What if I don't like the arguments for Palin or Biden?
Seriously... do some digging around on Biden. He's really not anything at all like the image that Obama would prefer to be projecting. That's largely why they've kept him shut up.
And Palin? Please.
How does the governing party run on a change platform? Palin is different because she was up in the middle of the frozen tundra while Bush was ruining things? Ok... I'll grant that. And really, to look at Palin's reactions to Ted Stevens and the earmarks sent her way, I'll even entertain the argument that she's an alternative to the 2000-2006 Republican Trifecta. But let's get back to the bigger problem: she's only the Candidate for Vice President.
Honestly, if she were running for President, I'd probably be able to reconcile her candidacy with the message she's running with. She's an outsider, she's already stood up to the party big-shots and the biggest argument against her is the same argument against Obama: no experience. But she's running with McCain, who used to be the party outsider. Yeah... before he sold out sometime back in 2003 in a bid to help Bush get re-elected and, presumably, in order to get the party to approve him in 2008.
So right now, I've got two unfortunate options:
1) Obama/Biden
2) McCain/Palin
It's enough to make me want to vote Libertarian. Again.
"The number of poisoned web sites is increasing. 1 in 1000 web pages are infected with malicious drive-by downloads (source IDG News)." - the AVG install scaretext.
A drive-by download?! Yeah... because comparing software viruses to the most callous and indiscriminant of murderous gangland attacks is REALLY appropriate.
It's just stupid... and yet, that's how anti-virus is marketed. Still, I'd like to find the moron who started that naming convention and throttle him.
Really? Are you kidding me?
Look... I'm not saying that I've even come close to making my mind up about November... which is good, given that the field isn't set yet... but I'm with Jon Stewart on this one: I want an elitist president.
Honestly, I think that the talking heads and the 24-hour news networks are so desperate for something, anything to keep this campaign going that they're really the ones attempting to turn this thing into an issue. And Hillary? Of COURSE she's playing this... this is her lifeline and even if it turns out to be an anaconda, it's better to try holding on to this than end up drowning without anything to hold her afloat.
As for McCain... well, I'll address his issues later, because as a life-long Republican, I'd like to address that at a good bit more length. But suffice it to say that I really think that everyone has something better to be paying attention to... like, I don't know, the real issues in play. If we're arguing over which candidate is the most elitist, I think we're missing something.
You would think that a Chinese Buffet staffed by those of obvious Chinese descent (who spoke something that I was pretty sure was some sort of Chinese) would represent a marked improvement over the sort in East Texas, located out in the middle of nowhere and staffed by individuals of a Hispanic descent. You would think that... but in this case, you'd be WRONG.
The Metro Buffet on Blairs Ferry Rd in Hiawatha (Cedar Rapids) has to be one of the worst buffets, if not the worst that I've ever been to. Some would criticize and say that my tastes are not acclimated to "authentic Chinese cuisine." And that might be true to a certain extent... but the staff of the Metro Buffet wouldn't know authentic Chinese if it lit the restaurant on fire on account of being far too busy yelling at each other in shrill voices across the restaurant.
In fact, let's take a minute to discuss the food. The crab rangoon was the worst I've ever had... it tasted strongly of salt and old fish and I could barely gag one down. The sesame chicken was actually "white sesame chicken" and it was basically fried chicken soaked in an orange sauce that tasted suspiciously like sweet and sour. The peppers in the pepper steak and the General Tsao's Chicken were wilted and off-color and the broccoli was brown... really, the only vegetable that wasn't screwed up was the onion, and that was nearly raw. All in all, the only thing that tasted like it was supposed to that I was willing to try was a chinese donut.
And for the pleasure of partaking of this exquisite fine dining experience as overseen by the paramount staff, I got to pay $12.50. Now, to be fair, there were options as far as sub-rate sushi and snow crab legs were concerned... but considering the quality of the other faire of which I HAD partaken, I wasn't about to risk my ass on food poisoning.
This is a slightly altered version of a bit of "customer response" that I sent to U-Haul. Really, the only alteration is the removal of salient bits of contractual and financial information. Well... and the addition of some more colorful commentary.
To say that my experiences with U-Haul have been negative fail to fully describe the nature of my ordeal. The problems with the rental began before my arrival on the scene, but for the sake of simplicity, we'll stick with the problems relevant to me, which began after I became involved.
My friend Jared Wheeler rented a moving truck with which to conduct a 1-way move from Longview, TX to Waco, TX and due to complications involving his drivers' license (read: "crap... my drivers' license expires today so they won't let me drive"), it became necessary that someone else drive the truck, and I volunteered (read: "I was the only schmuck along who had a valid drivers' license). At the time, I was asked for my driver's license and a secondary form of identification, for which I used my MasterCard. At that point in time, I made sure to ask the man at the desk two or three times if my credit card would be charged under any circumstances and I was assured repeatedly that under no circumstances would my card be charged. (Seriously, this guy didn't look like much of a winner in the 'Brains' Department, so I kept asking to pound this point in... apparently, it didn't take.)
Of course, as would be necessitated by my irritation, my credit card was charged. As soon as I received my credit card statement and noticed the errant charge, I called the Cubby Hole where the rental was started (the one on 259 near my old apartment) and they were pleasantly helpful. I was promised a call for the next day by the manager, which I received first thing in the morning after he had researched my case. He apologized and told me that my name was not, in fact, listed as the driver and that somehow my credit card had simply been amended to the file due to an employee mistake. He also noted that he was sadly unable to resolve the issue in-store and would be forced to escalate me to the corporate offices. (Note: he would be the second and last intelligent employee with whom I would speak. Also notable was that he and the first lady with whom I spoke actually had brains and customer service skills and didn't work for U-Haul; the next 5 employees fit none of these criterion.)
Uhaul Corporate is worthless. Well, the receptionist is helpful enough, but the actual call-center failed to accomplish a single thing beyond wasting my time and exposing me to impressive lengths of heretofore unexperienced elevator-type hold music. I had to call on three separate occasions, being assured the first two times that I would be called within 48 hours and the third time (5 days later), I was only helped after I insisted that I speak to someone who could actually do something for me, at which time I was transferred to a regional office. Unfortunately, the manager who was required in order to rectify things for me was not in and I would have to hope for a call back.
I was pleasantly surprised that the manager from the regional office actually called back as promised. At least, that is, until after he got my information and went about his way, he became impossible to contact. In fact, after a week of trying to get ahold of him without so much as a peep, I finally decided to do what I should have done a week and a half earlier: call my credit card company and dispute the charge. Oddly enough, your company has managed to attempt to turn me from a non-party into a customer and in so doing has made me loathe to even associate with it, much less patronize it.
