had good friends, a sex life, and an active social life. Yet I started this blog post with a couple of words that will only be understood by .05% of the population - and I am proud of that.
And you know what; no one should be ashamed to be a nerd. Nerds rule the world, control information, run industry, invent things, send people and robots into space, split atoms, create tomorrow's technology, and are clever and witty. I am proud to be a nerd and think that the rest of the nerdly world needs to speak up - as soon as their SG1 torrent finishes downloading.
Curate ut valeatis,
Brian
Sunday, August 03, 2008
Entry for August 03, 2008 (Part 2)
Violence - the last desperate act of someone who has just lost an argument.
Entry for August 03, 2008 (Part 1)
Pacifism - A philosophy of nonviolence, historically only practiced by those who rely on the killing and dying of others in defense of their privilege to practice that philosophy.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Vaccine Denial
Vaccine Denial
By Koren Shadmi
Progress is easy to take for granted. When I was a child in the late '60s, polio was history, measles was on the way out, and diphtheria and whooping cough were maladies out of old movies. Now these contagious diseases are making a comeback. Take measles, for instance. The disease used to infect 3 to 4 million Americans per year, hospitalizing nearly 50,000 people and causing 400 to 500 deaths. In 2000 a panel of experts convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention proclaimed that measles transmission had been eradicated in the United States, except for imported cases. But that caveat is important. An unvaccinated 7-year-old from San Diego became infected with measles while traveling with his family in Switzerland and ended up transmitting the disease back home to two siblings, five schoolmates and four other children at his doctor's office - all of them unvaccinated. Whooping cough has also seen a resurgence: A school in the East Bay area near San Francisco was closed recently when some 16 students fell ill.
The reason for these incidents - and for recent outbreaks of polio - is that the percentage of parents vaccinating their children has fallen, perhaps because some parents see no point in warding off diseases they've never encountered. Religious or new-age beliefs may also factor into the decision: The San Diego outbreak spread in a school where nearly 10 percent of the students had been given personal-belief exemptions from the vaccinating requirement. The East Bay outbreak started at a school that emphasizes nature-based therapy over mainstream medicine; fewer than half of the students were vaccinated.
Why would parents refuse to vaccinate their children against dangerous diseases? Many are skeptical of modern science and medicine in general. (And it is true that most vaccines carry exceedingly tiny - but real - risks of serious illness or even death.) But I think most are responding to the widespread belief that vaccines are linked to autism. Recent studies have soundly dispelled that notion. And a simple glance at health statistics shows that autism cases continued to rise even after thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative widely blamed for the supposed autism link, was largely phased out of U.S. vaccines by 2001.
Nevertheless, these unsubstantiated fears have led some people to say that getting vaccinated should be a matter of individual choice: If you want to be protected, just get yourself and your children vaccinated.
Only it's not that easy. While the measles vaccine protects virtually everyone who is inoculated, not all vaccines have the same rate of success. But even if a vaccine is effective for only 70, 80 or 90 percent of those who take it, the other 30, 20 or 10 percent who don't get the full benefit of the vaccine are usually still not at risk. That's because most of the people around the partially protected are immune, so the disease can't sustain transmission long enough to spread.
But when people decide to forgo vaccination, they threaten the entire system. They increase their own risk and the risk of those in the community, including babies too young to be vaccinated and people with immune systems impaired by disease or chemotherapy. They are also free-riding on the willingness of others to get vaccinated, which makes a decision to avoid vaccines out of fear or personal belief a lot safer.
Of course it is very success of modern vaccines that makes this complacency possible. In previous generations, when epidemic disease swept through schools and neighborhoods, it was easy to persuade parents that the small risks associated with vaccination were worth it. When those epidemics stopped - because of widespread vaccinations - it became easy to forget that we still live in a dangerous world. It happens all the time: University of Tennessee law professor Gregory Stein examined the relation between building codes and accidents since the infamous 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire in New York and discovered a pattern: accident followed by a period of tightened regulations, followed by a gradual slackening of oversight until the next accident. It often takes a dramatic event to focus out minds.
