Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January
2003 December
2003 November
2003 October
2003 September
2003 August
2003 July
2003 June
2003 May
My Links
DRAMA's Blog
Librarianguish's Blog
Hhunter's Blog
Dragonbait22's Blog
Anniebananie's Blog
Whoisjohngalt's Blog
Polling Report
Savage Love
...including Tod Holton, Super Green Beret!
The defunct but awesome Inexplicable Object of the Week
Hybridanglo's Blog
MisterNiceGuy's Blog
Winstonsmith's Blog
SamAdams's Blog
Sulkbrarian's Blog
ISpork's Blog
Luthar's Blog
Whynot's Blog
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
|
| The Revision Thing |
| 09.29.03 (7:19 pm) [edit] |
Here's some worthwhile reading from Harper's. You can read the entire article [url=http://www.harpers.org/online...]here[/url].
[i]The Revision Thing: A History of the Iraq War, Told Entirely in Lies, by Sam Smith
All text is verbatim from senior Bush Administration officials and advisers. In places, tenses have been changed for clarity.
Once again, we were defending both ourselves and the safety and survival of civilization itself. September 11 signaled the arrival of an entirely different era. We faced perils we had never thought about, perils we had never seen before. For decades, terrorists had waged war against this country. Now, under the leadership of President Bush, America would wage war against them. It was a struggle between good and it was a struggle between evil.
It was absolutely clear that the number-one threat facing America was from Saddam Hussein. We know that Iraq and Al Qaeda had high-level contacts that went back a decade. We learned that Iraq had trained Al Qaeda members in bomb making and deadly gases. The regime had long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist organizations. Iraq and Al Qaeda had discussed safe-haven opportunities in Iraq. Iraqi officials denied accusations of ties with Al Qaeda. These denials simply were not credible. You couldn't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talked about the war on terror...[/i]
Go on, read the [url=http://www.harpers.org/online...]rest[/url]!
|
|
|
| |
| bait |
| 09.28.03 (10:39 pm) [edit] |
It seemed kind of wasteful to take a trip to the west coast for less than 48 hours. But then there were the all you could eat raw oysters at my pal's wedding. I made a good friend in the oyster man. Perhaps he is my new best friend now.
I'm not sure why I start hoovering around them. I've loved oysters ever since I was really small (and back then I was eating them out of the Gulf of Mexico - probably pretty risky behavior). I'm a purist about them too. Forget all of those silly sauces people use to make themselves forget what they're eating! Just a bit of lemon and I'm set!
|
|
|
| |
| Cali |
| 09.26.03 (11:28 am) [edit] |
I'm going back to San Francisco today. I'm looking forward to hearing some more buzz about the recall election up close. Oh yeah, I'm looking forward to the food too.
Meanwhile, I was looking over some of the lesser known candidates for governor. Could anyone tell me if there is a [i]minimum[/i] age one needs to be to run? I ask because of [url=http://www.quinn4gov.com/]this[/url]:
![]() =http://www.quinn4gov.com/quin... height=187 width=495
Can he be any older than 19? Nice platform, by the way.
|
|
|
| |
| Emmy questions |
| 09.24.03 (7:23 pm) [edit] |
Somebody help me out with this one. What does one need to do to get the "best hairstyling" award on the Emmys? Heck, forget that, how do they even figure out who to nominate? I imagine all of these judges sitting around, giving points for silkiness and body, subtracting for frizziness and split ends. I mean, it's HAIR!
I guess it also goes along with the "best casting" award, which is somehow supposed to be different from the acting awards. I just don't get it.
|
|
|
| |
| Emmy losers |
| 09.23.03 (8:35 pm) [edit] |
Normally I'd be peevish about some of my favorite shows failing to win an Emmy. As a longtime Buffy fan, I was really mad when the musical episode didn't get recognition for the masterpiece it was.
But I don't think Buffy deserved an Emmy this year. And while I'm an avid Six Feet Under watcher, this wasn't the show's best season.