Since Jared seems to have a burr in his ass about my criticisms of his ideal locations to erect a domicile, I figured I would come up with a vague list of criterion for good places for the SC to move to. As always, I would encourage all takers to hop in and advocate their favorite points and maybe we can all agree to move somewhere... or something.
Culture
I think that we can all agree that we want to end up in an area rich with culture and with access to the finer things in life. And while that doesn't necessitate living within a large city, it does necessitate living at least within striking distance of a large city... and speaking from practical experience in Longview, 2 hours, while workable, is probably further than is profitable... so let's say 1 hour from a major (at least 1 million people) city. It should be noted that, for the time being, I'm reserving judgments on individual cities... with the exception of Cleveland and Newark. Cleveland sucks and yet is heaven by comparison to Newark. Beyond that though, we'll have to come up with some way of discussing the cultural merits of the city of choice.
Level of Freedom
While there is a certain correlation to freedoms accorded to those who live in a state where police activity and federal authority are severely curtailed, I'm afraid that there are members of the SC who don't want to go turning our social organization into a drug cartel... much more's the pity, but there it is. That said, while a certain level of anarchy is charming, we're going to want to end up in a place where the police presence is available and reassuring, but not overbearing. And yes, Wheeler, while London is a wonderful place on a lot of levels, I'm not such a big fan of the Orwellian schtick that they've been playing to in the last 10 years. This includes thousands of monitored cameras in London alone, tracking all vehicle traffick in and out of London, the acquisition of flying spy drones, and God only knows what else... sorry, just say no to totalitarian levels of police monitoring.
Language
To limit ourselves to areas of the world that only speak English would be foolish, insular, and downright detrimental. I mean, after all, if we can't have the option of leaving the US for other places, that would be terrible. At the same time, ending up in an area where five languages are spoken and none of them English would leave us rather high and dry. Thus, while ending up somewhere like Spain where English isn't the primary means of communication would be less than ideal for some of our members, there is enough English spoken for even the meanest gringo to get by initially, and I would expect that the same is true for many of our more ideal destinations.
Stability
And lastly, where would we be without stability: both financial and governmental. To put a point on it, governmental coups suck... as do financial crashes. Thus, I refuse to put my ass in harm's way in a country where the economy and the government aren't at least moderately stable. While I'm not demanding exclusively First-World destinations, I am probably excluding (between this and other conditions) most Third-World locations by this demand. And yes, while I'm very sad that I'll probably never get to live in the Sahara as a result of this, I value my bullet-free self a bit more than a nice safari. Ah well... such are the sacrifices we make.
What Now?
Where does this leave us? Well, I would like to think that there are a number of candidates in Europe, North America, and the Tropics that are fair game. There might be a location or two in the countries of South America (read: Brazil and Argentina) and maybe some outliers like Qatar and a couple in East Asia... but for the most part, we ARE talking about First-World Western locations, at least as I read it.
That said, while I may be the most vocal member of the Council, I wouldn't presume to speak for all of it. So I'd love to hear additional considerations and pleadings... but please, leave individual cities out of this for now unless they're so unique that they bear special consideration on their own merits.
I've always found it perplexing (and more than a little upsetting) that non-adult citizens have severely limited civil rights. As a high school student, this disdain was established in me as a member of the student newspaper when I discovered that Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier had established that our publication's first amendment protections were subordinated to the will of the school district.
The issue of the lesser rights of high school students is currently being argued further in the Supreme Court, specifically a variety of free speech cases, chief among those being infamous "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case.
To make a long story short (and I'm planning on getting into this at greater length later), I find it suspect that school districts are able to exercise curbs on free speech except as directly relates to free speech disrupting education. While I certainly appreciate the need to remove glaring distractions from the educational experience, I am perhaps more disturbed by the willingness of school districts to run roughshod over students' rights for "educational reasons." If someone could explain to me how publishing a story on teenaged pregnancy in the student newspaper or how holding up a seemingly-controversial but meaningless sign on a public roadside not even on school property significantly interfere with education, please let me know.
Yes, I know, I'm ranting. In the end it comes down to this... we don't let the federal government interfere with the free speech of public citizens at state colleges, government agencies, or pretty much any other public forum... except public primary and secondary schools, which can more or less limit the rights of students at their discretion. Maybe it's just my experience with the public school system, but I sure as hell don't trust them... do you? Surely, they're not all bad, and high schoolers are by no means qualified as adults... but I would prefer to err on the side of civil rights than the opposite... but that's just me. My wife would apparently prefer to subordinate EVERYONE'S Civil Rights to the educational process.
Several things. First off, I would like to note that Texas (at least Gregg County) pays $6 for waiting in the jury pool from 9am to 12 pm. Yep, $6 for 3 hours. That said, you are given the options of donating the $6 to charity, collecting it, or donating it back to the county. Yes, donating the money to the county... because the taxes aren't enough... the county needs charity.
Secondly, it has been inferred by some that my post yesterday asserts that all jurors are chumps. This isn't true, as I clearly note that there is a category of individuals who get paid for jury duty time who are not chumps. That said, these individuals, being intelligent and well-educated, are also typically the first to get tossed off of juries. Go figure
Being as that my wife was selected in the jury pool today for a trial tomorrow, I figured I would take a quick stab at my issues with jury duty in America, in general. Take as a caveat that I've never been on a jury, nor have I even made the selection pool.
First off, in Texas, jurors are paid $40 a day for jury duty. To an 18-year-old college student, that might sound like a sweet deal, but it should be noted that $40/day is less than minimum wage for an 8-hour day, which is an insult to just about anyone who isn't on Welfare who gets a jury summons. Oh... and they don't pay you blow your Monday morning in the selection process, regardless of if you're picked or not.
Secondly, in most states, businesses aren't compelled to pay you for missed time, they're just forbidden to fire you. Look, I understand the capitalistic basis of the American economy as well as anyone... but if the system argues that the time of a worker is worth money and an employer shouldn't have to pay employees for time that they don't work, it stands to follow that the legal system should see at least some value in a juror's time and pay said juror accordingly.
However, being as that the above enumerated problems have not yet been addressed, anyone who makes a decent wage at work is going to have real issues missing work just to go sit on a jury. Patriotism is a good and fine thing, but it really doesn't buy one's groceries. Thus, anyone with a brain and a job who isn't going to pay him for lost time does his level best to avoid jury duty. And who remains? Individuals who have never been on juries before (and thus are clueless as to how to avoid jury duty), people who want the $40, those without the cynicism to avoid jury duty, and those who can either afford to miss work or have a nice enough job that they're already being paid for jury duty.
