July 29, 2004
Scientists have documented a sighting of blue whales 100 miles off the shores of Alaska. It is the first citing of the gargantuan creatures there in three decades, after a world-wide killing spree of 350,000 blue whales before 1965. This recent sighting is good news for the world's largest living creature. Read on.
July 28, 2004
July 27, 2004
July 26, 2004
Convention bloggers.
Be sure to keep up with the Democratic National Convention via the few, the brave, the bloggers. Here, that is.
July 23, 2004
Regarding reading for the Jenna-Monster.
Read City of God by Doctorow, if you haven't already. You'll be glad you did.
A write-in? I agree that Mr. Kerry isn't perfect (I liked Little Denny K. in the beginning), but I'll do anything to get rid of Bush. You crazy Yankies:) But, if you want to know who would make the best leader of the free world (and who you should write in), write me in. I would rock the...uh....White House.
I'm glad that our Collective is growing again, and with only the finest that the blogosphere has to offer.
A write-in? I agree that Mr. Kerry isn't perfect (I liked Little Denny K. in the beginning), but I'll do anything to get rid of Bush. You crazy Yankies:) But, if you want to know who would make the best leader of the free world (and who you should write in), write me in. I would rock the...uh....White House.
I'm glad that our Collective is growing again, and with only the finest that the blogosphere has to offer.
There will be a parade.
First of all, I AM FREE!
I have FINALLY gotten my own computer internet-friendly and am happy to report that I am no longer dependant on others to get online! This means more posts, and lots of pictures!
And Laura's back and that, also, makes me very happy.
News from the greater Boston area: Law school starts in three weeks. Joy. The Falmouth Road Race (cheer for me - I'm number F1771) is two weeks away and my knee is finally on the mend. Not a moment too soon. I had this entire week off from work and LOVED every minute of it at the beach. The man and I broke up last week and are trying really really really hard to be just friends. And on a semi-related topic, I think I have commitment issues. (Anyone familiar with the Matchbox 20 line "Everybody's trustin' in their heart like their heart don't lie?") And I've started listening to country. That must be semi-related, too.
I, too, just read "Angels and Demons" and found it a fun read. Not quite as interesting as "The DaVinci Code," but still a lot of fun and very suspenseful. I'm looking for my next book... any suggestions? Fiction, preferably.
Campaign news: I think I mentioned this before, but I have officially decided to use the write-in candidate option. I've had a lot of people ask me how I could throw away my vote like that, but, the way I see it, I'm taking it very seriously. I don't want to vote half-heartedly, or for a candidate that I THINK I'm best supporting. I want to be able to say proudly "I voted for so-and-so." A vote for anyone else is throwing it away.
So whom should I vote for? Who the heck would make the best president of the United States?
Other news: ALL vegetarians are sexy.
I have FINALLY gotten my own computer internet-friendly and am happy to report that I am no longer dependant on others to get online! This means more posts, and lots of pictures!
And Laura's back and that, also, makes me very happy.
News from the greater Boston area: Law school starts in three weeks. Joy. The Falmouth Road Race (cheer for me - I'm number F1771) is two weeks away and my knee is finally on the mend. Not a moment too soon. I had this entire week off from work and LOVED every minute of it at the beach. The man and I broke up last week and are trying really really really hard to be just friends. And on a semi-related topic, I think I have commitment issues. (Anyone familiar with the Matchbox 20 line "Everybody's trustin' in their heart like their heart don't lie?") And I've started listening to country. That must be semi-related, too.
I, too, just read "Angels and Demons" and found it a fun read. Not quite as interesting as "The DaVinci Code," but still a lot of fun and very suspenseful. I'm looking for my next book... any suggestions? Fiction, preferably.
Campaign news: I think I mentioned this before, but I have officially decided to use the write-in candidate option. I've had a lot of people ask me how I could throw away my vote like that, but, the way I see it, I'm taking it very seriously. I don't want to vote half-heartedly, or for a candidate that I THINK I'm best supporting. I want to be able to say proudly "I voted for so-and-so." A vote for anyone else is throwing it away.
