Kay Hagan Knows What Is Important

Recognizing the accomplishments of athletes. This is what elected officials are for. Not for crafting substantive legislation on matters like the economy or war or anything like that. Nope. Recognizing the achievements of highly paid, very famous sports figures is what it is all about.

Or something.

h/t: Ezra Klein

Art vs. the Artist and Growing Up

Tasha Robinson has a great article on the AVClub discussing how our perception of an artist and what they have said or done may color our view of their work.

It’s hard to know exactly where knowing the context of a work—knowing about its creator’s history and goals—fades into bias, and an inability to see the work for itself. It’s hard to come to any piece of art without bringing our personal baggage with us. Ultimately, we all have to decide for ourselves whether a given film, show, book, or whatever is meaningful and worthy, and we do that with all the knowledge at our disposal, often more subconsciously than consciously.

But I still think that while we can’t help how we interpret something subconsciously, we can help whether we let an artist’s words or actions completely distract us from our own direct, personal reactions. And in the end, letting those things get in the way is unfair to ourselves, and to our own emotions. And it’s unfair to the art itself, and whatever it may move us to feel or think. Regardless of its intent, regardless of its creator’s behavior, regardless of what anyone else who experiences it says, something speaks to you or it doesn’t, all on its own.

It's a thought provoking piece and worth your time to read in full.

The main thrust of her topic is how what an artist says outside of their art can influence our perception of the art, though she also touches on an artist's actions (e.g. Mel Gibson). I've found that many books and movies I enjoyed as a youngster I now have a different understanding of or appreciation of whether or not I have learned more about its creator. One book, though, took on a much different tone for me after learning more about its author and reading it through more mature eyes.

I'm referring to Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card. I read this book when I was eleven or twelve and fell in love with it. How could an intelligent, outcast kid not love a book about an intelligent, outcast kid who is tasked with saving humanity? I read it more than once and it became one of my favorites. I strongly recommended it to many people.

Then I grew up. I found out that Card has a strong dislike for Muslims. He doesn't like gay people. He wrote a book about evil liberals overthrowing the American government and the courageous conservatives that must restore things to their natural order. In short, I found him to have a rather despicable world view.

But, that wasn't going to change my love for Ender's Game. How could it? None of that stuff was in the book that I could recall. So, a couple of years ago, I decided to read it to my daughters. I couldn't wait to share one of my favorite books with them.

It was different this time, though. I still enjoyed it and my daughters certainly did, but I couldn't help but seeing his political beliefs coming through and frankly I found it appalling at times. This essay does an excellent job taking apart many of the problems with the book, but I want to focus on the one thing that really shined through reading it again. If you have not read the book (and I do encourage you to because despite its issues, it is a very engaging story) stop here because spoilers ensue.

As Ender becomes more and more isolated by his trainers and is put through more and more torture and more students die at Ender's hands, it becomes clear that the ends justify the means for the protagonists of the book. The climax of this is Ender's genocide of an entire race of aliens that humans had been at war with. Topping it off, in the denouement, while Ender is vilified for becoming the Xenocide, he is portrayed in a sympathetic light. He did just what he had to in order to save humanity. He also didn't know what he was doing because he thought he was still just training.

In the essay I linked to above, an interview with Card is mentioned in which he states, "I don’t really think it’s true that ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions.' Good people trying to do good usually find a way to muddle through. What worries me is when you have bad people trying to do good. They’re not good at it, they don’t have any instinct for it, and they’re willing to do a lot of damage along the way." This is a very scary road to go down. If a person has good intentions, can they really do no wrong? And, who judges whether or not a person's intentions are good? One person's good can be another person's bad. I see Card reading Watchmen and unequivocally applauding Ozymandias's actions at the end whereas Alan Moore makes the reader very uncomfortable if he or she finds themselves thinking that what Ozymandias did might be justifiable.

I think there are definitely lines that should not be crossed, that the ends most certainly do not justify the means. Reading Ender's Game when I was young, I did not see Card's beliefs shining through. But as I mentioned earlier, reading it through more seasoned eyes and after having read some of the vile crap that he spews, I have a more troubled outlook toward the book and frankly am appalled at many of the things Card stands for. I do think that art should stand on its own, that its meaning or interpretation is between the connoisseur and the art. However now that I know what I know about Card and now that I have grown up and learned so much more, I can't put that away and look at it the same way I did when I was twelve. I suppose a part of me longs for the naivete of my youth. A part of me wants to simply enjoy the story as a simple tale of a boy far more talented and intelligent than all those around him who must overcome adversity to save the human race.

It's a great story, but I'm saddened that it's not the same story anymore.

UPDATE: Changed the first sentence because by the time I got around to finishing this post, it was not today that Tasha's article was posted.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

I can relate.

Humans Are Not Vulcans

This is a fascinating presentation by Dan Ariely.



This also brought to mind one of my favorite new blogs, You Are Not So Smart, which sets about debunking common knowledge that we take for granted.

The more we learn about ourselves, the more interesting we become. Stuff like this makes me think about how easily we can be manipulated in all sorts of subtle ways. I also found myself thinking about how I wasn't like this. I'm rational. I'm not like the mindless sheeple. And then I had to tell myself that, unfortunately, I'm human, too, and prone to this as much as anyone else. The important thing, of course, is to be cognizant of it, to do what we can to recognize our weaknesses and our failings and take steps to mitigate them.

If you are, you know, one of those weak-willed suckers that is.

Pathfinder Giveaway

Let's see...

1) I like Pathfinder.
2) I like free stuff.

So, when I found out that Troll in a Corner was doing a drawing for three Pathfinder rulebooks, I had to sign up. For those not in the know, Pathfinder is the spiritual successor to the Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 rule set. I have a pdf of the core rulebook and I love it (even though I haven't had a chance to play it).

My current group is playing Dark Heresy, but I'm hoping that when the current campaign wraps up, we can get some Pathfinder action going. Perhaps some shiny new books (*crossesfingers*) would be added incentive.

Quote of the Day

"We are more far more afraid of being racist than we are of being good human beings. And that is fucking cowardly." -Adam Serwer

The Differences in Educating Girls vs. Educating Boys

These are two fascinating studies.

He found that students who attended high school with high-achieving peers performed better at graduation, passing more of their final exams than students who went to the same school in a different year, when the crop of classmates was weaker. Intriguingly, the effect of high-achieving peers was much more positive for girls than for boys. Jackson's results suggest that boys may, in fact, pass fewer exams when surrounded by high-achievers, while girls' graduation exam pass rates are helped by having bookish classmates.

Essentially, it is very good for girls to be surrounded by smart classmates. It is good for boys, too, as long as their classmates aren't too much smarter than they are. Being surrounded by poor performers has a negative effect on both genders.

Studies like these are crucial for education and a way to guide educators in how to make their programs more effective. I read stuff like this and think about the possibility of separating boys and girls into different classrooms. Girls can be thrown together for the most part regardless of level. Boys, however, should be grouped with other boys on a close scale of ability so that no one of them is that much better than the others cutting down the gap between the "best" and the "worst."