Allow me to address these groups one at a time and point to the fact that the best candidates for the jury pool are the ones you've eliminated already. First, people who have never been in a jury pool don't realize that they have the means to get out of it and thusly they may (or may not) make good jurors... it's a crap-shoot. Second are the people who actually want the $40, and no offense, but that particular subset is largely limited to those who are either too young, too inexperienced, or too indigent to get a job. Thirdly (and I'm working out of order), we have those with the education and/or experience to have a job that will grant time off for jury duty... which is to say a white-collar, mid to high-end job. Which is good that it usually indicates life experience, thinking skills and a logical mind and bad in that one of the two lawyers involved will spend his or her time sniping all of these individuals out of the jury pool. Oh, and lastly, we have our guileless Polyannas who think that they should bend over backwards for the judicial system. I'm not going to criticize them at length except for to note that whenever you find yourself in a situation where you're doing the government a favor, it defies logic. It's like donating money to the government... what the hell are you thinking?
Is human papillomavirus a Bad Thing? That is inarguable. Should it be eliminated along with the likes of polio, smallpox, measles, mumps and rubella? With certainty. Should legislators be mandating the Gardasil vaccine which is the only FDA-approved HPV vaccine for all women while at the same time taking money from Merck? Merck, the makers of Gardasil, who stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars off of this legislature and who is actively campaigning to legislate that their drug (a $360, 3-shot regimen) be given to all girls by age 11 or 12. To say that I find their motives impure is probably an understatement.
That said, I find the arguments against the drug to be hallow and, quite frankly, idiotic. To those who dislike vaccines in general... that's great for you and all, but I think that you'd be hard-pressed to find a real doctor who feels that the country is worse off for vaccines against many of the major medical demons of the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries. Not to mention that HPV causes cancer... and cancer is bad. Granted, HPV is an STD... but some parents act as if a vaccine against HPV is a blank check to go have sex with everyone in sight. As if there weren't still Herpes, Syphilis, AIDS, Chlamydia, Hepatitis, Gonorrhea, and more to contend with. As if the only way to get HPV was through unprotected sex and as if people who may screw up once down the road don't deserve to be protected.
Look... I'm not saying I have a corner on the answers... but I think that having a problem with the ethics of legislators in requiring Gardasil is a whole lot more sensible than any of the other objections that I've heard. I'd be more than happy to hear from opponents of Gardasil for other reasons though, or from people who actually know more about biology or about Rick Perry than I do.
I haven't declared war on an idiot in a long time. It hasn't been strictly necessary... until today. You see, in Texas there is a Senatorial seat up in November. The incumbent, Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) has served two terms, and while I'm not a huge fan (she voted against Net Neutrality and for funding Ted Stevens' infamous Bridge to Nowhere), I am developing a loathing for her chief opponent Barbara Ann Radnofsky (D).
I was reading through the issues comparison page on Radnofsky's campaign site (which, incidentally, is in this annoying pdf form) when I stumbled on this gem. (Note: formatting is mine.)
Radnofsky: Supports U.S. Constitution and the Bill of RightsHutchison: Segregation and a Full Plate: Too busy to sponsor an anti-lynching resolution
[Radnofsky Will] Renew the Voting Rights Act
Opponent sought to exclude hurricane survivors from schools and segregate them, suspending the McKinney-Vento Act which prohibits segregation of homeless children.
Radnofsky opposes lynching and would co-sponsor the anti-lynching resolution without hesitation.
When asked why opponent had not yet joined 83 of her colleagues in cosponsoring the U.S. Senate's resolution against lynching, Sen. Hutchison’s spokesman strangely replied, “For her, lynching is something that is very present. This is something she knows very personally.” Then he added, “But as a member of the Senate leadership, you just can't co-sponsor everything."
Apparently, though, you can, as opponent managed to co-sponsor at least 186 resolutions since 1999, including recognition of the anniversary of the founding of the Harley-Davidson Motor Company, congratulations to Lance Armstrong in 2003, and calling for a 4-H postage stamp. Responding only to public outcry, she later grudgingly co-sponsored the anti-lynching resolution.
[Radnofsky Will] Oppose the KKK’s message of domestic hate and terrorism.
Opponent refused to denounce the Ku Klux Klan.
In case you hadn't noted... every point gets worse than the point before, but the last takes the cake. The best part about the last point is the supporting text that whichever political flunky compiled this included in the relevant footnote:
San Angelo Standard-Times, August 5, 2006. “Radnofsky denounced the clan and called on her senate opponent, incumbent Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison to do likewise. No one answered the phones in Hutchison’s Washington or Abilene offices to issue such a denunciation.”
Wait... a newspaper can't get ahold of someone with the authority to issue a denunciation and thus Kay Bailey Hutchison refuses to issue one? Now, I'm sure that a dozen other politicians have thousands of such bullshit lines on their position lists, but this one offends me. This is like my picking up a phone right now and calling Radnofsky's offices, failing to get an answer and then announcing "Barbara Ann Radnofsky refuses to renounce NAMBLA and Hitler... Kay Bailey Hutchison, on the other hand, is not a fan of either." So... without further adieu.
The Cynic Declares War on: Barbara Ann Radnofsky
Alright, most of you use AOL Instant Messenger, or aim to communicate, right? Good... and that means that most of those (maybe even all) know that one can put up away messages to indicate one's status as not present and to then expound and give details about one's whereabouts and when one is expected to return. Some, like myself, tend to be a bit lax in noting locale... but considering that I don't get to return to my abode at various points throughout the day, I think we can excuse myself along with the other working members of the SC. That said, my away message does typically convey when I am abed or at work... as do most of ours. Alright, so Ardith's always says 'asleep', Anna's laptop just logs her off when she goes to bed, and I'm not sure that Leatherwood even has AIM... but the point stands!
On the other hand, away messages on campus are getting unruly to the point of approaching utter uselessness. For the first part, could someone make Jared and Randy actually log on? That would be awesome... as I don't even have a way to leave them messages if they don't ever bother to log on or even to make contact with my appointed message-bearers. Beyond those two delinquents... would someone please tell Barbour that if you're going to post a whole poem/song/paragraph/chapter in your away message, it would be really nice to know where the crap you are. And Sharpton, the whole song, complete with repetition and chorus notations, isn't really necessary... just excerpt a couple of lines... or maybe even a paragraph. Come on people, get ahold of yourselves... I want to know vaguely where you are, maybe even specifically. I like the poignant stuff in the away messages... but 25 lines is probably too long.
Oh... note to Uncle Doug, the Old Testament is feeling left out.
If anyone is wondering who the people to model after are, I would go with Martinez if you feel like being witty and posting long-ish stuff in your away message, Wilson if you're feeling a little witty but very terse, and Ma Hoyt if you want up-to-the-minute updates with only a slightly canned feel to them.