So whom should I vote for? Who the heck would make the best president of the United States?
Other news: ALL vegetarians are sexy.
July 22, 2004
Sexiest Vegetarian of 2004.
It's Andre 3000. Nice. Having this contest is one of the few things that PETA does to spread its message that is actually in good taste.
July 16, 2004
July 15, 2004
This mulatto lover is not alone.
Slate's Chatterbox picks up the story. I thought it was a Heartland thing, wherein there is not much...Sensitivity in some folks' language. I mentioned to my wife -- who is a mulatto and doesn't mind saying so -- that Dairy Queen needs to change the name of that drink, even though that commercial wherein a woman runs into a lab door and tears down the mini-blinds is hilarious.
I don't think this is a case of liberals being overly sensitive. If the name of the drink was the StupidBushLatte', there would be no more drink. And no more Dairy Queen.
Hee hee hee.
I don't think this is a case of liberals being overly sensitive. If the name of the drink was the StupidBushLatte', there would be no more drink. And no more Dairy Queen.
Hee hee hee.
July 13, 2004
United, not divided.
Go here and e-sign this petition. Bush and his minions have to be stopped. My wife is black, and I am white. If they make gay marriage illegal, what's next? Making us get a divorce?
Hell no.
Hell no.
July 12, 2004
A time that the pieces fit.
That's strange. We just drove (sped, really) to Makanda to get some coffee beans at the country store. On the way, we were on Giant City Road, where C and I saw that over-turned van a few weeks back. And "Schism" was playing on the radio.
Who would Ghandi vote for?
"You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul." ~ Ghandi
July 11, 2004
Action movies.
What's wrong with "stupid" action movies? Why can't an action movie be good for the (gasp) actionn? There will never be another Matrix. The two sequels proved that.
Get off of your intellectual high-horses, critics, I say. The second and third Matrix movies had some of the greatest special effects in movie history. Sure, they lacked some of the "philosophical underpinnings" of the parent film, but so what? Was the title of either movie, "The Matrix Academic: Get Your Philosophy Here"? No. There is a great place to get one's philosophy, if issues of human freedom and moral agency are one's cup of tea. They're called philosophy books.
Sure, some films get philosophical. That's fine. That's a very good thing, I think.
But why fault an action movie for not being a banquet of state-of-the-art special effects, as well as philosophically rigorous pieces? What was Neo supposed to do? Seriously contribute to the store the Western philosophical debate on free will and fate? Was Morpheus expected to give an oral defense for his dissertation on control?
Anyway, there was no more "philosophy" in the first than the sequels anyway, to be honest. Look closer.
This brings me to King Arthur. Several critics (I don't feel like coding the links, really, sue me) don't like it because it's just an action movie.
So the hell what?
Does one go to a summer blockbuster to learn about history, to hear debates on philosophical issues or to be entertained? Calling the movie unentertaining is a good criticism of a movie. But getting all over an action movie for not being historically accurate or philosophically rigorous is like faulting a philosophy book for being...dry.
For pete's sake, if you want philosophy, read Sartre. If you want to be entertained, go to the movies. If you want both, don't expect big-budget action movies to all be like The Matrix.
Seriously, though, the worst part about King Arthur was the lack of banjos and unicycles. There.
Get off of your intellectual high-horses, critics, I say. The second and third Matrix movies had some of the greatest special effects in movie history. Sure, they lacked some of the "philosophical underpinnings" of the parent film, but so what? Was the title of either movie, "The Matrix Academic: Get Your Philosophy Here"? No. There is a great place to get one's philosophy, if issues of human freedom and moral agency are one's cup of tea. They're called philosophy books.
Sure, some films get philosophical. That's fine. That's a very good thing, I think.