Unfortunately the trends seems to be more toward teaching for tests in reading and math and not worrying about anything else. I'm curious to see if Race to the Top will produce anything good, but I'm skeptical that it actually will. For as much money as we spend on education and for as important as it is, you would think that there would be more willingness for bold experimentation especially as we see our country falling behind other developing nations in terms of student achievement.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

MSM Fail

Thank you, Jake Tapper, for bringing this important story to light. Did the President Go to the Wrong Ice Cream Store?"

I will sleep better tonight knowing that ABC is on top of this.

Eulogies

Here are two stories that brought a touch of warmth to my cold, cynical heart.

A married couple dies within hours of each other. "Lou, I love you. I had a wonderful life. I'll see you in another place."

Author John Scalzi writes about the passing of the family dog. "And both times I did the same thing. I petted her head, slid out of the chair and on to the floor, and held my dog while I cried, letting her be the one to share both my joy and pain, so I could go on to what I had to do next."

Shocking Grandma

I have written about stuff like this before. A cop in Oklahoma tased an 87-year-old woman who wanted to commit suicide.

And so we meet Lona Varner, an 87-year old woman from the central Oklahoma town of El Reno, bedridden and respirating with the aid of an oxygen machine. In late December, her grandson called the police in fear that Ms. Varner was in the process of suicide. But the cops discovered that she retained an acute desire to take anyone who tried to stop her into the Void with her.

Newser reports that Ms. Varner kept a knife underneath her pillow and pulled it when the police entered her home. “If you try and get the knife,” she warned, “I will stab you and kill you. I killed four Japs in World War II, and I would not bat an eye killing you.” An ugly remark at an ugly moment, to be sure.

It was followed up by compounded ugliness. One of the officers reached for a Taser and used it on Ms. Varner, burning her to the point where she would require hospitalization. According to her lawyer, the police also “treated the frail woman brutally, ripping the flesh on her arms as they grabbed her.” Police have the right not to be harmed, without question. But is there a policeman alive who can’t disarm an 87-year old bedridden woman without the use of a stun gun?

One of the reason that stories like this make me mad is that it makes people (such as me occasionally) who carry Tasers look bad. The Taser is a great tool, but like any tool it needs to be used properly. And using it on an bedridden 87-year-old woman on oxygen is not the proper use of it, not when she only has a knife. If she had a gun, it could probably be justified. But this woman didn't. If an officer gets a cut on his arm getting a person like this under control, then he can chalk it up as part of the job.

Does that suck for the officer? Well, yeah. But it is the job of law enforcement to serve and protect. That carries risk. And this officer did not protect this woman. As Ackerman writes in the article "[t]here’s something about non-lethal weapons that encourages abuse." It's because they are easy to use. Point, shoot, and your target is on the ground, muscles locked, and screaming in pain. Anyone carrying a Taser needs to learn that they can't be used anytime the officer feels like it. There has to be justification. And you can't tell me that a bedridden old lady with a knife is a serious enough threat to justify an electric shock.

Fear in the Media

Greenwald has some questions about standards in the media.

So common is this appellation that a NEXIS media search reveals that the word "disgraced" appears extremely close to the phrase "Eliot Spitzer" (within two words) a total of 394 times:

The problem is that conservatives don't get the same treatment.

By blindingly stark contrast, ever since he got caught hiring prostitutes to wrap him in diapers while campaigning on the basis of Family Values, the word "disgraced" appeared within two words of the name "David Vitter" a grand total of 4 times -- all from small blogs:

[Newt] Gingrich was so described a grand total of 5 times, none from major news outlets:

Alberto Gonzales, who was forced to resign as Attorney General in the wake of a major Department of Justice scandal, and who was revealed as one of the earliest authors of pro-torture memos, has had that term applied to him a grand total of 17 times.

Glenn wants to know "[w]hat accounts for this extreme discrepancy." I think it boils down to fear. The media is scared of being portrayed as having a liberal bias, so they go out of their way to demonize people on the Left while soft-pedaling conservative politicians. The noise machine from the Right led by Beck, Limbaugh, and Hannity make MSM media outlets cower in fear, worried that attacks from them will diminish their quickly dwindling audience. They don't realize that their extreme cowardice demonstrated in issues like this and their changing the use of the word "torture" is a bigger reason for their decline, not attacks from right-wing bloviators.

Polanski Won't Be Extradited

Switzerland announced today that they will not be extraditing Roman Polanski for his crimes committed here in the states. This is ridiculous, but not really surprising unfortunately. I struggle to understand it, though.

Why do so many stars support him? Why do so many people think that just because he is a great filmmaker (and he is) he should get a pass? Why does the horrific murder of his wife and unborn child mean he can commit a crime and get away with it? Why is the fact that he has been living in self-imposed exile from the US (to hide from the authorities) count as "punishment enough"?

I am appalled that anyone can support him. I have enjoyed his films, but seeing him get a standing ovation at the 2002 Academy Awards made me squirm. The applause was clearly not for the film, but for him as a person. He committed a crime; he should pay the price. If there were problems during the trial, that is what the appeals process is for. He pled guilty!

The other thing I would like to briefly address is the victim's wish that Polanski be forgiven and the case dropped. I can't imagine what this must be like for her and I have no doubt that she would like to put the entire matter behind her. The problem is that doing so only adds incentive for other criminals to run. Why stick around and potentially go to prison when you can run for thirty years and hope that all will be forgiven? Even if you do end up going to prison, that's a few decades of freedom to enjoy.

This whole case is a travesty of justice and we all lose when this happens.

But They Do It, Too!

Conor Friedersdorf discusses Glenn Beck and political discourse with Matt Lewis.


It's a good talk, but I really have to take issue with one thing Lewis says. At one point, after Friedersdorf says that he thinks it's a problem when people on the Right like Beck demonize the Left and make them out as being not people they disagree with, but people allied with our enemies. Lewis then says that it's not much different than what liberals were doing when Bush was around. In other words, "B-b-but they do it, too!"

You know who else makes arguments like this? Kids. My daughters do it all the time and I smack them down every time. Just because someone else has done something wrong, I say, does not mean it is okay for you to do it. I know other parents don't let their kids get away with this, either. So, why is it okay for adults to get away with this? Why can't Lewis or anyone else debating something one side or the other has done in politics instead say, "You're right. They shouldn't be doing that and I don't support that." Doesn't that sound more mature than pointing fingers at other wrong-doers?

I also wish that Friedersdorf had been stronger on the dangers of making someone you disagree with politically into the scary other. These people-one-step-removed-from-Hitler are people that we have to live with, work with, and, yes, compromise with. We don't live in a nation where one group always gets what they want. We have to be able to live together and accept that no one (no matter where you may be on the political spectrum) gets to have everything they want in terms of policy. And, if by some chance you (yes, you) get a piece of legislation that you think is perfect, just wait. Control of Congress will change and your favorite legislation will get changed, watered down, or repealed.

So, instead of making political opponents your enemies, how about we respectfully disagree, work on persuading them of the rightness of our actions (rather than the wrongness of theirs), and learn how to work together like adults.

Yeah, I know that sounds about as likely as "Imagine," but that doesn't mean it's not something we should strive for.