That's all for now. Keep those away messages in line or you will be hearing from me. Don't make me come down there with a club, Wheeler.
This news story is not something I would suggest reading to the faint of heart or people with a weak stomach. It outlines a rather grotesque element of American society: mentally unstable people. In this case, a mentally unstable homophobe who ended up killing his own three-year-old son in an attempt to protect him from "becoming gay."
Normally, I'm a pretty firm opponent of government agencies like the Child Protection Services. That said, every time I see one of these incidents, I can see why other countries name all children wards of the state and allow parents to continue raising their children on a provisional basis. I mean, the government really shouldn't have to do this, but on the other hand, there are a lot of little children like Ronnie Parris III who would be alive and well today if it weren't for the pathetic ink-stains in the historical record like 21-year-old Ronnie Parris Jr. If the government isn't going to save them who is?
As a libertarian, I object to government interference in my personal life. I don't like the idea that I should have to pass some sort of government test to be allowed to father a child if I should want to (not that I do, but just if I wanted to), nor should I be forced to submit to scrutiny of some outside organization, government or otherwise, to tell me how to run my life. That said, these children have rights too, and the right to not be smacked around by some worthless waste of oxygen, cigarettes and welfare stamps ranks pretty high on my list.
So I guess my question is, where does one balance the rights of those who cannot protect those rights with the libertarian ideals of the private, unharassed life?
Maybe it's a sign that I'm finally starting to get a tad too old for this place that I'm finally becoming exhausted with the petty neanderthal activity that passes for amusement amongst many college guys. I'm not going to begin to claim that I'm immune to such activity, nor especially that I haven't participated in it in the past, but the inconsiderate immaturity around here is really starting to get on my last nerve.
The particular object of my ire today is the segment of campus known as 2A, not because they are the only perpetrators, but because they are reliably the worst. Today was the annual Senior Awards chapel. I must say that at least this year they managed to have the decency not to have floor members walk up to the stage in a motorcycle helmet to receive awards, so at least there is some improvement from last year. That said, whenever a member of the floor (or their sister floor) had his or her name read, the entirety of the floor would shout loudly and prolongedly and then begin to make catcalls for the next 30 to 40 seconds. The overall effect was like unto a crowd at a football game after their team scores. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be congratulatory when their friends are recognized, but there is definitely a line between congratulatory and racous. In my mind, that line is crossed far too often at LeTourneau by the guys I go to school with. Maybe this is a problem the world over, but I can't say as that it pleases me to have to tolerate such immaturity.
You want to see the signs that there are evil people in the world today? Look no further than here. All I can say is there are all sorts of words that wouldn't even begin to describe the mount of animousity I feel towards that woman....
Today marks the official beginning of the Jihad against Inanity in Digital Communication. The chief object of my ire is the idiom "lol" which I have taken to be an indicator of a flighty, pre-pubescant mindset.
Geoff Barbour is public enemy #1. He has been kind enough to confess to me (under methods consistent with the Geneva Convention, I assure you) that Paige, Sharpton (AKA "The Reverend Al", "Sharptor", "Adam West", "Adam West-erano" "Sharptiano" and "Conan") and Melby (AKA "Stud") are also enemies of the intelligent electronic expression of thought.
If you happen to communicate with these or any other parties and they use retarded AOL-speak or just pre-teen babble, be kind enough to grouch at them for the sake of our language.
This afternoon, I was reading this article about problems with the Social Security Administration not following up on evidence of identity theft on Social Security numbers and on potential illegal situations regarding the use of spurious numbers. As I was reading, this quote really, REALLY bothered me:
MSNBC.com research and government reports suggest hundreds of thousands of American citizens are in the same spot -- unknowingly lending their identity to illegal immigrants so they can work... It's a thorny problem that cuts to the heart of America's undocumented worker issue. Immigration opponents say it's another reason to shut the borders tight; immigrant rights groups point out that identity theft is an inevitable outcome of unfair labor laws that push foreign visitors deeper into the shadows. Either way, immigrant imposters with the least nefarious of intentions -- simply a desire to work -- often unknowingly victimize the rightful Social Security number holders.
Does this sound crazy to anyone else? Since when did illegal aliens become "foreign visitors" and victims of "unfair labor laws" who are "unknowingly victimizing" citizens by defrauding the government? And while we're at it, who gave illegal aliens rights to begin with?
All of this leads into the Cynic's plan to stop illegal immigration. First, let's define the problem: We have hundreds of thousands if not millions of illegal immigrants dwelling in the United States today, fleeing the poverty of Mexico to work in the U.S... illegally. The current penalty for crossing the border illegally is a one-night stay in a federal prison and deportation... or "go back and try again." Oh yeah, and attempting to help in an illegal immigration is a misdemeanor offense. This all amounts to an essentially unregulated, unprotected border with an unstable country known for its tendancy towards despotic anarchy. Can anyone say "national security issue?"
My solution is threefold:
With laws like these in place and a lid on illegal immigration, legal immigration can be boosted and deserving foreign nationals can get into the U.S. And then maybe we can fix our warped policy on Cuba.
Stupid people should not be allowed to participate in the legal system... especially not in civil suits. It's because of people like this that the legal system is glutted with frivolous lawsuits and other nonsensical crap. Thusly, I propose a new facet to the American Judiciary, as originally advanced by my friend Mark: Discretionary Compensational Maiming.
In essence, Discretionary Compensational Maiming would allow the judge to decide that they lawsuit in question was too foolish to be allowed anywhere near a court. In addition to being thrown out, all involved plaintiffs (lawyers included) will be subjected to corporal punishment as directed by the bailiff. In short, if you sue McDonald's for making you fat, the bailiff gets to beat you down.
This applies to class-action lawsuits as well. If a bunch of environmental wackos (PETA) try to sue a fur coat manufacturer for violating the rights of the animals in question, PETA gets a bunch of broken arms... and while we're at it, why don't we make the punishment apply doubly for the lawyers?
Since many of you are Intoverts and fail to understand the intricacies, I am going to explain to you what I term to be "The Principal Sin."
The philosophy goes something like this: to the mind of an extrovert, there are few things in the world more energizing than spending time with a group of people. There doesn't necessarily have to be something interesting going on, merely the act of spending time with people that I like is enough to energize and envigorate me. Granted, I will always take a choice to add more interesting people to the group and the option of doing something fascinating with that group... but failing that, I'm just a big fan of chatting with a group of my friends... who I already consider a very entertaining group of people.