Instead of focusing on who didn't win (and the inexplicable success of Everybody Loves Raymond. Does anyone really watch that show?), I choose to celebrate the victory of Jon Stewart over all of those tired, old late night shows. Although Stewart repeatedly calls his show a "fake" news show, it's one of the best ones out there. Go Jon!
|
|
|
| |
| thirteen |
| 09.21.03 (10:07 pm) [edit] |
I saw the movie "Thirteen" last week. After reading all of the hype about how this is a movie that is honest about what kids are like and what credibility it has because it was (partly) written by a real 13 year old, I have to say I'm rather disappointed. Actually, the more I think about the movie, the more pissed off I get.
Part if it was that it just didn't feel real. I was a 13 year old girl once - NO ONE gets into the "cool" crowd that quickly.
More importantly, the narrative was only a hair removed from that of many propaganda flicks, and not nearly as entertaining. If I want to see a movie about kids doing really destructive things on drugs, I'll track down that awesome after school special starring Helen Hunt, "Angel Dusted"! Remember when she fell out the window!
Do they still make after school specials?
So, yeah, the acting in Thirteen was fine, but if I have to see one more scare piece about how unconventional and unstructured parenting puts children at risk (the mother's past is implicated more than once, even though her life was fairly together throughout the movie), I'm going to throw something.
|
|
|
| |
| complaining |
| 09.20.03 (9:45 pm) [edit] |
The only thing worse than working too much is working too much while you're sick.
Back to work!
|
|
|
| |
| Wesley Clark |
| 09.19.03 (6:39 pm) [edit] |
I'm not sure how I feel about Wesley Clark declaring his candidacy. While his presence protects the Democratic Party somewhat from being accused of being soft on defense, I'm not certain that he's what we need. My concerns are:
1. He's never held elective office before. While many Americans disdain "professional" politicians, there is something to be said for having job experience. This particular job requires being able to work well with others while still protecting your own constituency. The president especially needs to be able to understand the power dynamic in Congress. Which brings me to...
2. He's really, really arrogant. OK, all 4-star generals are at least somewhat arrogant and, sure, he was a Rhodes scholar, but from what I've heard, he's even more arrogant than someone who has those types of credentials usually is.
3. I'm not sure what he's all about yet. I suppose I'll figure that out in time, but lack of a published record on public policy issues makes it harder. The confusing statement he made on Iraq doesn't look promising.
Regardless, I think he'd make good VP material. But maybe I just like the idea of him and Dean together because they would look so darned dapper next to each other.
Wait and see, I guess...
|
|
|
| |
| erratic votomatic |
| 09.17.03 (8:21 pm) [edit] |
I'm sure that some of you out there have been following the court case involving the California recall election. Some have challenged the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to postpone the election until March, by which time all of the California counties will have replaced their punch card systems.
It is a mistake to blame the problems with the punchcards on "stupid" voters. Certainly, there are some people who forget to vote for offices or accidentally vote for too many. It is for this reason that new machines were created to tell people that they messed up and give them the option to correct their mistakes.
It does a terrible disservice to voters to blame them for poorly designed ballots and ill-kept, error-prone machines. Voting is not designed to be an intelligence test. Postponing an election to prevent machine-based mistakes and the potential of another post-election fiasco helps democracy rather than hurting it.
I think the following [url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin...]quote[/url] by UC Berkeley professor Henry Brady puts the issue into perspective:
[i]The whole point of the voting system is not to test people on their understanding of how electro-mechanical or mechanical systems work.... If we designed a car such that it was so hard to understand that even Ph.D.s constantly got into accidents with it and people with less education got into even more accidents, we wouldn't say, 'Oh, dumb people.' We'd say, 'Bad car.' [/i]
No one believes that punchcard systems work as well as more modern voting systems. The [url=http://fecweb1.fec.gov/hava/h...]Help America Vote Act of 2002[/url] specifically calls for the elimination of punchcard machines in all states for a good reason.
|
|
|
| |
| One more reason to be afraid in 2004 |
| 09.15.03 (10:31 am) [edit] |
Espero que nadie quiere votar en espaņol en 2004. (Did I say that right, or should "quiere" be in the subjunctive? Damn, my Spanish is crap. Then again, at least I don't write Spanish-language ballots for a living).