But why fault an action movie for not being a banquet of state-of-the-art special effects, as well as philosophically rigorous pieces? What was Neo supposed to do? Seriously contribute to the store the Western philosophical debate on free will and fate? Was Morpheus expected to give an oral defense for his dissertation on control?
Anyway, there was no more "philosophy" in the first than the sequels anyway, to be honest. Look closer.
This brings me to King Arthur. Several critics (I don't feel like coding the links, really, sue me) don't like it because it's just an action movie.
So the hell what?
Does one go to a summer blockbuster to learn about history, to hear debates on philosophical issues or to be entertained? Calling the movie unentertaining is a good criticism of a movie. But getting all over an action movie for not being historically accurate or philosophically rigorous is like faulting a philosophy book for being...dry.
For pete's sake, if you want philosophy, read Sartre. If you want to be entertained, go to the movies. If you want both, don't expect big-budget action movies to all be like The Matrix.
Seriously, though, the worst part about King Arthur was the lack of banjos and unicycles. There.
July 08, 2004
True that.
Very very true. If the vocals in the next Tool LP are anything like the sophomore APC effort, music will have reached its apex. Really.
July 06, 2004
Fahrenheit 9/11.
You know what? I'm too lazy to condense my post about Fahrenheit 9/11 from my other blog. So I'm going to paste it here. Sorry it's so long.
I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 today. I was not in the mood to watch it, since I had one of those headaches you get from sleeping too late, and I really wanted to go outside today. However, we were going to get (and indeed did get) violent storms today, and my wife really wanted to see it. So to the flick I went.
You know, a lot of people are calling this film a piece of propaganda. I think that's inaccurate. I think that what critics mean to say is that Michael Moore is a liar (which I don't really believe), and they don't know the proper meaning of the word propaganda. Propaganda, in their eyes, involves deliberate deception, whether that is in the form of outright lying, spinning or omitting the truth or what have you. There is a fine line between presenting the truth in a biased manner (what propaganda essentially is) and their idea of propaganda, and I don't think that Michael Moore crossed that line more than any news outlet which only shows us half of the truth and such anyway. If Fahrenheit 9/11 is propaganda, so is the damned "Today Show." There is nothing terribly wrong with propaganda always, and one might say that anyone who puts forth his or her views cannot help putting a slant on them. Then we're all guilty of propaganda, aren't we?
Maybe I'm wrong or crazy. Or, god forbid, biased.
Besides, I don't think critics are giving Moore enough credit for his fairness. When he showed something that the American media censored, he rarely called attention to it. He never mentioned Tony Blair by name, and Prime Minister Blair was only in the background of shots twice. He never actually says anything negative about Bush or anyone else, for that matter. He lets them embarrass themselves. He states facts about the actions of the Bush administration without really judging them at the same time outloud. He doesn't have to. If one is worried about unfairness, and one has not seen this film, one should shut up promptly and not criticize it.
I think it is the most emotionally trying documentary in the history of film-making. And it has little to do with Michael Moore's orchestration, i.e., music, voice-overs, etc. It is upsetting because of what happened. The charred bodies of American soldiers being dragged through the streets and hung on posts are what is disturbing, not Michael Moore's film-making. The people weeping in theaters are not weeping because of Michael Moore. Men younger than I am are dying and many more are suffering. When the gloss of the big media goes away, we see that what is going on is terrible and grossly unnecessary.
Indeed, the sickest thing about this is that it is entirely unjustified. Even if Moore's suspicions are true, and this is all about money and power, neither of those hollow things are worth human lives and human pain.
The ever-wise Max Scheler says that sacrifice is the act of giving up something for a higher value (since he thinks values are phenomenologically given, prior to all cognition, as higher or lower than other values).
Sacrifice is a word used a lot in Fahrenheit 9/11. I think Michael Moore is on the right track, but he didn't come out and say it: our troops are dying for nothing. They are not sacrificing their lives for anything, since what they are dying for -- money, power, or utter foolishness -- is unquestionably lower than their own immeasurable value as human persons. Each and every one of the noble people over there are worth more than all of the Bush family's and Saudi Arabia's money -- each person alone. Throwing away life for anything that serves life (which money and power do) goes against all human reason and feeling and goodness and enters the realm of evil.