By the same token, I tend to find time alone by myself to be very draining. It does tend to be very productive in terms of self-growth and all of that nonsense, but at the same time it is very stressful for me to be engaged in that sort of activity. I would much rather be with some friends... and after a time I become downright miserable if I am forced to spend long periods of time alone by myself.
Granted, there are rare exceptions when I really feel overwhelmed by people and need to get away, but those exceptions are so few and far between that I tend to simply wedge them in my spare time which, though limited, suffices almost all of the time to leave me with a sense of longing to be back with my friends again.
In light of all of this, the Principal Sin that I can commit against my friends is leaving them out. Granted, sometimes we will engage in an activity that some will not want to be involved in, but I pride myself in going to great efforts to attempt ensure that everyone can get in who wants in. By that same token, I expect similar efforts to be undertaken by my friends on my behalf. After all, if I'm willing to undergo the wrath of the entire group to wait for you to show up so you don't get left behind, I would appreciate at least a phone call to tell me when something interesting is happening. After all, I may have been sitting around with nothing to do, and the only reason I had a miserable evening is because you, my friend, didn't see fit to come get me.
Yes, I understand this post is kind of ranting and weaving around... I guess that's because this subject is one of those things that I just take for granted until I realize time and again that some of my friends don't share the same understanding of the topic.
So on our long trek back from Lake City, we had an idea as we hit the DFW area. Actually, it started when we got turned around on one of those damned Ft. Worth roads and Eric stated in frustration, "I need to send the mayor of Fort Worth a post card that says 'I hate your town.'"
This started the wheels of my mind turning and I have come to this conclusion: we should pick 25 or 50 towns that we think suck and figure out who we should send post-cards to that say something like "Your town is the most worthless place in the world." We also need to put a return address on them so that we can get a response, and then we wait and see what happens. I'm more than willing to go in with others, if we can get some more participants. But right now, I need towns.
Here's what we have so far: (note: not all of these were suggested by me)
Longview, TX
Newark, NJ
Arroyo Seco, NM
Fort Worth, TX
Mount Enterprise, TX
Marshall, TX
Jonesville, NY
Hamilton, OH
Miamisburg, OH
Oxnard, CA
El Paso, TX
Mobile, AL
Baton Rouge, LA
Wheeling, WV
For the record:
The 7th day of every month is "I hate Texas" day.
The 9th day of every month is "I hate Longview" day.
The 10th day of every month is "Texans Can't Drive" day.
Please take note. I will be doing something special to commemorate each of these days as they come up as well as explaining why they are celebrated.
I used to be ambivalent about Earth Day. I just can't say that I cared much one way or another... mostly due to the fact that while I respect the Earth and don't want it to become a rotted-out apple core upon which we live, I am a fairly firm believer in the ability of natural processes to rebound from just about anything mankind can do. That said, until the advent of a series of liberals and obnoxious Science teachers, I was just of the opinion that Earth Day was an occasion for variety in the announcements over the PA in school.
...And then I ran afoul of some morons who believed that the Earth was a purpose and an end in and unto itself. "Save the earth! Blow up buildings and save the earth! Sacrifice yourself to stop deforestation!" These were the cries of the idiots who felt the paramount cause was that of conservation. Humanity was inferior for its inability to live within their paradigm of naturalism. And then I decided that I would deal with the problem of Mother Earth at some later date... and spite these morons while I still could.
Thus, I pronounce it a Miserable Earth Day. It is today that I litter, light fire to things, and destroy the habitats of Eco-terrorists and rabid animals alike!
Call me crazy, but I really didn't enjoy chapel today. It all started with praise and worship. Granted, I'm fairly obnoxious regarding my likes and dislikes of praise and worship... that said, I'd like to be able to understand what's going on. If we're singing in Spanish, I really don't have much of a clue. We could be singing in Swahili or even "Made-Up Space Language" for all I care. Yes, I know we're being "diverse" and "multi-cultural," but the simple fact of the matter is that if I don't understand what I'm singing, there isn't much point. The traditional argument is that there is a significant population of Spanish-speakers at LeTourneau... and that's fine with me. I would just like to point out that there is a significantly larger population of people who don't understand Spanish, and the fact of the matter is that it's required that one speak English to end up at LU in the first place. So yeah... I'm having serious issues with praise and worship that might as well have been in "Made-Up Space Language."
That rousing praise and worship chapel just really put me in a wonderful mood for the message. That said, the message didn't start out half bad... essentially Corey correlated Simon of Cyrene's carrying of Christ's cross with a Christian's carrying of each other's burdens. And then it got weird... because "carrying burdens" all of a sudden meant rebuking others in love when they needed it... and by others, it means just about anyone you feel like rebuking whom you suspect might be a Christian. I've heard that sentiment several times before, and usually it ends up with overzealous Christian teens going around and making general asses out of themselves. And what's worse, Corey encouraged this sort of nonsense by telling people not to worry about feeling silly or stupid in confronting their friends and acquiantances.
Look, I'm not saying that this sort of thing doesn't have a place, and indeed there is quite the biblical precedent for confronting a sinner in love... but that said, I would like to look at the example of Christ and the Samaritan woman in John 4:1-42. I really don't want to do an in-depth exegesis, I just want to point out that before Jesus confronted the Samaritan woman's extensive sin problem, he established a rapport and earned a right to say something. I would like to take this as an example rather than people who walk up and start condemning people.
Oh yeah... and I really wish people would lay proper logical framework for chapel messages. I know they typically have something valid to say, but I really dislike the fact that an unacceptably large number of chapel speakers don't have the logic of a hill of beans. If I'm made to listen to these people, at least they could do me the favor of spending some time on their talks.
Links I only wish were April Fools Jokes:
Kid charged for child pornography for own pictures.
Iraqis dragging corpses through streets.
Bike Ride through Chernobyl
Christ-inspired murder.
Yep... the world is still screwed up. Suck.
So yesterday, we got to hear from Eric Buehrer, a guest speaker who is apparently the president of Gateways to Better Education. His organization exists to further the teaching of Judeo-Christian beliefs and values in the public arena, especially public schools. Incidentally, before I get into a criticism of his talk, I will note two things:
1) Dr. Jimmy Ames (the education prof who introduced Mr. Buehrer) put the entire audience to sleep in the 30 second introduction and thus things got off to a rough start with a cold crowd.
2) Apparently Eric Buehrer is on a first name basis with Mel Gibson, with whom he watched The Passion about a month ago. We gather this from "I saw [The Passion] about a month ago. Me and Mel... Mel was there. Me and about 500 other pastors."
His reasons why Christianity could and should be taught broke down into four arguments, namely: Christiantity is culturally appropriate, academically legitimate, legally permitted, and morally imperative. While I would agree with all of these points and agree that Christianity can and should be taught in the public schools, his support was absolutely abysmal.