HT: Andrew Sullivan

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

Religious Studies Does Not Equate to Being a Minister/Priest/Pastor

A friend of my mother's asked me today if I was still majoring in Religious Studies. I said I was and she asked me if I planned to teach it when I got my degree. I said I might, but that there were other options I wanted to explore, as well. She proceeded to tell me about several members of her family who were ministers of some sort or had been to some sort of Divinity school. While she didn't come right out and say it, the implication was that she thought I might be interested in that, too.

Uhm, no.

In fact, I often tell people that my major is History because many people make the assumption that I want to lead a church when they hear Religious Studies. While I admire those who have that calling, I most certainly do not. In fact, I think I would make a rather poor preacher. I do have very strong personal beliefs, but they are just that. Personal. I don't even really share most of my beliefs with those closest to me.

My interest is in studying religion itself and how it works and what people do in its name. I find it fascinating. History is close enough to that so I don't quite feel like I'm quite lying (history of religion?) even if I do feel a bit guilty when I say that. I'm just trying to save them some confusion when I have to attempt to explain that my major is secular.

Faith vs. Science

Dreher writes about the problems with having blind faith in science.

We should be responsibly skeptical of authority -- not only religious authority, but scientific authority. We live in an age of Scientism, in which many people invest science with the power of ideology. Wendell Berry calls this "modern superstition," because people have given science the powers they used to give to religion. Berry wrote a fantastic book defending the integrity and value of art and religion as ways of knowing, against the idea that Science should be the undisputed master of all. He doesn't oppose science, but he thinks that all three ways of knowing -- art, science, religion -- must be understood as limited. The trouble comes when any one is elevated as supreme above all others, and their spheres.

I agree 100% that we should be skeptical of authority of all types. I don't think there is ever anything wrong with asking questions, with not accepting anything blindly. We have brains for a reason (to reason...hahaha...nevermind). No one who espouses any sort of thought about something should be upset with someone else asking them, "Why do you think that?"

However, I'm not sure it's accurate to say we live in an age of Scientism. More accurately we do live in such an age, but it's only different from every other period in human history in terms of what we have blind faith in. Having a skeptical, questioning nature is hard. In fact, it seems to go against human nature. We are wired to accept certain things and we don't want to think that our belief (in religion, in science, in whatever) could be wrong. That's scary. So, we blindly accept a premise, however we've come to it, and then cling to it with a fearful fury. Certainty is much more comfortable than its opposite.

In my mind, school is where we should learn to get away from this. School should be less about facts and more about thinking, reasoning, questioning. I would much rather have a kid graduate knowing the bare minimum of facts about say, the American Revolution, but with a strong ability to critically examine the entirety of it, its pros and cons, its consequences, and what it meant. The ability to think critically is a much more useful skill than rote memorization of facts.

One last thought on skepticism. Being critical of everything does not mean not believing in anything. It means being able to explain why you believe something, not just what you believe.

America's Rules

Glenn Greenwald kindly sums up the way things work here in America.

* If you torture people or eavesdrop on Americans without the warrants required by the criminal law, you receive Look-Forward Imperial Immunity.

* If you shoot and kill unarmed rescuers of the wounded while occupying their country and severely wound their unarmed children sitting in a van -- or if you authorize that conduct -- your actions are commended.

* If you help wreck the world economy with fraud and cause hundreds of millions of people untold suffering, you collect tens of millions of dollars in bonuses.

* If you disclose to the world evidence of war crimes, government lawbreaking, or serious corruption, or otherwise embarrass the U.S., you will be swiftly prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and face decades in prison.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry reading that, but either way, it's patently absurd. We are living in America, right? Right?

Touching is Important

Here is a fascinating article from Discovery on how what we touch affects our judgment.

First off, in two experiments reminiscent of another study I’ve written about, Ackerman showed that holding a light or heavy clipboard can affect a person’s decision-making. In a study of 54 volunteers, those who clutched the heavier board rated a job candidate more highly based on their resume, and thought that they displayed a more serious interest in the job. They even rated their own assessments as being more important! However, the boards didn’t affect the recruits’ judgments on areas unrelated to importance, such as the candidate’s ability to get along with others.

In a second test with 43 volunteers, those who held the heavier boards were more likely to call for government funds to be spent on serious social matters like setting air pollution standards, over more trivial affairs like public toilet regulations. Again, the mere feeling of weight appears to influence the importance we give to matters.
...
Ackerman also looked at the influence of an object’s hardness. He asked 49 volunteers to touch either a hard block of word or a soft blanket, under the pretence of examining objects to be used in a magic act. Afterwards, when they read an interaction between a boss and an employee, those who felt the wood thought the employee was stricter and more rigid than those who touched the blanket (but no less positive). It doesn’t have to be the hands that do the touching either – when he repeated the same task with 86 volunteers who sat in either a hard, wooden chair or a soft, cushioned one, he found the same results. “We primed participants by the seat of their pants,” he writes.

The chair experiment also gave Ackerman the opportunity to test the effect of hardness on decision-making. He asked his recruits to place two offers on a $16,500 car, the second following a straight refusal of the first by the dealer. While the volunteers offered the same average amount at first, those who sat on the softer seats offered far more on their second go than on their first. That’s consistent with the idea that hardness has connotations of rigidity and stability. People who feel hard sensations are less likely to shift in their decisions. Harder chairs made for harder hearts.

This is really neat stuff and I can see companies and marketers using this to influence in all sorts of ways we won't realize.

Interestingly, just a few days before I read this I was thinking about the growing prevalence of hands-free devices. I began wondering how that would impact our understanding of and feeling toward these technologies. There is something about touching an object that helps us connect with it. Think about your car, the feel of the wheel in your hands, the gas pedal as you press it down, the gentle rumble (or not depending) of it as you drive it. This makes the car come alive in a way making it more than just a metal husk taking you from A to B.

I also wonder where this will lead. If we become more and more reliant on hands-free devices, how will that affect our relationships with other people? Will we value more the physical contact we make with loved ones (hugs, handshakes, and more) or will we place less emphasis on these as we become used to interacting with things without actually touching them? I don't know, but is something to think about while I physically press the keys on my laptop to type this.

Happy Fourth of July!

Montana Republican Party Fail

The Montana GOP just released their 2010 platform. It contains this doozy of a line.

We support the clear will of the people of Montana expressed by legislation to keep homosexual acts illegal.

Aside from the fact that their is no way to "keep" homosexual acts illegal in Montana since they were decriminalized in 1997, I am baffled by conservative action against consenting adults. Aren't Republicans constantly railing against government intruding where it shouldn't? Don't they want smaller government? How does that square with outlawing homosexual acts?

Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it should be outlawed. I don't like, burqas, toe jam, or bad rom-coms. I also don't think they should be illegal. Conservatism is supposed to be about dealing with the world as it is, not how you want it to be. Gays are here, they want relationships, and it doesn't hurt anyone. Someday these people will have to accept that.

HT:From Here to Eternity

Super Mario Crossover

Some clever soul recreated the original Super Mario Brothers video game as a flash game. The kick is that you can play through as other classic 8-bit characters such as Link, Simon Belmont, and Mega Man. It's so awesome, I can't believe no one else has done it before. Check it out here. Fair warning, though: don't click through if you have other things to do because this will consume a few hours at least.