The problem is that modern society requires constant, not episodic, attention to keep it running. In his book The Escape from Hunger and Premature Death 1700-2100 Noble Prize-winning historian Robert Fogel notes the incredible improvement in the lives of ordinary people since 1700 as a result of modern sanitation, agriculture and public health. It takes steady work to keep water clean, prevent the spread of contagious disease and ensure an adequate food supply. As long as things go well, there's a tendency to take these conditions for granted and treat them as a given. But they're not: As Fogel notes, they represent a dramatic departure from the normal state of human existence over history, in which people typically lived nasty, sickly and short lives.
This departure didn't happen on its own, and things don't stay better on their own. Keeping society functioning requires a lot of behind-the-scenes work by people who don't usually get a lot of attention - sanitation engineers, utility linemen, public health nurses, farmers, agricultural chemists and so on. Because the efforts of these workers are often undramatic, they are under appreciated and frequently underfunded. Politicians like to cut ribbons on new bridges or schools, but there's no fanfare for the everyday maintenance that keeps the bridges standing and the schools working. As a result, critical parts of society are quietly decaying, victims of complacency or of active neglect. It's not just vaccinations or bridges, either. A few years ago, I attended an Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board meeting, and the water-treatment discussion was enough to make me think about switching to beer.
What do we do about this? To some degree, we have to do what the reformers of the 19th and early 20th centuries did: Hector people about the importance of paying attention to our society's upkeep. Alas, our main allies in persuasion will probably be the epidemics and other disasters that take place when too few pay attention. Sometimes, people have to trip and fall to be reminded that it's important to watch their step.
Shadmi, K. (2008, August). Vaccine Denial. Popular Mechanics, 185(8), 48-50.
By Koren Shadmi
Progress is easy to take for granted. When I was a child in the late '60s, polio was history, measles was on the way out, and diphtheria and whooping cough were maladies out of old movies. Now these contagious diseases are making a comeback. Take measles, for instance. The disease used to infect 3 to 4 million Americans per year, hospitalizing nearly 50,000 people and causing 400 to 500 deaths. In 2000 a panel of experts convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention proclaimed that measles transmission had been eradicated in the United States, except for imported cases. But that caveat is important. An unvaccinated 7-year-old from San Diego became infected with measles while traveling with his family in Switzerland and ended up transmitting the disease back home to two siblings, five schoolmates and four other children at his doctor's office - all of them unvaccinated. Whooping cough has also seen a resurgence: A school in the East Bay area near San Francisco was closed recently when some 16 students fell ill.
The reason for these incidents - and for recent outbreaks of polio - is that the percentage of parents vaccinating their children has fallen, perhaps because some parents see no point in warding off diseases they've never encountered. Religious or new-age beliefs may also factor into the decision: The San Diego outbreak spread in a school where nearly 10 percent of the students had been given personal-belief exemptions from the vaccinating requirement. The East Bay outbreak started at a school that emphasizes nature-based therapy over mainstream medicine; fewer than half of the students were vaccinated.
Why would parents refuse to vaccinate their children against dangerous diseases? Many are skeptical of modern science and medicine in general. (And it is true that most vaccines carry exceedingly tiny - but real - risks of serious illness or even death.) But I think most are responding to the widespread belief that vaccines are linked to autism. Recent studies have soundly dispelled that notion. And a simple glance at health statistics shows that autism cases continued to rise even after thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative widely blamed for the supposed autism link, was largely phased out of U.S. vaccines by 2001.
Nevertheless, these unsubstantiated fears have led some people to say that getting vaccinated should be a matter of individual choice: If you want to be protected, just get yourself and your children vaccinated.
Only it's not that easy. While the measles vaccine protects virtually everyone who is inoculated, not all vaccines have the same rate of success. But even if a vaccine is effective for only 70, 80 or 90 percent of those who take it, the other 30, 20 or 10 percent who don't get the full benefit of the vaccine are usually still not at risk. That's because most of the people around the partially protected are immune, so the disease can't sustain transmission long enough to spread.