Before I can even get to his main arguments, we have the problem of dealing with his absolutely awful prelimilary remarks and straw men. At the beginning, he spoke of a stupid argument about the words "Under God" being in the Pledge of Allegiance and noted that they weren't in the original and discredited arguments for returning to the original by saying "it took 50 years to get it right." After this, he moved to an example where a teacher re-wrote a class production of The Sound of Music without mention of nuns and a abbey in order to take religion out of it and how a parent successfully fought her on that. Another example is a child being forced to wash a cross off of her hand that she had drawn on it so that she wouldn't upset other students. Can we say "straw men?"
Here are his arguments, in chronological order, organized under the categories in which Buehrer placed them:
Christianity is Culturally Relevant
First, we have our suspect statistics:
"85% of Americans claim Christianity?"
"40-44% of Americans attend church in a given week"
"61% of African-Americans describe themselves as attending church weekly"
"39% of Americans referred to themeselves as 'committed born-again Christians'"
And then we have a reference to a Newsweek article:
(date 7/16/2001) - Newsweek "Christian music is now the hottest genre in the entire music industry"
The article also mentioned Left Behind, Veggie Tales as selling well and having cultural significance. And from that, he drew this conclusion and moved on:
"It is reasonable that American schools teach American students about american culture and Christianity is deeply-rooted in American culture."
Christianity is Academically Legitimate
Here we started out with another straw man of a teacher agreeing to allow a student to do a report and presentation on Psalm 23 but refusing to allow the student to read Psalm 23 in his presentation.
He branched from this to the legality, noting that the Department of Education has given students the right to incorporate their faith into their schoolwork.
After this, his only justification for reading the Bible alound (aside from when you've been allowed to do a report on a particular Biblical passage) is because it's a thing of "literary beauty."
From here he jumped to the Texas State curriculum and noted that religious awareness education is present in many different places in the curriculum and that it shouldn't be irrelevant in Texas schools in light of its educational standards (that's all well and good in a conservative state like TX, try NY for a different perspective.)
And finally, Buehrer noted that it is proper and allowable to present religious holidays in light of their historical and ongoing religious significance, such as with Easter and Christmas. Granted, this only works sometimes in more conservative settings, but it's something.
Christianity is Legally Permitted
Buehrer first noted that the 1963 case Abbington vs. Shemp invalidated the requirement of religious ceremony and reading in school. However, the courts explicitly stated that a study of the Bible was a academically legitimate one in the light of a study of comparative religions and in light of its historical impact. He then pointed out that even the ACLU noted that objective teaching of religious impact in schools. And that was essentially that
Christianity is Morally Imperative
Buehrer asserted that modern children are morally aimless due to a lack of religious roots. He then made the more or less syllogistic assertion that if people follow Christianity and stick to the morals it teaches, they will be moral.
If you look up and read the main talking points, you may wonder why this bothered me so much. And I can't even really give the man justice by typing the talk out. The fact is that I happen to have been in public school for 13 long years and nobody agrees that the place needs Christianity more than I. That said, there wasn't one of his arguments that I either couldn't find fault with or couldn't point out the obvious straw-man that he was using to build his case. It's people like this who bother me to no end because I look up at them and I see them destroying something that I find valuable by their ineptitude and inability to find real talent to do the job that they are botching. Thanks for another quality chapel!
This article on Edmunds.com. If you are ever in the market for a car, this is a really good read. Actually, this is a really good read for anyone who expects to be interacting with salespeople in the future.
Throughout high school and college, I've had a lot of friends with sales jobs and even had one or two myself. Let me tell you from experience, any salesman who claims to have your best interest at heart is probably lying to you. Almost without exception, salesmen will lie, cheat and swindle you to get their commission and sales numbers up. In case you weren't cynical of salesmen before... the above article ought to help reinforce that notion.
As much as I generally approve of having Bush in office, as opposed to the alternatives, I really don't like his power-grabbing nonsense. This is just ridiculous. Does Bush mean to tell us that he can all of a sudden use war-time powers to relieve American citizens of their rights at any point in time? Does this scare anyone else?
When you boil it down, the checks and balances present in the US Constitution are to prevent a single individual (especially the Chief Executive) from abusing the system to the detriment of individual citizens and the country as a whole. How can depriving a citizen of rights without a trial be construed as a good thing. I want my Constitutionally-guaranteed rights and I want them NOW!
So I called American up and told them about my situation. And I told them that I wasn't getting up at the crack of dawn this morning just so that I could fly to Longview and get my stuff. And they told me that was fine, but I would have to pick it up at the airport in Longview.
Why can't we just get the airlines to man up when they make a mistake and have them fix it? Look, I understand that the airline industry is in the middle of a financial crisis and that they are liable to take a lot of heat for stuff that is completely outside of their control. That said, there are some things that are the fault of airlines:
For instance, there is no reason that there should be overbooking of flights. This is a multi-million dollar industry, yet you are using antiquated and outdated computer systems, rather than modern databases and softwaree. With the amount of information at your fingertips, you should be able to determine exactly what passenger is where, what flight they're on, and what flights they can and can't make. There is no reason that I should have sat on a tarmac for 10 minutes last night while these imbeciles tried to find an open gate... they should know where their planes are and where their terminals are.
And on the topic of customer service: if my flight is late, and it's your fault, you should be willing to help me out on this. Granted, nobody can account for mother nature 100%, but maintenance issues and delays due to gate-scheduling snafus are definately the fault of the airline. And leaving a person stranded in an airport overnight is not an acceptable solution, you idiots.
Now while we're at the issue of customer service, I shouldn't be able to determine that there will be a delay before you tell me. At least have the courtesy of keeping your passengers informed. Yes, they'll be a bit pissed... but at least they can get about the process of making plans a bit earlier.
Oh yeah... and about boarding planes. Let's make this really easy. Start with the very back row and work forward... not the other way around. That way, the whole line doesn't get held up by the stupid lady in the 5th row who brought a carry-on that has no prayer of following the laws of physics and being crammed in that overhead bin. And pre-board the families and the people in wheelchairs more than 2 minutes before everyone else. Yes, I know it's inconvenient... but they're slow, and they make everything else slower. Not that I resent them for that, I was once the one of those stupid little kids that kept getting in the way... but you need to make accomodations for that. Oh yeah, and the flight attendants need to start carrying muzzles and tranquilizer darts...
Don't even get me started on the people employed by the flight industry and the TSA people... this is enough of a rant for one day.
Commenting is down... again. Between Blogger and Enetation, it's a miracle that I manage to get this thing to work at all. I guess it goes without saying that I need to get real hosting and MT.
Yet again I am reminded of just what a bizarre and eclectic fellow I really am.