Am I saying that the Bush administration is evil? Yes, I am. Lying that causes death is evil, especially when the consequences of such lying are clearly foreseeable. The war machine has thrown away American and Iraqi lives for nothing that is a higher value than those lives. It's backwards.
And we are all fools if we sit back and let this keep happening. Just because the thought that innocent people are dying for nothing is a terrible thought to stomach doesn't make it untrue. If that were my brother, I would have a hard time dealing with the idea that he didn't sacrifice himself for a greater good but that some businessmen-turned-politicians threw his life away and didn't even give him a choice in the matter. That is without question. But no amount of pain can make something untrue or make something go away, as if it never happened.
But action can. I didn't vote in the last election. I was a senior in college and was studying some peace studies, and I didn't want to take part in the government, for my own stupid reasons. Luckily, Maryland always votes Democratically in the Presidential elections. This year, I thought about sending in my absentee ballot to Maryland. Who wants jury duty, right? But I'm going to vote in Illinois anyway. I hear that Illinois can go either way in Presidential elections, and I need to do my part for my country by getting rid of Bush. The biggest reason I want to vote here, though, is for the pleasure I will get when I leave my polling place having voted against that bastard.
Michael Moore is certainly doing his part to enlighten people. My brother who is in the United States military (and I am, and will always be, proud of him) was a Bush supporter. Hell, when he told me last weekend that he was going to see Fahrenheit 9/11, I thought he was joking with me, since no one in my family really agrees with me on most political matters. However, I spoke with him for a long time yesterday, and he told me that he did really see it. And he is not voting for Bush now.
Way to go, Michael!
I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 today. I was not in the mood to watch it, since I had one of those headaches you get from sleeping too late, and I really wanted to go outside today. However, we were going to get (and indeed did get) violent storms today, and my wife really wanted to see it. So to the flick I went.
You know, a lot of people are calling this film a piece of propaganda. I think that's inaccurate. I think that what critics mean to say is that Michael Moore is a liar (which I don't really believe), and they don't know the proper meaning of the word propaganda. Propaganda, in their eyes, involves deliberate deception, whether that is in the form of outright lying, spinning or omitting the truth or what have you. There is a fine line between presenting the truth in a biased manner (what propaganda essentially is) and their idea of propaganda, and I don't think that Michael Moore crossed that line more than any news outlet which only shows us half of the truth and such anyway. If Fahrenheit 9/11 is propaganda, so is the damned "Today Show." There is nothing terribly wrong with propaganda always, and one might say that anyone who puts forth his or her views cannot help putting a slant on them. Then we're all guilty of propaganda, aren't we?
Maybe I'm wrong or crazy. Or, god forbid, biased.
Besides, I don't think critics are giving Moore enough credit for his fairness. When he showed something that the American media censored, he rarely called attention to it. He never mentioned Tony Blair by name, and Prime Minister Blair was only in the background of shots twice. He never actually says anything negative about Bush or anyone else, for that matter. He lets them embarrass themselves. He states facts about the actions of the Bush administration without really judging them at the same time outloud. He doesn't have to. If one is worried about unfairness, and one has not seen this film, one should shut up promptly and not criticize it.
I think it is the most emotionally trying documentary in the history of film-making. And it has little to do with Michael Moore's orchestration, i.e., music, voice-overs, etc. It is upsetting because of what happened. The charred bodies of American soldiers being dragged through the streets and hung on posts are what is disturbing, not Michael Moore's film-making. The people weeping in theaters are not weeping because of Michael Moore. Men younger than I am are dying and many more are suffering. When the gloss of the big media goes away, we see that what is going on is terrible and grossly unnecessary.