But when people decide to forgo vaccination, they threaten the entire system. They increase their own risk and the risk of those in the community, including babies too young to be vaccinated and people with immune systems impaired by disease or chemotherapy. They are also free-riding on the willingness of others to get vaccinated, which makes a decision to avoid vaccines out of fear or personal belief a lot safer.
Of course it is very success of modern vaccines that makes this complacency possible. In previous generations, when epidemic disease swept through schools and neighborhoods, it was easy to persuade parents that the small risks associated with vaccination were worth it. When those epidemics stopped - because of widespread vaccinations - it became easy to forget that we still live in a dangerous world. It happens all the time: University of Tennessee law professor Gregory Stein examined the relation between building codes and accidents since the infamous 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire in New York and discovered a pattern: accident followed by a period of tightened regulations, followed by a gradual slackening of oversight until the next accident. It often takes a dramatic event to focus out minds.
The problem is that modern society requires constant, not episodic, attention to keep it running. In his book The Escape from Hunger and Premature Death 1700-2100 Noble Prize-winning historian Robert Fogel notes the incredible improvement in the lives of ordinary people since 1700 as a result of modern sanitation, agriculture and public health. It takes steady work to keep water clean, prevent the spread of contagious disease and ensure an adequate food supply. As long as things go well, there's a tendency to take these conditions for granted and treat them as a given. But they're not: As Fogel notes, they represent a dramatic departure from the normal state of human existence over history, in which people typically lived nasty, sickly and short lives.
This departure didn't happen on its own, and things don't stay better on their own. Keeping society functioning requires a lot of behind-the-scenes work by people who don't usually get a lot of attention - sanitation engineers, utility linemen, public health nurses, farmers, agricultural chemists and so on. Because the efforts of these workers are often undramatic, they are under appreciated and frequently underfunded. Politicians like to cut ribbons on new bridges or schools, but there's no fanfare for the everyday maintenance that keeps the bridges standing and the schools working. As a result, critical parts of society are quietly decaying, victims of complacency or of active neglect. It's not just vaccinations or bridges, either. A few years ago, I attended an Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board meeting, and the water-treatment discussion was enough to make me think about switching to beer.
What do we do about this? To some degree, we have to do what the reformers of the 19th and early 20th centuries did: Hector people about the importance of paying attention to our society's upkeep. Alas, our main allies in persuasion will probably be the epidemics and other disasters that take place when too few pay attention. Sometimes, people have to trip and fall to be reminded that it's important to watch their step.
Shadmi, K. (2008, August). Vaccine Denial. Popular Mechanics, 185(8), 48-50.
Monday, July 14, 2008
The News is Making Me Dumberer
Occasionally CNN or one of the other 24 news channels makes a morning debut when there is actual big news event that is rapidly changing, or I feel the need for background noise and NPR is running a telethon. What I’ve found amazing is the ever increasing dumbing down of the network news. Whether it’s the pretty blonde girl rapidly talking to compensate for depth, or guy who is either your best friend or far too avuncular chiming in with vague non-sequiturs, or the grizzled old guy with downcast eyes and a gruff demeanor, no one has anything intelligent to say. Maybe that is why all of the news organizations have gone to "experts" to give perspective on whatever it is that is being reported that moment.
I use to think that it was a time filling strategy, because there is rarely ever 24 hours worth of news (most days there is barely an hour). But alas, this isn’t the case. The truth is that these people (and I use that term loosely) are just hired to look friendly and read whatever is put in front of them. Any conjecture, insightful questions, or witty banter is strictly frowned upon. Instead, these paid news readers are suppose to immediately turn to someone claiming to be an expert in whatever that field is for further analysis. If the news is in some way political (and what isn’t?), they will call in two people who presumably are politically opposed. And in turn, these people repeat prepared statements and arguments from their own political side. The whole thing is choreographed so that no original thought is put forth and no one is asked a question that requires an answer that is more than a simple catchphrase or insult.
What the hapless viewer is left with is news that hasn’t really told them anything. Something simple has been stated, both sides added their spin, and the person watching the show is forced into taking one of the sides as the truth. The whole thing is massively insulting to any rational human being. Moreover, because of the overall lack of real news throughout the day, soft news (Brittney Spears, Brangelina, or whatever dumb blond is that minute’s "it girl") is reported upon just like the real news. The only difference is that the people on either side of the spin are paid to mock her and to do it with a smile. The 24 hour news stations need this infotainment to break up the constant propaganda being force fed from all sides.