Anyway, from [url=http://www.newsday.com/news/l...,0,2032862.story?coll=ny-linews-head lines]Newsday.com[/url].
[i]Voter Info Lost in Translation
By John Moreno Gonzales
Staff Writer
Evelyn Pappa received a voter information card from the Suffolk County Board of Elections with a Spanish translation so faulty that it has her doubting just how participatory democracy is for Hispanics.
If she lived in Nassau, she may have had even more questions, because according to the U.S. Justice Department, that county is violating federal law by providing similar cards in English only.
Pappa, who traces her roots to Argentina and is bilingual, said she was thoroughly confused by the Spanish-language voting instructions on the polling place cards sent to her parents last month.
One portion explains in perfect English where the polls are located, how to apply for an absentee ballot and how to provide the board information such as a change of address. But its Spanish translation commits such linguistic atrocities as the board referring to itself as a "tablero," the Spanish word for a cutting or gaming board, and a host of mixed-up tenses.
Polling place cards sent to Nassau voters contain no Spanish at all, even though that county, like Suffolk, is obliged under the Federal Voting Rights Act to provide Spanish translations of all voting materials.
"By law, all voting information must be in English and Spanish for these two particular counties, Nassau and Suffolk," said George Martinez, a spokesman for the Justice Department...
...Pappa said she called the Suffolk board to complain and they first told her the translations were provided by the federal government. Then a board official said the board used a computer program to translate the materials into Spanish.[/i]
Even the average high school student knows not to just write down what [url=http://babelfish.altavista.co...]babelfish[/url] spits out. I guess the law never said the ballots had to be grammatically correct. I think to make up for it, all of the English instructions should be written in hillbilly. Or better yet, surfer.
|
|
|
| |
| say cheese |
| 09.14.03 (1:54 pm) [edit] |
I just learned today that Canadians are no longer permitted to [url=http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand...]smile for their passport photos[/url], because smiling will interfere with new technologies to provide "identity confirmation."
Such a shame. I've always smiled for my passport photos, ever since I didn't for my first one and ended up looking like I was suffering from a severe case of food poisoning. The smile has never been a problem when I crossed borders - although I learned the hard way that I shouldn't wear sunglasses while going through passport control. Apparently sunglasses send a different message in Eastern Europe than they do in California...
|
|
|
| |
| lunch money |
| 09.12.03 (8:06 pm) [edit] |
I had no idea [url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin...]this was true[/url]:
[i]Democratic presidential candidate Bob Graham said Friday that the least the government can do for soldiers who are injured or get sick in the line of duty is let them keep their meal allowance.
Soldiers in the field get $8.10 a day for food, but since those who are hospitalized get free hospital meals, the military requires them to repay the allowance. Graham, a Florida senator, said he will introduce a bill next week that prevents them from having to reimburse the government.
Rep. C.W. Bill Young, R-Florida, sponsored a similar bill in the House after learning that Marine Staff Sgt. Bill Murwin of Nevada had been billed $243 for his meals while hospitalized due to wounds suffered in Iraq. Part of his left foot was amputated. Graham's bill would cover those who get sick as well as injured.
"How can we justify spending billions of dollars on no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq, then turn around and charge an injured soldier $8.10 a day for meals while they are being treated for war injuries?" Graham said in a statement. [/i]
Apparently it's a old policy to collect the meal money back. It just seems so cold hearted.
|
|
|
| |
| Tommy Chong |
| 09.11.03 (10:35 pm) [edit] |
It seems a bit overboard that Tommy Chong is going to [url=http://story.news.yahoo.com/n...]serve a 9 month jail sentence[/url] for selling bongs and marijuana pipes (as if a lack of pipes and bongs is actually going to stop people from using drugs). Is the next step to arrest people who are selling candy and pacifiers to raver kids?