Indeed, the sickest thing about this is that it is entirely unjustified. Even if Moore's suspicions are true, and this is all about money and power, neither of those hollow things are worth human lives and human pain.
The ever-wise Max Scheler says that sacrifice is the act of giving up something for a higher value (since he thinks values are phenomenologically given, prior to all cognition, as higher or lower than other values).
Sacrifice is a word used a lot in Fahrenheit 9/11. I think Michael Moore is on the right track, but he didn't come out and say it: our troops are dying for nothing. They are not sacrificing their lives for anything, since what they are dying for -- money, power, or utter foolishness -- is unquestionably lower than their own immeasurable value as human persons. Each and every one of the noble people over there are worth more than all of the Bush family's and Saudi Arabia's money -- each person alone. Throwing away life for anything that serves life (which money and power do) goes against all human reason and feeling and goodness and enters the realm of evil.
Am I saying that the Bush administration is evil? Yes, I am. Lying that causes death is evil, especially when the consequences of such lying are clearly foreseeable. The war machine has thrown away American and Iraqi lives for nothing that is a higher value than those lives. It's backwards.
And we are all fools if we sit back and let this keep happening. Just because the thought that innocent people are dying for nothing is a terrible thought to stomach doesn't make it untrue. If that were my brother, I would have a hard time dealing with the idea that he didn't sacrifice himself for a greater good but that some businessmen-turned-politicians threw his life away and didn't even give him a choice in the matter. That is without question. But no amount of pain can make something untrue or make something go away, as if it never happened.
But action can. I didn't vote in the last election. I was a senior in college and was studying some peace studies, and I didn't want to take part in the government, for my own stupid reasons. Luckily, Maryland always votes Democratically in the Presidential elections. This year, I thought about sending in my absentee ballot to Maryland. Who wants jury duty, right? But I'm going to vote in Illinois anyway. I hear that Illinois can go either way in Presidential elections, and I need to do my part for my country by getting rid of Bush. The biggest reason I want to vote here, though, is for the pleasure I will get when I leave my polling place having voted against that bastard.
Michael Moore is certainly doing his part to enlighten people. My brother who is in the United States military (and I am, and will always be, proud of him) was a Bush supporter. Hell, when he told me last weekend that he was going to see Fahrenheit 9/11, I thought he was joking with me, since no one in my family really agrees with me on most political matters. However, I spoke with him for a long time yesterday, and he told me that he did really see it. And he is not voting for Bush now.
Way to go, Michael!
July 03, 2004
July 01, 2004
Another legacy.
George Bush Senior called my grandfather out of retirement at 75 years old to serve in the Gulf War... interesting, huh?
More later.
More later.
Complete bullshit.
My father, the 36-year veteran of the United States military and my brother, new to the service, are both Bush-supporters. (Other than that, they are both great men.) It is common knowledge that the majority of military personnel and families support Bush.
This baffles the shit out of me, considering what a lack of RESPECT Bush has for the members of the military. He's calling them up again, just because he can. It is a stupid, but little-known, feature of American law that the President can -- during war or a national crisis -- call up any and everyone who EVER served in the military, up to and including retirees under the age of 60.
This includes my father, who will be 55 years old one month from tomorrow.
Sure, I could console myself with the idea that Bush would never do that, right? Whatever. I doubt that most of the people who voted for him (and that's not most of us, now, is it?) in 2000 ever thought that he would fail to find the criminal who attacked our country and would then try to cover it up by attacking the man whom his Daddy couldn't take care of in the early 90s. He's surprised (read, SHOCKED) us all before, and it stands to reason that he would do it again.*
Bush is a liar. And he has been screwing over the military of our nation for years now, because he can. Because he believes they will vote for him no matter what, since the military "always" votes Republican, right? To quote retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Merrill "Tony" McPeak, a Kerry adviser, "The troops are paying the price for arrogant mismanagement and poor planning at the civilian policy level" (via the Boston Globe).