Bonobos Are Clearly In League With Satan

Vanessa Woods at Psychology Today wrote an article on bonobos and how she believes their pacifist ways are the key to "[saving] the world." One of her readers, a pastor, took issue with the piece, however, because bonobos are quite promiscuous and not just heterosexually, either, but...homosexually so.

When I read your article about bonobos, I of course, thought of [my son]. He would love them. But, I had to ask the question, "Am I comfortable with him learning about bonobos and their behaviors?" It's a good question for me to ask myself. If I'm honest, I would say my first reaction was to shield him from these animals because of their behavior. This wouldn't be uncharacteristic for us, since there are lots of animal behaviors that are difficult for a four-year old to understand (i.e. mating, violence, etc...). However, what's different about this particular behavior is that in an orthodox biblical position, homosexuality is a sin... but animals don't sin. We don't typically place animals in a moral category. In other words, they don't do righteous acts or unrighteous acts. So...what am I to make of these animals that engage in homosexual activity?

It seems to me that this behavior reveals a sense of brokenness in the natural world. Paul spoke of the unnaturalness of homosexuality, "men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men..."(Rom. 1:27). So, what he says is unnatural, now looks to be natural! But, just as natural disasters aren't normative, neither is homosexual activity within animals. The creation itself is marred with the effects of sin (i.e. death).

You can read the entirety over there, but this is the meat of it. It's nice that this guy didn't condemn the bonobos to the depths of hell, but his email still leads to some troubling conclusions. He says that the bonobos can't really sin because they are animals, but that their homosexual acts are indicative of a broken world. But, why would God allow an animal to be acting in a "wrong" manner because of what a couple of humans did? Yes, I know one can easily ask why we are paying the price for the mistakes of Adam and Eve, but I feel one can make a more likely logical argument for that than for the punishment of animals. And while bonobos are quite close to us genetically and very smart, they don't have the intelligence and reasoning capability of a human.

All of which is to say that I have a hard time ascribing the actions of an animal to human sin.

Everyone Should Have a Pet Like This

Well, everyone cool anyway.

AT-AT day afternoon from Patrick Boivin on Vimeo.

From the Ashes

I'm back.

I apologize for not giving any notice of my prolonged absence. Honestly, I didn't expect it to last this long. Regular readers of the blog know that I have been in a custody battle with my ex-wife. I had reason to believe that she may have been online looking for info to use against me. In order to protect myself, I locked down my blog, my Facebook account, my Twitter page, and so on. I just could not take the chance that she (or her lawyer) would find something I had written and use it against me in someway. As much as I love writing, getting my girls was more important.

Last week, though, over two years after I began this journey, my ex-wife finally signed the parenting plan and I have full custody of my daughters. I can hardly describe the exhilaration, the relief, the unbridled joy I feel now that this is over. My work with them and for them is, of course, not done. But for all of the moments I wonder "what the hell have I gotten myself into?" I have two more where I find I love being a parent and wouldn't trade it for anything.

Okay, enough of the sap, eh? What this means for you, lucky reader, is that the Captain is back to blogging. I'm sure my absence only made your heart grow fonder of my and my presence will now only strengthen it as some famous English dude said (or something). Stay tuned for deep thoughts, not so deep thoughts, sarcasm (always), and the usual blatherings from the deepest, most cobweb-riddled recesses of my mind. Perhaps I'll make you think or perhaps I'll get your blood boiling or perhaps I'll just make you say, "Uh, WTF?" Whatever it is, I hope it's interesting and you'll leave the occasional comment.

Freddie Mercury

A moment of silence for one of the greatest vocalists of all time, the one and only Freddie Mercury. He passed away eighteen years ago today.



I'll link to a vid later when I'm at home and not behind a firewall that blocks YouTube.

UPDATE: Here we go.







I get chills listening to him.

Obama on Facebook

Slate has been doing a great series where they have a faux-Facebook page for the President. It's all done for humor, of course, and the star of the show is Joe Biden. The current update has Biden volunteering to do mammograms for women that need them.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

Not knowing what happened thirteen years ago makes it hard to make any sort of judgment here, but I do know that there is a lot of pain here and there probably is on the other side as well. Now is as good a time as any to begin work to patch up any family rifts for anyone out there. Don't let more time go by.

A Charter School to Watch

This is interesting. I'm going to have to get more info on their curriculum and methods.

Lieberman is Worthless

Even when confronted with lies, Lieberman still peddles them.

"This is a kindof [sic] 11th hour addition to a debate that's gone on for decades," Lieberman told reporters tonight. "Nobody's ever talked about a public option before. Not even in the presidential campaign last year."

I asked in response, "How do you reconcile your contention that the public option wasn't part of the presidential campaign given that all three of the [leading Democratic] candidates had something along the lines of the public option in their white papers?'

"Not really, not from what I've seen. There was a little--there was a line about the possibility of it in an Obama health care policy paper," Lieberman said.

...

I said, "And at the time Senator Clinton, and John Edwards also had..."

"Edwards probably had it more than anybody else," Lieberman said. "But Clinton, Obama, McCain--I don't see it. Anyway, I'm opposed to it."

Thanks, Connecticut. You did good.

Not Worrying About the Next Election

This is a story I would like to read about more often. Michael Bennett (D-CO) has said that he will vote for health care reform even if it costs him his seat. Perhaps it's naively idealistic, but I wish more politicians thought like this. I think that they should stand up and do the right thing even if it means they lose a re-election bid. There is something craven about not supporting a position or cause because you are worried about losing your job especially when your job is in public service. Unfortunately for us, the vast majority of politicians are in politics to serve their own ends and are only concerned with doing what's best for themselves. Even if a member of Congress took a position that I disagreed with, I could respect them if they said they were more concerned with doing what they felt was right than getting votes.

I guess I like people with principles.

Politics in State Creation

This is a fascinating anecdote about the creation of North and South Dakota.

Weekly Music Video

The 80s were great.

Alphaville - "Dance With Me"

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

Never Forget

"All Things Will Die" - Lord Alfred Tennyson

Clearly the blue river chimes in its flowing

Under my eye;
Warmly and broadly the south winds are blowing

Over the sky.
One after another the white clouds are fleeting;
Every heart this May morning in joyance is beating

Full merrily;
Yet all things must die.
The stream will cease to flow;
The wind will cease to blow;
The clouds will cease to fleet;
The heart will cease to beat;
For all things must die.
All things must die.
Spring will come never more.
O, vanity!
Death waits at the door.
See! our friends are all forsaking
The wine and the merrymaking.
We are call'd—we must go.
Laid low, very low,
In the dark we must lie.
The merry glees are still;
The voice of the bird
Shall no more be heard,
Nor the wind on the hill.
O, misery!
Hark! death is calling
While I speak to ye,
The jaw is falling,
The red cheek paling,
The strong limbs failing;
Ice with the warm blood mixing;
The eyeballs fixing.
Nine times goes the passing bell:
Ye merry souls, farewell.
The old earth
Had a birth,
As all men know,
Long ago.
And the old earth must die.
So let the warm winds range,
And the blue wave beat the shore;
For even and morn
Ye will never see
Thro' eternity.
All things were born.
Ye will come never more,
For all things must die.