The war on drugs has been a miserable failure. At a time when increasing numbers of Americans believe that marijuana is not harmful (at least in the sense that it's no more harmful than alcohol), the federal response appears to be more enforcement. Why they are holding on, I have no idea.
I predict that in a generation we will look back on these drug laws and laugh. But until then, we are wasting money and abusing an already overburdened legal system.
And Kenny Lay still walks the streets.
|
|
|
| |
| Educated stupid |
| 09.10.03 (4:19 pm) [edit] |
In response to the accusations of liberal bias in academia, perhaps I should incorporate the teachings of the [url=http://www.timecube.com]Time Cube[/url] into my curriculum.
(note, if you have never seen the Time Cube page before, I dare you to try to read all the way through it. Then I dare you to try to explain it without speaking in complete gibberish).
[i]Cubeless education - is a deadly evil.
Cubeless educators are evil bastards. [/i]
-Dr. Gene Ray
|
|
|
| |
| leftist education |
| 09.09.03 (9:17 pm) [edit] |
[url=http://www.rockymountainnews....,1299,DRMN_21_2238507,00.html]It's happened again[/url]. An article like this comes out every year or so, claiming that professors at college campuses are overwhelmingly liberal and have shut out conservative thought. They also claim that conservatives can no longer find academic employment or get tenure because of their political beliefs.
This research is wrong in so many ways that I don't know where to begin. But here are a few places to start.
You may wonder how they measured how liberal the faculty at various campuses are. The group (Horowitz's "[url=http://www.studentsforacademi...]Student's for Academic Freedom[/url]") selected a number of top universities and from there chose the departments they deemed to teach matters of social relevance. Then they took the names of the faculty and tried to match them to voter registration records to see who was a Democrat and who was a Republican.
They reported that Democrats outnumbered Republicans 12-1. What they don't mention is that for the bulk of the faculty they either could not figure out a match or the faculty member wasn't registered to vote. Furthermore, it's fairly clear that "Democrat" and "liberal" hardly mean the same thing these days.
Regardless of these errors, I will accept that there are more liberals than conservatives in the social sciences and humanities at top universities. But what does that have to do with what we decide to teach and how we decide to teach it? My class on elections might be considered especially subject to some sort of partisan bias. Frankly, I'm so happy to get my students to participate in class, I don't much care who they voted for.
Maybe the folks at SAF should consider that the reason there are more liberals in academia is that only liberals would be foolish enough to spend such a long time getting a degree for a job that pays so little money (for what it's worth, the Republicans in my grad program seemed to have no more trouble getting an academic job than anyone else did).
Or maybe Horowitz should remember that it's illegal to ask people their political preferences as a condition of their employment.
Is Horowitz's idea to create some kind of twisted affirmative action for conservatives? If that's the case, I'd like to request that we have a few more liberal CEO's out there. It seems only fair.
|
|
|
| |
| John Edwards |
| 09.07.03 (8:08 pm) [edit] |
Ok, so John Edwards [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2003/0...]has decided not to run[/url] for Senate re-election in 2004 so he can concentrate on his presidential campaign.
Given that his chances for getting the nomination are slim at best, is he
an idiot?
hoping to get the VP slot for the ticket?
trying to make the Senate more Republican in 2004?
all of the above?
|
|
|
| |
| for sulky and other people who read too much |
| 09.05.03 (6:15 pm) [edit] |
I think sulky's [url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin...]profession[/url] is being dissed again.
It's strange how people never update their ideas of what people in certain professions look and act like. I don't think I've ever seen someone like this where I work
![]() =http://www.barbiecollectibles...
Meanwhile, I've survived the first week back at classes without making too much of an ass of myself, so I figure I'm doing ok. I was proud that I was able to work Plato and the act of smashing an empty beer can against one's forehead into the same lecture.
|
|
|
| |
| infestation |
| 09.02.03 (9:42 pm) [edit] |
Are they really going to [url=http://www.kvbc.com/Global/st...]recall the governor[/url] in Nevada too? It seems unlikely, but frankly I can't even believe it's on the table. It's like some crazy virus moving from west to east.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