Thoughts for today:
You know, the restaurant industry in general is very poorly run and since my mind is on coffee shops of late, we will focus there. You need to understand your target demographic. If you are looking for teens and yuppies who want to feel a bit snobby, the best way to do this is NOT to monopolize half of your store with gaudy-looking crap for sale with your logo on it. The key here is a layed-back atmoshpere: mellow and subdued are the key. Kill the lighting, figure out a way to get rid of that menu monstrousity on the wall behind you, and get rid of the metallic art-deco furniture in favor of padded chairs and wooden tables. Also try to find some classy people to work at your store. If you're going to charge $5 for coffee, make it look like the place is worth it. Another thing, get some wireless internet and some subtle power outlets by the tables for laptops. Maybe even a terminal or two in an out-of-the-way spot. Don't charge for the internet (maybe charge for use of the computer) and watch the nerds flock. And they'll be much more likely to buy more coffee if you keep them sticking around.
Why is it so hard to find the places that need workers? I was out helping my little brother find a job today and we drove by all manner of stores and restaurants, grabbing applications. And literally 95% of the places that were hiring had no indicator of it. There has to be a better way for this. It's not like the companies don't want employees and it's not like the people who are in need of work don't want to get a job... but there is really no better way of a teenager finding a job then walking into a place cold and asking for an application. What gives with that?
Now that I'm home and away from the people I want to be around and the mental engagement of school, I finally get my head to clear and start thinking straight again. I mean, I haven't had this much spare mental energy since about week 2 of the semester. Why is it that we never have the time or resources to get things done when we're all at school together and it's only all by ourselves that we start getting really creative? And why is it that I forget all of the truly interesting thoughts somewhere between the car and the computer? I need to get something to record my brain waves, because I even have thoughts slip my mind in the several seconds it takes to fish the notepad and pen out of my pocket. Sad, isn't it?
I am very bad at trying to resist reading the books that I buy. Granted, I also borrow a lot of books from my friends to keep me in the money, but since I've been home I've read: Dragons of Autumn Twilight, Dragons of Winter Night, Dragons of Spring Dawning, The Case for Israel, The DaVinci Code, Angels and Demons, Slander, Treason, Bias, Why I am not a Muslim, Unveiling Islam. I'm currently working my way through the Space Trilogy and then I'll
probably read some other stuff. Bear in mind that I've read a lot of these
before, but one makes due with what one must.
Most days I like politics... the process, the deal-making, the smoke-filled rooms... it just appeals to a certain part of me that revels in intricacy. Wilson and I have a great deal of fun talking about it... frequently dragging the Guatemalan into discussions and just enjoying the great political theories that we come up with. Of late however, I have not been enjoying politics, and most of that is due to the fact that I can't find anyone whose foreign policy I can support.
The ditto-heads and Republican Party faithful out there will tell me that I should stick with Bush because he's doing the right thing. My problem with that is the war on Iraq was NOT JUSTIFIED, at least... not like Bush justified it. If we ever find WMD's, I will be very surprised (thanks for the link, Wilson.) If we even find good evidence of them, it will be a good deal more than we have
now. The fact of the matter is that justifying this war on the basis that Iraq was an international threat is bullshit. North Korea is a threat, China is an international threat, Iran is an international threat.... hell, our allies like Israel are more of an international threat than Iraq was.
What it all boils down to is that while there might be good reasons to justify the invasion of Iraq, they weren't the reasons employed for invading Iraq. What's worse is the outcome of these arguments. "Potential support of terrorism?" Great, so now we're fighting pre-emptive wars? "Human rights?" This one is even better because if we're all of a sudden fighting wars to free the denizens of countries from Human Rights opression, we're going to be doing a lot of fighting, including against allies such as Saudi Arabia and China.
My general concern is this: either the Bush administration actually believed that
there were WMD's in Iraq or they didn't. If they did, and they were there, then we have a good bit of digging to do and all of our intelligence right now is wrong. If the WMD's weren't there, then our pre-war intel. has a lot of explaining to do. If our pre-war intel. said that there weren't WMD's and we went in anyways, then we have some sort of unterior motivation that isn't being addressed and the president is lying to the world and the American people. Any of these ways, I'm at least slightly annoyed and assuming that there aren't still undiscovered WMD's out there, I'm downright irritated.
But in the end, what am I going to do? Vote for Dean? I'd rather move to France.
I've been fiddling with some homework as well as a D&D campaign that I'm working up for next semester and I've been mulling over the whole Dungeons and Dragons thing, especially in the light of those conservatives who claim it is strictly demonic. After all, my parents (especially my father) are given to the notion that the whole thing is bad. Granted, they're only working on what they've been told be hyperconservatives (bear in mind, when D&D was in the news bigtime, some mentally unstable people committed suicide over it and at the time my parents were at a church with some very conservative Bob Jones alums) and my father really isn't into the fantastical anyways, but it's still frustrating that I more or less lie to my parents rather than hash this out with them.
Going over things in my head, my points essentially boil down to this:
1) D&D is just like reading fantasy, it isn't real... just imagination.
2) Consequently, the only real moral value it has is what you make of it.
3) D&D is NOT a guide to witchcraft and sorcery (check this out for a humorous commentary on the matter; thanks Gallagher)
4) While D&D might be used to draw people into the occult, so could things like the Chronicles of Narnia and Lord of the Rings...
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that D&D is not intrinsically evil, it has just been used to evil ends. The same could be said for any number of things, including well-meaning Christians. In fact, I would go so far as to say that there are probably more drawn away from God by overzealous Christians who venture out of God's plan than by any D&D book.
That said, I recognize that people tend to be uncomfortable with the notion and that D&D is one of the fringe elements of nerd-dom that gets the furthest away from the norm. Therefore, as a policy, I try not to invite anyone to come and play with us who hasn't asked. We don't make it a secret that we play as a rule (there are exceptions) but we also try not to beat people over the head and drag them in. If anyone wants to play, we welcome them.
So there... not sure why I went off on that topic... but to quote a favorite movie line:
"Well.... there it is"
I think I might have finally hit a bit of oil again...
It's one of those things that whenever you get hit with a really great idea, you're never in the right place at the right time to jot it down and remember it for posterity. Fortunately for me, mine (not necessarily great, but an idea nonetheless) happened to rebound again this evening, after blessing me on the way to Digital earlier today. The profound thought is namely this: why should administration be requesting patience and understanding when they so rarely bless us with the same? I know, I know... the golden rule and all of that. But I just figured I'd take the time to point out the hypocrisy in this.