Patrick Roy Kramer - May 6, 1977 - October 22, 2006

Game of Thrones Pilot to Start Filming

Excellent news for geeks everywhere as the pilot for George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series is about to start filming. This does not guarantee it will air, but as Poniewozik notes is a very good sign.

Oh, and here is an update from Martin on the status of the long-delayed fifth book in the series.

Finished a Jon Snow chapter, and have just passed the 1100 page (manuscript pages, the page count in the final printed book will be different) mark on A DANCE WITH DRAGONS. That's counting only finished chapters in something close to final form. I have considerably more in partials, fragments, and roughs.

Even with just the finished portions, DANCE is now longer than A FEAST FOR CROWS and A GAME OF THRONES, and I'm closing in on A CLASH OF KINGS. I do hope I can wrap things up before I approach the 1521 page length of A STORM OF SWORDS.

Making a new run at the Meereenese knot, but maybe not tomorrow. I think I'll hang around at the Wall a bit longer, and maybe visit Winterfell.

Putting on the Pressure to Close Gitmo

Want to see the detention center at Guantanamo closed? Sign the petition.

The Dishonesty of Glenn Beck

I don't get Glenn Beck. Or more accurately, I don't get the people who watch Glenn Beck. On the occasions that I've watches his show, I've been left dumbstruck by his circus antics - making a dramatic point with a misspelled word, crying, or rudely yelling at a caller. I just can't figure out how he can be taken seriously. Obviously he's making a ton of money doing it, so why shouldn't he keep doing it? The fact that so many people buy into his shtick, though, just boggles my mind.

What is perhaps most egregious, however, is his reckless dishonesty. Check out Media Matters pwning Beck for his lying about Anita Dunn's remarks. The video that he keeps showing has been edited to take her remarks out of context! Not to mention that many conservatives have quoted Mao. It's sickening that he does this and people don't care. They live in their little bubble where Beck is an outcast prophet speaking truth to power. Beck is a dangerous demagogue and shouldn't be given the time of day let alone a regular TV spot to spout his garbage.

UPDATE: And here's another example of Beck's intellectual dishonesty.

Tough Times for the Vatican

They're having to hire temps to fill vacant Priest positions. I bet I could do that gig. Maybe I'll look into it.

Your Money at Work

Check out this incredible visual breakdown of the federal budget. It certainly helps to put things in perspective.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

Weekly Music Video

A couple of weeks ago, I was listening to my Arcade Fire channel on Pandora when this song came on. After about 30 seconds, I was hooked. I had never heard of the group before, but I tracked them down on iTunes and downloaded Sam's Town, the album this song was on. The whole album is good, but this song is just brilliant. I've been listening to it over and over. It's hard not to feel good when listening to the earnest vocals, the soaring sound, and the beautiful lyrics. A new favorite of mine.

The Killers - "Read My Mind"

Speaking of "I don't know"

Listen to this very fascinating speech given by Tom Honey, a Canon Pastor at Exeter Cathedral, that grapples with our notion of a loving, all powerful God and the fact that great tragedies occur.



H/T: Sullivan

"I don't know."

That's the answer the lawyer defending the California gay-marriage ban gave when a judge pressed him on how gay marriage threatened heterosexual marriage. This is going to be the biggest problem for proponents of banning gay marriage. There is no logical basis for it. Outlawing it rests on religious beliefs or the "ick" factor. There is no concrete proof that it harms children, raises divorce rates, or in any way has an adverse affect on society.

Gay marriage will be legalized. It's only a matter of when.

Only Mostly Dead

A scientist is working on a method of "slowing time" for people which could be used in caring for critical patients.

You see, Roth thinks he's figured out the puzzle. "While it's true we need oxygen to live, it's also a toxin," he explains. Scientists are starting to understand that death isn't caused by oxygen deprivation itself, but by a chain of damaging chemical reactions that are triggered by sharply dropping oxygen levels.

The thing is, those reactions require the presence of some oxygen. Hydrogen sulfide takes the place of oxygen, preventing those reactions from taking place. No chain reaction, no cell death. The patient lives.

...

After that, and after his conceptual breakthrough, Roth was ready to experiment. First up: developing fish embryos. He found a way to drain the oxygen from their cells, and they wouldn't die -- they'd just stop growing. When he put the oxygen back, they'd pick up where they left off. If he suspended them for a day, they took a day longer to develop. No more, no less. Nothing else was different.

Next up were fruit flies. This time, he gassed them. They seemed to die; they stopped moving. Then he returned them to fresh air, and the flies came back to life. New CPR beat back death for a young mom

The air we breathe is 21 percent oxygen. At 5 percent, those fish and flies -- like us -- would be dead in a few minutes. At 0.1 percent, it was another story. "You get a state of suspended animation and the creatures do not pass away, and that's the basis of what we see as an alternative way to think about critical care medicine," Roth says. "What you want to do is to have the patient's time slowed down, while everyone around them [like doctors] move at what we would call real time."

If the patient's time -- the process of your death -- were slowed down, doctors would have more time to fix you. In medicine, time is key. An analogy is the history of open heart surgery. For years, surgeons had the technical tools to make simple repairs on the heart, but they couldn't help patients until the development of the heart-lung machine made it possible to preserve the body for more than a few minutes without a heartbeat.

This is an incredible time to be alive.

Obama's Nobel Prize

I've thought a lot about what I think about Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize and I wasn't sure exactly what to think. I do think, though, that Ezra Klein probably best sums up how I feel.

I had a good time making fun of Barack Obama's Nobel prize this morning. It is undeserved. It is a bit ridiculous. But it's a laugh in the way that finding a $900 antique chair in the attic is a laugh, or getting paid $120,000 to be a celebrity dog walker is a laugh. It's an absurdity worth celebrating. It's an absurdity that can help you.

During the campaign, one of the arguments for Obama's candidacy was that his election would give us a costless shot of international goodwill. That the symbolism of his election would aid America's international standing without forcing any substantive policy concessions. At the time, that was a very big deal: Leaders were winning elections in other countries in no small part by tying incumbents to George W. Bush. That made it a lot harder for our allies to loudly support our initiatives. Fixing that was not going to be easy. Candidates and countries pay a lot of money to better their public image. Obama, some said, could do some of it on the cheap.
...
This prize, which came as Obama contemplates a troop build-up in Afghanistan and hectors the international community on financial regulation and global warming, suggests that there is some reservoir of relief and amazement for America's young president. The international gushing may seem absurd to us, as the schoolyard lionization of an older brother often seems funny to a sibling, but it can be used to our advantage. Leaders in allied countries no longer run against America, and now the Nobel Committee is attempting to welcome America back as the leader of the free world. And it didn't cost us anything. Would that life told more jokes like that one.

Last Words

I don't believe in the death penalty. Even if we were able to be 100% certain that the person was guilty, I would still find it barbaric. Killing someone is not justice; it's vengeance. Maybe that's why I found a recent NYT article rather poignant. It has a list of the last words spoken by some of the people executed in the state of Texas. Here are some.

Death row is full of isolated hearts and suppressed minds.

Mistakes are made, but with God all things are possible.

I am responsible for them losing their mother, their father and their grandmother. I never meant for them to be taken. I am sorry for what I did.

I can’t take it back.