In the end you are probably less informed then you were to start with. And I am left wondering why I turned it on in the first place.
I use to think that it was a time filling strategy, because there is rarely ever 24 hours worth of news (most days there is barely an hour). But alas, this isn’t the case. The truth is that these people (and I use that term loosely) are just hired to look friendly and read whatever is put in front of them. Any conjecture, insightful questions, or witty banter is strictly frowned upon. Instead, these paid news readers are suppose to immediately turn to someone claiming to be an expert in whatever that field is for further analysis. If the news is in some way political (and what isn’t?), they will call in two people who presumably are politically opposed. And in turn, these people repeat prepared statements and arguments from their own political side. The whole thing is choreographed so that no original thought is put forth and no one is asked a question that requires an answer that is more than a simple catchphrase or insult.
What the hapless viewer is left with is news that hasn’t really told them anything. Something simple has been stated, both sides added their spin, and the person watching the show is forced into taking one of the sides as the truth. The whole thing is massively insulting to any rational human being. Moreover, because of the overall lack of real news throughout the day, soft news (Brittney Spears, Brangelina, or whatever dumb blond is that minute’s "it girl") is reported upon just like the real news. The only difference is that the people on either side of the spin are paid to mock her and to do it with a smile. The 24 hour news stations need this infotainment to break up the constant propaganda being force fed from all sides.
In the end you are probably less informed then you were to start with. And I am left wondering why I turned it on in the first place.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Entry for July 10, 2008
The attractiveness of a guy is inversely proportionate to the probability that he will be accused of sexual harassment.
Monday, July 07, 2008
I Fail to Believe That You Are a Christian
First of all, let me state that I am 99% Atheist (with the 1% going to the extremely rare possibility that Earth was created by a mythological superhero that now has turned vain and wants our approval). So my condemnation of people advertising that they are Christian comes with a grain of salt. That being said, I think that I'm in the right when I say that a lot of your Christianess is completely phony. These people are fairly easy to spot due to their overt attempts to tell the world that they are indeed Christians.
To help easily identify those who are not actually Christian, please see the following list a la my own Jeff Foxworthy knockoff of:
You Might Not Be A Christian if...
...you are proclaiming their religion in bumper sticker form - usually next to the equally important Looney Tune character sticker or Go Ahead and Honk, I'm Reloading. Because nothing says you love God more than putting him on the same level as Yosemite Sam.
...you are wearing a cross that cost more than the entire wealth of all of the money changers that Jesus through out of Temple in Jerusalem. Like you thought that the best representation of your vow-of-poverty prophet is a diamond encrusted, 24k gold, obscenely large cross dangling over your low cut blouse and scientifically enhanced boobs.
...you add a large cement lawn ornament of the Virgin Mary to your front yard. As if the insanely clear personification of humble purification put forth by Mary somehow doesn't count when there is an empty spot in your yard screaming to be filled by a six foot statue of modesty.
...you can justify the government killing people, just as long as unwed mothers don't do it. I'm not sure how, "Thou Shall Not Kill" can be turned into "Well, we have to have wars and the death penalty - you know, for God".
...you drive your $80,000 car from your $250,000 home to a $2,000,000 church to learn how you can be more generous to your fellow man.
...you judge people in the name of someone who defended a prostitute from an angry mob that was trying to kill her for religious reasons. If we take Jesus' word of "he that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone" and your actions together, we come to the conclusion that you are perfect - or at least think you are.
...you are holding up a John 3:16 sign at a sports stadium. That passage is the Cliff Notes version of the Bible. So you're marketing to the same crowd who is advertised to using talking dogs and half-naked women. I know that you think that if you could only reach these people you could convert them, but you just come off as an attention seeking idiot and might as well have your face painted.