Rather than screwing over young civies, like myself, Bush puts the pain and burden of this war on the members of the armed services and their families. He already has their votes, and that's all he needs from them these days, it seems. What would seem more just than to send someone like my father, who served his country for three and half decades to war, would be to send someone like me.
I hate this war. When we went to the rescue of Kuwait, I was all for it. But not this obscenity. Nonetheless, I would gladly go, if that meant that my father could stay home. I know, that's easy to say when: a)A draft is very unlikely; and, b)I am married, a graduate student and almost 25; I would not likely be drafted anyway. I know.
Exactly how much does Bush expect our servicemen and servicewomen to give? When does the time come for the rest of us to give a little, too? My father saw god-knows-what in the jungles of Vietnam. He has had to gear up his friends and send them to wars and conflicts many times. He's seen more horrible things than anyone should ever have to see. What's enough?
Send people like me -- ME INCLUDED -- instead. And instead of younger folks who have done their service to their country. But above all, I wish we could send Bush. Let him be far from his home and family and watch his friends bleed to death in the street and risk being shot or captured and beheaded everyday. He deserves far worse.
*[Luckily, however, Bush won't be President much longer. My father's retirement is safe.]
This baffles the shit out of me, considering what a lack of RESPECT Bush has for the members of the military. He's calling them up again, just because he can. It is a stupid, but little-known, feature of American law that the President can -- during war or a national crisis -- call up any and everyone who EVER served in the military, up to and including retirees under the age of 60.
This includes my father, who will be 55 years old one month from tomorrow.
Sure, I could console myself with the idea that Bush would never do that, right? Whatever. I doubt that most of the people who voted for him (and that's not most of us, now, is it?) in 2000 ever thought that he would fail to find the criminal who attacked our country and would then try to cover it up by attacking the man whom his Daddy couldn't take care of in the early 90s. He's surprised (read, SHOCKED) us all before, and it stands to reason that he would do it again.*
Bush is a liar. And he has been screwing over the military of our nation for years now, because he can. Because he believes they will vote for him no matter what, since the military "always" votes Republican, right? To quote retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Merrill "Tony" McPeak, a Kerry adviser, "The troops are paying the price for arrogant mismanagement and poor planning at the civilian policy level" (via the Boston Globe).
Rather than screwing over young civies, like myself, Bush puts the pain and burden of this war on the members of the armed services and their families. He already has their votes, and that's all he needs from them these days, it seems. What would seem more just than to send someone like my father, who served his country for three and half decades to war, would be to send someone like me.
I hate this war. When we went to the rescue of Kuwait, I was all for it. But not this obscenity. Nonetheless, I would gladly go, if that meant that my father could stay home. I know, that's easy to say when: a)A draft is very unlikely; and, b)I am married, a graduate student and almost 25; I would not likely be drafted anyway. I know.
Exactly how much does Bush expect our servicemen and servicewomen to give? When does the time come for the rest of us to give a little, too? My father saw god-knows-what in the jungles of Vietnam. He has had to gear up his friends and send them to wars and conflicts many times. He's seen more horrible things than anyone should ever have to see. What's enough?
Send people like me -- ME INCLUDED -- instead. And instead of younger folks who have done their service to their country. But above all, I wish we could send Bush. Let him be far from his home and family and watch his friends bleed to death in the street and risk being shot or captured and beheaded everyday. He deserves far worse.
*[Luckily, however, Bush won't be President much longer. My father's retirement is safe.]
Can't do it.
I can't run at all. I'm embarrassingly out of shape, and I have still not healed entirely from smoking -- even though I just passed my 2-year quitting-forever-anniversary last month.
I can, however, sprint for about thirty seconds and outrun half of the people I know. But then I fall over coughing and wishing I had never picked up smoking in the 90s.
I'm not what you would call a distance runner.:)
I can, however, sprint for about thirty seconds and outrun half of the people I know. But then I fall over coughing and wishing I had never picked up smoking in the 90s.
I'm not what you would call a distance runner.:)