Lord Jesus forgive of my sins. Please forgive me for the sins that I can remember.

All my life I have been locked up.

Give me my rights. Give me my rights. Give me my rights. Give me my life back.

I am tired.

I deserve this.

A life for a life.

It’s my hour. It’s my hour.

I’m ready, Warden.

Now, to be clear, I am not feeling sorry for these people (unless they were innocent). But I do pity them and I do think that this is wrong, no matter how heinous of a crime they may have committed. How can killing someone in cold blood ever be considered an acceptable course of action? Don't we teach our children that two wrongs don't make a right? That we should not sink to the level of those who perpetrate wrongs against us?

Saturn's New Ring

New to us anyway. Scientists have discovered a new ring around Saturn. This one is quite different from the others.

"Iran is a military nothing"

Juan Cole, a Middle East expert, reminds everyone of some basic facts, not that those are welcome in the debate.

Remember, God is a Conservative

What a great idea.

Since the landmark 2008 general election, there can be no doubt that a very large percentage of our Nation's leaders have a liberal mindset. The undeniable fact is that the 111th Pelosi-Reid Congress and the Obama Administration demonstrate a far left political philosophy. And since the President nominates federal judges and Justices of the United States Supreme Court, the judicial branch of government could take on a decidedly more liberal bent as the Obama Administration wears on.

Liberty Counsel has therefore named this special new prayer-in-action program Adopt a Liberal. And that's exactly what we invite you to do -- adopt a liberal who is in authority for regular, intense prayer in accord with St. Paul's admonition to his disciple, Timothy. In fact, we expect that many of our friends and supporters will choose to adopt many liberals as subjects of regular prayer!

I would think that there would be better uses of prayer, but I guess that's just me.

H/T: Sullivan

The Politics of the Olympics

Regardless of how one feels about Obama's campaigning for Chicago to host the Olympics, the crowing from some on the Right about Chicago losing is just bizarre. As Roland Martin said:

Whenever President Obama has traveled overseas and offered pointed and direct assessments of the United States, some of them critical, Republicans have ripped him for criticizing America, saying a president should always defend the United States.

So I want to hear the explanation by these so-called patriots of their giddy behavior over the United States losing the 2016 Olympic Games.

This is an example of what I was talking about in a previous post about how the Republican Party is treating politics as a zero-sum game. It doesn't matter what Obama and the Democrats propose, the GOP proclaims that it is against it. The Republicans have adopted this strategy rather wholeheartedly, but it is hard to see how this can pay off in the long run. Can anyone (Republicans included) even say what the GOP stands for right now? If the Republicans expect to govern effectively in the future, they need to stop the slash-and-burn tactics and take a stand on something. I guess I'm not optimistic about that happening, however. It's much easier to paint the other party as EEEVIL! than to actually make a case on the merits. Unfortunately both parties are well-versed in this, but right now at least the Democrats are standing up for something whether or not you agree with any of it.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

War

Check out this very cool and very heart-wrenching "sand animation" by a Ukrainian woman on the cost of war.

The Current Republican Party

Courtesy of the Boston Globe

Identity Crisis

Back in June, my friend, Jeromy, sent me an email inquiry.

On to my question: In part these diseases (M.S., Diabetes, and Chronic Trekkyism) become part of your identity. Their consuming nature dictates as much. Do you find it difficult not to have these diseases become your identity? Do you have to intentionally combat the trend of these diseases identifying who you are?

I know with my asthma there is a tendency among some people to identify me according to my disease. Asthma places me in convenient "can and can't do" compartments as well. Because it is also a constant (though perhaps not like diabetes or MS) it easily enters into my psyche, my conversation, and of course plays a part in my decision making processes. I could see that if it was more of an issue it could be consuming.

I told him that it sounded like a blog post, so here I am finally getting around to answering his question.

The question of identity is not an easy one. We humans are an incredible mass of pieces, emotions, experiences, thoughts, and dreams. Can any one part of us overwhelm the rest to become the core of our identity? I don't think so. We are an amalgamation of many seemingly disparate elements that are forged together to make up who we are. To whit, I am:

Shane the male.
Shane the father.
Shane the person born in Billings, Montana.
Shane the geek who was picked on in school.
Shane the white guy.
Shane the procrastinator.
Shane the lover of books.
Shane the diabetic.
Shane the admirer of Star Trek.
Shane the boy whose parents divorced when he was 12.
Shane the person who dreams of saving the world like his heroes.
Shane the guy who can't dance, but would like to.
Shane the person with multiple sclerosis.
Shane the sarcastic.
Shane the guy who likes memorizing digits of pi.
Shane the dude who has never tried alcohol.

And this is only a small fraction of who I am. I don't think my two diseases become my identity any more than any one of these things listed becomes my identity. Most of the time. I have had to make lifestyle adjustments since contracting them, but these are actions I take, not who I am. I admit that when I am feeling depressed, I can feel like these diseases are overwhelming me, that they are who I am. But those moments are not common. Most of the time these diseases are just another brick in the wall of me. I am more than the sum of my parts.

Now, as to other people's perception, I'm not really sure. I doubt there is anyone who has put me in a box labeled 'diabetic' or one labeled 'M.S.' but that is probably just because neither show much outwardly. The MS will eventually, of course, but the diabetes has few outward indicators other than me pricking my finger to check my blood sugar or playing with my insulin pump. Still, I'm sure that there are some people who have put me into some little box based on some aspect of me they have seen. It's only natural. That's how our brains function. We have to fight against it all the time, struggle to see someone for the multi-faceted person they are rather than the surface bits we see. If anyone sees me as just one part of who I am, it is there loss, not mine.

As Whitman said

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)

168,178,719

That's the number of books in the world according to the Google Books team. I want to know how many of them are good, though.

Speaking of lots of books, check out this peek at Neil Gaiman's library. Very impressive.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

Me, too.

Kitty Survivor

Oh, who doesn't love a good cat story.

"Smoka" was last seen on Aug. 9, the night that Fitzgerald's Flowers and the apartments above it burned, which included the cat's home.

For 26 days, there was no sign of Smoka in any of her old familiar haunts.

"Whenever my neighbor kicked the door in to get me out, she hid under the bed and that was the last I've seen of her," said Sandy LaPierre, Smoka's owner.

Then, as a crew from Starks Wrecking was tearing down and clearing away the collapsed shell of the building, one of the workers suddenly saw what looked like a head poke up from under a pile of rubble.

Geek-Nerd-Dork: A Helpful Guide

Here is a helpful Venn diagram for determining whether or not a person is a geek, a nerd, or a dork. The X where I would peg myself.

Politics is Not or Rather Should Not Be a Zero-Sum Game

The problem with the current state of politics is that politicians treat it as a zero-sum game. We are at a point where if one party says they support daytime, the other denounces daytime as the first step to socialism/fascism/armageddon/whatever. Honest debate is no longer accepted. Now I don't think that politicians of yesteryear were pinnacles of upstanding morals always looking out for the best interests of the country. However, I do think that there was less of an inclination to automatically oppose the views of the other party no matter what they were. There were more instances of pols working together or at least not saying, "Your idea is bad because you are in the opposing party" in a knee-jerk fashion.