...you allow gambling (bingo, etc...) in your church on Fridays. If it is a sin on Sunday, it's a sin on Friday. As if church is a giant-economy package. Like to drink, gamble, dance, and wench? Do it with a free conscience, under holy auspices, and where God can approve it!
...you spread hate and intolerance through sanctimonious choices in some Bible verses, while completely ignoring other verses that either contradict or are aimed at a group of people that you either a) personally like or b) are too powerful to pick on. Like the message of Christian love comes with exclusions of bigotry, sexism, and racism.
...you think that the 1/3 of the world's population, or 75% of the US population, is in any way persecuted for their beliefs. The only way that the majority of anything can be systematic mistreated, is if they do it to themselves.
I'm not saying that you don't have some spiritual beliefs; I'm just saying that your Christian credentials look like they're full of shit.
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
The Beautiful Moron
There are people who walk this earth who, being blessed with above average physical qualities, have evolved to live solely on those talents. These individuals respond to any mental task with a mixture of exacerbation and increased sexual potency in the hope that you will see their frustration and beauty and be moved to help them. This display, while effective at younger ages, tends to fade with time. It leaves those who are dim and divine in a desperate departure from common sense to decrease their debilitating digression into distasteful despondency. In other words, they become damn-near worthless.
The upside is that they are willing to trade themselves for continued assistance in life. We know them as trophy wives, pool boys, etcetera. And for the right price, anyone can have one. It’s the putting up with them that is difficult. In order to help identify these people, I’ve created the following breakdown:
Younger years: When confronted with a mental problem they will smile, flirt, announce their intellectual short-comings, and wait for you to help.
Middle years: When confronted with a mental problem they will openly ask you to do the task giving one of several prepared excuses while looking tired and flaunting their best remaining features.
Older years: When confronted with a mental problem they will become clumsily lewd in the vain hope that you will either help out of your own sexual desperation or to stop them.
This last stage is the final act of a sickly animal. Excessive plastic surgery is their natural way of showing a thinning mane or a bum leg. Inviability is close at hand.
Now there is nothing particularly wrong with these sublimely slow. Just make sure that properly recognize them for what they are: beautiful morons.
The upside is that they are willing to trade themselves for continued assistance in life. We know them as trophy wives, pool boys, etcetera. And for the right price, anyone can have one. It’s the putting up with them that is difficult. In order to help identify these people, I’ve created the following breakdown:
Younger years: When confronted with a mental problem they will smile, flirt, announce their intellectual short-comings, and wait for you to help.
Middle years: When confronted with a mental problem they will openly ask you to do the task giving one of several prepared excuses while looking tired and flaunting their best remaining features.
Older years: When confronted with a mental problem they will become clumsily lewd in the vain hope that you will either help out of your own sexual desperation or to stop them.
This last stage is the final act of a sickly animal. Excessive plastic surgery is their natural way of showing a thinning mane or a bum leg. Inviability is close at hand.
Now there is nothing particularly wrong with these sublimely slow. Just make sure that properly recognize them for what they are: beautiful morons.
Whistle While You Work, Alone
Your whistling has never added anything to a song, melody, or situation. Instead, it just annoys those around you. It’s worse then talking to yourself in public, humming along in an elevator, or singing along in the car. So stop it, just stop it. Save your whistling for some time when no one else can hear you, because no one else wants to hear you.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Read Everything
Tomorrow ends my favorite part-time job ever. As many of you know, I took a job at the Barnes & Noble in Saginaw, MI to a) get me out of the house since all of my teaching assignments are now online and b) for the discount. I cannot express how much I enjoyed this position and the other individuals with whom I’ve worked.
There is just something sublimely enchanting to be constantly engulfed in literary tomes and speaking with fellow booklovers about history, alternate worlds and realities, poetry, science, travel, the love of language, and the need for intellectual stimulation. And to watch a child dive soul-first into a book warms my heart deeper than almost anything else. I will miss seeing that on a regular basis.
If there is one thing that I can take away from my time there, other than the hundreds of books that I purchased, it’s that you should always read everything. Honesty comes in the average, so if you make it a habit to read each and every book that you can get your hands on, you will find the closest possible thing to the truth. Moreover, if knowledge truly is power, and the quickest way is reading, than bookstores are the source for nearly infinite power and honesty. So please, seek out your local bookstore, immerse yourself, and read everything.
There is just something sublimely enchanting to be constantly engulfed in literary tomes and speaking with fellow booklovers about history, alternate worlds and realities, poetry, science, travel, the love of language, and the need for intellectual stimulation. And to watch a child dive soul-first into a book warms my heart deeper than almost anything else. I will miss seeing that on a regular basis.
If there is one thing that I can take away from my time there, other than the hundreds of books that I purchased, it’s that you should always read everything. Honesty comes in the average, so if you make it a habit to read each and every book that you can get your hands on, you will find the closest possible thing to the truth. Moreover, if knowledge truly is power, and the quickest way is reading, than bookstores are the source for nearly infinite power and honesty. So please, seek out your local bookstore, immerse yourself, and read everything.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Loose Lips
From the apparent usefulness of the social virtues, it has readily been inferred by skeptics, both ancient and modern, that all moral distinctions arise from education, and were, at first, invented, and afterwards encouraged ... in order to render men tractable, and subdue their natural ferocity and selfishness, which incapacitated them for society - David Hume
These shared limitations of morality - these defining characteristics of our societal structure - allow our civility to exist. Beyond laying the groundwork for law, they help us to understand one another. Social virtues and moral distinctions work to transcend religion, culture, and class. The hallmark of a structured society becomes compromised when one of these moral codes is broken. Scorn and punishment come quickly and often with great vengeance, either through demand of restitution or, once the punishment or scorn has run its course, expulsion.
The cliché is the standard in westerns: someone killed someone and revenge must be taken in blood. There is a similar theme in real life, although recompense in civilized societies has become the norm. This tradeoff exists because we seem to be incapable of simply dealing with our own affairs. We are petty, insecure, trivial, and needy. The desire to feel that we are bigger than ourselves undermines our actual potential. At the same time, in considering that humility is the quickest overlooked virtue, we can hear the voice of Freud echo through life declaring that the ego is not master in its own house. We are all small creatures longing to be big. And in return for a momentary increase in stature, we are willing to cast aside our shared functionalist interpretations of social or cultural entities and do as we wish.
As much as I would like to preach the gospel of forgiveness or tell a story about carrying your faults, I am not currently in the position to change the rules. Instead, I am now faced with dealing out punishment for a blatantly broken social virtue, and it is difficult to reconcile my own humility and ego while faced with the task at hand. Something must be done, a price must be paid, and the scorned must become an example. My job is to complete the circle and restore what Hume underscored as our societal natural balance. In this task, I am both reluctantly ardent and callously humble.
These shared limitations of morality - these defining characteristics of our societal structure - allow our civility to exist. Beyond laying the groundwork for law, they help us to understand one another. Social virtues and moral distinctions work to transcend religion, culture, and class. The hallmark of a structured society becomes compromised when one of these moral codes is broken. Scorn and punishment come quickly and often with great vengeance, either through demand of restitution or, once the punishment or scorn has run its course, expulsion.
The cliché is the standard in westerns: someone killed someone and revenge must be taken in blood. There is a similar theme in real life, although recompense in civilized societies has become the norm. This tradeoff exists because we seem to be incapable of simply dealing with our own affairs. We are petty, insecure, trivial, and needy. The desire to feel that we are bigger than ourselves undermines our actual potential. At the same time, in considering that humility is the quickest overlooked virtue, we can hear the voice of Freud echo through life declaring that the ego is not master in its own house. We are all small creatures longing to be big. And in return for a momentary increase in stature, we are willing to cast aside our shared functionalist interpretations of social or cultural entities and do as we wish.
As much as I would like to preach the gospel of forgiveness or tell a story about carrying your faults, I am not currently in the position to change the rules. Instead, I am now faced with dealing out punishment for a blatantly broken social virtue, and it is difficult to reconcile my own humility and ego while faced with the task at hand. Something must be done, a price must be paid, and the scorned must become an example. My job is to complete the circle and restore what Hume underscored as our societal natural balance. In this task, I am both reluctantly ardent and callously humble.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