How else can one explain much of the furor over Obama's speech to school children? We have people like Jim Greer, GOP chairman in Florida, throwing a fit over it, accusing the President of playing politics with kids. Guess what Greer has done in the past, though? Well, he's gone to schools to talk to kids and made jokes about Hillary Clinton. He also tell people that he has a simple explanation for kids on the differences between the two major parties.

"Republicans get up and go to work," he would tell his son. "Democrats get up and go down to the mailbox to get their checks."

That he has done this and can now turn around and claim the President of trying to "indoctrinate America's children to his socialist agenda" is a clear example of "if I do it then it's good, but if they do it it's evil."

Politics should not be like this. It only hurts our nation.

Liberal Capitulation

What he said.

No good comes from appeasing a lunatic bully like Glenn Beck.

Things That Don't Make Sense (In Science)

Okay, science junkies, check out this cool list of thirteen things that don't make sense. The idea of the universe as a "holographic projection" is the most fascinating to me. More about that here.

Would a Loving God Make a Creature Like This?

Tom Smith wonders about parasitic wasps and God.

Just found one of these guys in the pool.  I've blogged about them before;  everybody needs their little obsessions.  These creatures sting spiders, paralyze them, carry off the still living bodies, lay an egg on them, which hatches into a larvae, which then eats the paralyzed spider alive, avoiding key body systems so as to make sure it stays alive until the last possible moment.  You really have to hope spiders have no awareness, or else that they are reincarnated Nazis or something.  As I have said before, Darwin apparently found the existence of God and parasitoid wasps incompatible.  An alternative that worries me sometimes is that God did create parasitoid wasps and thinks they're really cool.

It is an interesting question. When a human does something bad, we can chalk it up to free will. These insects, though, have to do this. It is their essential nature. If one believes in God, what does it mean that God created a creature whose existence is based on torturing other creatures? As fascinating a thought experiment as it is, however, I don't see how any conclusion other than "ineffable mystery" can be reached. It's just one of those things that is beyond human ken.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

I wonder how many people are in similar situations.

Napping on the Job

Without a doubt the worst and the most frustrating side effect of my multiple sclerosis has been fatigue. I take Provigil to help with this because without it I would be a zombie. Most of the time it does it's job, however there are days (or weeks) when the MS comes out on top.

This past week has been rough. In fact, on Thursday I was so tired shortly after lunch that I had to punch out, close my office door, turn out the light, and take a 30-minute nap. Now, it's nice that I have a job where I can get away with this, but I would much rather not have days where I have to take a nap or be unable to function. Even with the Provigil and on a better day, I often still feel at least a little tired. Trying to work up the motivation to get anything done is hard when you always feel exhausted.

Mice Have a Cure for MS

Could one for humans be far behind?

A new experimental treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) completely reverses the devastating autoimmune disorder in mice, and might work exactly the same way in humans, say researchers at the Jewish General Hospital Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research and McGill University in Montreal.

MS is an autoimmune disease in which the body's own immune response attacks the central nervous system, almost as if the body had become allergic to itself, leading to progressive physical and cognitive disability.

The new treatment, appropriately named GIFT15, puts MS into remission by suppressing the immune response. This means it might also be effective against other autoimmune disorders like Crohn's disease, lupus and arthritis, the researchers said, and could theoretically also control immune responses in organ transplant patients. Moreover, unlike earlier immune-supppressing therapies which rely on chemical pharamaceuticals, this approach is a personalized form of cellular therapy which utilizes the body's own cells to suppress immunity in a much more targeted way.

Max Baucus Is...Captain Ineffective

Max Baucus is taking a lot of flak (and rightly so) for his bizarre tactic of working primarily with Republicans on health care reform and shutting out his fellow Dems. Check out this cartoon dubbing Baucus 'Captain Ineffective.'

Of course, this post would not be complete without a link to Baucus's essay on his own shitty record.

How Do People Spend Their Day?

Check out this very cool chart at the NYT that breaks down how various groups of people spend their day.

Ah, the News Media

Watch and be amazed at how stunningly stupid our news programs can make us.

This is an example of why I rarely get my news from the TV anymore. It's easier to find more reliable voices on the internet. Really.

Taser Overuse

Digby subbing for Greenwald writes about the abuse of Tasers by law enforcement officers.

But that isn't the real problem, although it may eventually be the path by which tasers are banned for use in civilized countries. As awful as the possibility of death is, tasers would be a blight on any free people even if they weren't so often deadly. Tasers were sold to the public as a tool for law enforcement to be used in lieu of deadly force. Presumably, this means situations in which officers would have previously had to use their firearms. It's hard to argue with that, and I can't think of a single civil libertarian who would say that this would be a truly civilized advance in policing. Nobody wants to see more death and if police have a weapon they can employ instead of a gun, in self defense or to stop someone from hurting others, I think we all can agree that's a good thing.

But that's not what's happening. Tasers are routinely used by police to torture innocent people who have not broken any law and whose only crime is being disrespectful toward their authority or failing to understand their "orders." There is ample evidence that police often take no more than 30 seconds to talk to citizens before employing the taser, they use them while people are already handcuffed and thus present no danger, and are used often against the mentally ill and handicapped. It is becoming a barbaric tool of authoritarian, social control.

The issue of Tasers is one that I think about a lot since I am certified to carry one at work. Part of this involved taking a hit from the Taser, a full five-second ride. As I wrote then:

Yes it is the most painful thing I have ever done. I will certainly be very cognizant of what will happen if I make the decision to draw and employ it.

It was stressed to us in our training and frequently since that the Taser is not to be used as a behavior modification tool. It is used to prevent serious injury to the officer or anyone else on the scene. And for this, it is a fantastic tool. The electricity locks up the muscle's in a person's body. The cycle (with the darts) lasts five seconds which in a heated situation is an eternity and gives the officer time to get control of the subject whether that is pinning them to the ground, handcuffing them, or whatever is needed to deescalate the situation. I have yet to even draw it, but I like knowing that it's there if the situation calls for it.

Unfortunately, there are a number of officers out there who use them when a person gets a little mouthy or doesn't comply right away or just simply makes the officer mad. This is, of course, completely unacceptable; but the fact is that our society has really failed to crack down on this and put a stop to it. We tut-tut when we see videos of abuses, but no one does anything. I think that many of us deep down feel the person deserved it, that they should have just shut up and done what the officer told them. Sometimes this is the case, however it also a fact that many people are Tased who should not be. It's easy for an officer who deals with a lot of scumbags to let their temper get the best of them, to give someone a 50,000 volt shot, because they want a release and since the Taser is billed as less-than-lethal, why not? I'm not saying it's right, far from it. However law enforcement officials and security officers who carry Tasers are human beings with all of the foibles that comes with.

Anyone with the authority carried by a law enforcement official should be held to a higher standard, though, and Taser abuse should be dealt with swiftly and harshly. We as a society do need to come together and ask ourselves, "What should cops be allowed to do?" It's easy to see something happen to someone else and not worry about it, but if we become complacent it could be us or a loved one riding the lightning for no good reason.

Weekly Secret

Isn't it funny how religion and politics can so easily get in the way of friendships? I think it's the way that these things are so personal to us. Someone with a differing view isn't just rejecting our view, they are rejecting us personally. Or at least that's how it often feels. Somehow we need to learn to respect each other's beliefs and to not take a difference of opinion as a rejection of ourselves. This is, of course, easier written than done, but still a goal worthy of striving for.

Too Much Security?

Despite working in security and constantly pushing for increased security measures at the hospital I work at, I can understand where David Ignatius is coming from.

The hyper-security has added as much to public fear (and annoyance) as to public safety. The Transportation Security Administration is so pervasive at airports that we forget how bizarre it is to see old ladies and pregnant mothers and 8-year-old kids frisked and searched as if they had just arrived from Waziristan. Does this really make sense?

21 to Drink

Seems that one of the main drivers of the law to make 21 the legal drinking age is now saying that it has not worked.

Since that time, however, Chafet has apparently had a change of heart. The Los Angeles Times reports that in an editorial that has yet to be published, Chafet describes his effort to raise the drinking age as the "single most regrettable decision" of his career. "To be sure, drunk driving fatalities are lower now than they were in 1982," Chafet notes. "But they are lower in all age groups. And they have declined just as much in Canada, where the age is 18 or 19, as they have in the United States."

This is one of those laws that I have never understood. How could anyone think that having a law like this was going to stop young adults from drinking? It just drives them underground so they are doing it out of sight. Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems to me that laws should reflect reality (to an extent) and be enforceable. If not, then I think we need to examine whether it should be a law or not.

Of course, none of this even gets into the dubious notion of restricting an adult's rights before they have even done anything wrong.

xkcd

If you haven't checked out this webcomic about "romance, sarcasm, math, and language," you are missing out.

I'm St. Vincent Healthcare

The hospital I work at just announced the expansion of our Walk-In Clinic and Emergency Department. This is very exciting news for the hospital, of course, and something we very much needed. Anyway, there was a press conference with the usual pomp and circumstance. The media was there and if you look carefully at the next couple of videos, you'll see some creepy looking dork in a green shirt. I hope that guy doesn't work at St. V's because I sure wouldn't want to get healthcare at a place that would employ a guy like that.





I hate to disappoint anyone, but I'm not doing autographs. Sorry.

The Crushed Ego Gets the Last Laugh

I was orienting a student to the hospital on Monday. She is going to shadow a dietitian for a week to see if this is "What She Wants to Do With Her Life." I have to cover basic safety stuff such as what to do in case of fire, disaster, and so on. There is a quiz. One of the questions is "Who do you report to if you get injured?" She was not sure on this one, so I told her that it was me. This puzzled her until I explained that this was after she was patched up because we would have to do some paperwork for an event like that. We got that cleared up and went over a few more things. Then she smacked me down.

As she's leaving my office, she says with a smile, "Hopefully I don't get hurt so I don't have to come see you again."

What?

Where in the hell did that come from? I hadn't been rude. I hadn't come on to her. I had been nothing but friendly and polite. And this is what I get? After a brief, stunned moment I said, "I don't know how to take that."

She smiled again and said, "In the best possible way."

I guess there's a "best" way to take "I don't want to see your ugly mug ever again, freak!" I mumbled something like "have a good day" and she went on her way.

She should have knocked on wood when she said that, though. A couple of hours later, I got a phone call. She - the girl who prayed for no harm to come to her so we would never cross paths again - had...wait for it...passed out in the ICU, fallen on her face, and bloodied her nose. No kidding. How bad am I that this made me laugh uproariously? So, notepad and pen in hand, I fairly danced my way to where she was because I had to get the info on the matter to file a report. Oh, yes, I reveled in her embarrassment when she saw me. "So, you had a little accident, hm? Why don't you tell me about it."

Ha! I said. Karma's a bitch, isn't it? That'll teach ya. Anything else you want to say now? No? Are you sure? Yeah, that's what I thought? Maybe you'll think twice next time before you say something stupid, hm?

Of course none of that was said aloud. And it's a slight exaggeration of what was going through my head. It was damn funny, though. The ending. Not the beginning.

I hope you learned your lesson reading this.

Obama Sees the Light

I completely understand the President's change of heart, though I came to realize this many years ago.


Obama Drastically Scales Back Goals For America After Visiting Denny's

A New Fan of A Song of Ice and Fire

James Poniewozik over at Time has become a big fan of George R.R. Martin's epic fantasy series, A Song of Ice and Fire. He picked it up after hearing that HBO has a series pilot in the works. If you have not read this series, you owe it to yourself to check it out. It's heroic fantasy, but it's oh, so gritty. I wouldn't recommend getting too attached to any character as they are all fair game for the Reaper. Still, I highly recommend this series to anyone who likes rousing good characters and a gripping story. Now, if only book five would come out...

Birthers and One More Reason I Could Never Be a Politician

This video has been making the rounds lately.



Watching this amazes me on a certain level. I mean, I'm a pessimistic guy but I try (really!) to give people the benefit of the doubt. Then I see something like this and I think, "Yeah, humanity has barely more gray matter than an amoeba." What seals it is not the lady with her crazy rant. One or two loons in a crowd is to be expected. It's the mob applauding and cheering what she's saying.

This is just one reason I could never be a politician. I could not calmly stand there and be respectful toward this woman. No, I would be saying something like, "Look, lady, the fact of the matter is that you're crazy. And retarded. There's just no dancing around the issue. I hope you are not voting for me because I would consider myself a failure were I to secure votes from people as stupid as you."

Clearly, Mr. Castle is uncomfortable here. I feel for him. Up to a point. Republicans have not done near enough to quash this ridiculous rumor and so now have to sleep in the bed they've made. Of course, the media has been just as complicit. Witness Lou Dobbs raising the specter of "Obama Might Not Be an American" when the story was debunked on his own show three days previous.

Our Resplendent World

Check out this series of stunningly beautiful landscapes. This one is my favorite.

Weekly Secret

PostSecret

Tyler has words of wisdom for us all.

We'll Save You But Its Gonna Cost You

Is it just me or does this seem a little strange?

A Massachusetts teenager who spent three nights alone on Mount Washington in April after he sprained an ankle and veered off marked trails has been fined more than $25,000 for the cost of his rescue.
...
Acerno said he believes Mason's fine is the largest ever sought under a 9-year-old New Hampshire law that allows lost hikers and climbers to be charged for rescue costs. Mason's rescue was particularly expensive because the helicopters the state typically used were unavailable, and a helicopter from Maine had to be brought in, Acerno said.

Now, granted the kid screwed up, but how can he be charged for something he didn't ask for? I'm willing to bet he didn't call up the state and say, "Hey, you know I'm lost. Any chance you give me a lift? Just hone in on my cell signal. Oh, by the way, the terrain's a bit rough. I recommend sending out a chopper." If you take your car to a mechanic and say, "Change the oil," and you come back to find out he also replaced your carburetor and now wants to charge you for it. You didn't ask for it!

One could argue that the kid should have turned down the rescue if he didn't want to pay for it. Can't you see the headline on that? "Lost Teen Turns Down Rescue Because of Cost" But that is just ludicrous.

Of course this stuff is expensive, but there has to be a better way to pay for it than to "fine" the person who was rescued. Private donations? Taxes on people using parks? I don't know what the solution is, but I know this one is not right. In more ways than one.