The last Bud chapel (I think last Wednesday) he alluded to the fact that the "summer project" is just now coming to an end and is indeed, still not done. However, he admonished us that we should be glad that this is going on and noted that this delayed termination date is typical of many large projects and that things should be done shortly. Furthering this line of thought, we have the ever-present security dilemma and the cameras which Bud alluded to sometime last year (aside: we really should probably go through and find the actual date he made reference to those and quote him for posterity.) They're still not here, we have no closed-circuit tv and the budget for security seems to be much less than it should be. Cars are broken into regularly and this whole situation is something of an ongoing debacle. Yet Bud admonishes us that we live in an insecure area of the world and that we really are quite safe and ought to count our blessings and be wise. This is all well and good, and I think these are reasonable requests.
The problem comes out when administration turns around and refuses to make any concessions or hold anything back with regards to its own students. My favorite example, and I will hold this until I leave, is the legend of the 37 chapel credits. For those of you who have never benefitted from this story, here we go...
My old RA Aaron ran things on my floor, quite smoothly all freshman year. We even had the occasional room check, nobody did anything really dumb on his watch and largely things went quite well, especially as a guys' floor goes... well over par. Aaron had a fatal weakness, and that was that he never could seem to go to chapel and thusly ran deficient and had to do makeups. It was the same fall and spring semester... Aaron got behind, Aaron did makeups. But alas, during spring semester his memory slipped a cog and rather than do makeups to sum things up to 38, he only got to 37. And so in August, administration comes calling. It would seem that 37 chapel credits is 1 short and that due to this unfortunate circumstance, Aaron would no longer be allowed to be RA. No matter the fact that he had an impeccable service record, the love and respect of the floor, and had really gone to a lot of effort to make chapel credits up and had just fallen one short... this wasn't good enough for LeTourneau Standards.
I'm really at a loss on this one, because on one hand, I don't think I've held up the standard all of the time myself and I'm not one who deserves the right to judge. But on the other hand, you've got to see that something isn't right here and that this is more the rule than the exception: admin demands and does not reciprocate. If you were God, would you want these guys building a "temple" at LU in your name? I sure wouldn't.
It's funny... I don't post anything all week and then it all comes to a head as I sit in the lab and attempt to convince myself that I really ought to be doing something productive. Well, I have an ethical objection to homework, so I guess that leaves blogging. Not that that's really productive per se, but at least it leaves a mark somewhere that at some time on Sunday afternoon, the Cynic might have been thinking (or at the very least, his fingers jumped to productivity without the leave of his brain and this is what we have to show for it.)
I really miss cynicism on one hand and on the other hand I really don't. The rest of you don't even know what it means whether you like it or hate it, and that mildly annoys me and makes me really wish I could whole-heartedly advocate it like I should.
"So what is cynicism then?" the ingrates intone, as they attempt to salvage some dignity in the futile hopes that I really can't substanciate my assertions of being mentally superior inasmuch as I at least understand my terms. Sadly, Webster hops in a circle on this, but if you spend the necessary effort you can piece together a workable definition.
cynic (n) : 2 : a faultfinding captious critic; especially : one who believes that human conduct is motivated wholly by self-interest
cynical (adj) : 2 : having or showing the attitude or temper of a cynic; especially : contemptuously distrustful of human nature and motives
cynicism (n) : 2 : cynical character, attitude, or quality; also : an expression of such quality
You'll note that each is the secondary definition, due to the fact that cynicism derives from a philosophy of the same name started by the Greek philosopher Diogenes. The general gist of this being the primary tenet of cynicism is the contemptuous distrust of human nature and motives inasmuch suspecting that that all of these are tied up entirely in self-interest. I fully believe all of this... the problem is the contemptuous part and the attempts of some to extend this cynicism to God and a failure to account for the changing power of God in the lives of Christians. That isn't to say that Christians are above base motives, but neither does it excuse one from expecting Godly motives from one's Christian brothers rather than lording their former sinful nature and base motives over their heads. And of course, it's very difficult to be generally contemptuous when one is happily involved in a relationship, but that's neither here nor there. The long and short is that while some will accuse me of abandoning my philosophical basis, I will just say that mine is still cynicism, just slightly modified to include a Biblical worldview. The wide-ranging distrust of human motives, especially among non-Christians, is as strong as ever. Oh, and those who decry cynicism are back on the food chain.
Oh yeah... and welcome to my world
note: I'm sorry I killed your comment Morgan
As I sit here and read up on the news of the world, this disturbs me more than a little. I've been a staunch opponent of the Patriot Act since it first came out for the simple reason that I don't believe that the American judicial system is capable of functioning properly in secrecy. Without the check and balance of public information of some sort, there is no prevention of corruption.
Do you trust the Justice Department to police themselves? I certainly don't... nor do I think that secret courts will be any better. Classification of criminal matters and stripping the rights of US Citizens without due process on the claim of "national security" seems to be a cop-out. Sure, there should probably be a special court designated with privileges to classify some evidence and prevent it from entering public record, but there should also be intense scrutiny of any time where the federal government attempts to conduct any business outside of the public eye, much less the most important business of potentially stripping someone of their liberty or even life.
I'm always amused when I get the chance to go to a new church and muse upon the differences between their way of doing things and the way that I'm used to (along with all of the different ways that I've already run into.) This week, we had the joy of going to Pine Crest Bible Church and boy was it a fun time...
We rolled in a couple of minutes after the service had actually started and thus missed introduction. After what came later, I'm fairly grateful for that stroke of fortune. The singing selection was interesting and conservative (read: hymns), but hey, to each his own. After this, the real fun began as the pastor proceeded to preach from Revelation 18. For the first 20 minutes, I was exposed to this message: "Babylon is materialistic and materialism is bad... materialism is bad... materialism is bad... Babylon is materialistic... materialists will mourn Babylon... materialism is bad."
A fairly sound message, not very well preached and certainly not very deep, but fairly sound nonetheless. Then things got interesting as he proceeded to tell us about the evil demons and evil demonic birds that infested Babylon and went to this passage:
He presented another parable to them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; and this is smaller than all {other} seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches."
Mat 13:31-32 (NASB)
He then asserted that this passage was referring to the "Mystery Kingdom" which exists between Christ's first and second coming. Ever heard of the Mystery Kindgom? If so, enlighten me, because this was a new and special reference. He then further asserted that the birds were clearly demons living in the time of the Mystery Kindgom. Anybody out there willing to take a hack at this?
While this was easily the most aggregious of the bad exegetics on display today, there were other interesting observations from the sermon, such as "modern pop cultural music" being evil and some more yammering about the demonic birds. I will leave others to review other aspects, but will close in saying that the constant advertising for the evening service on giving was a bit unsettling, especially in the face of this sermon on materialism. That pretty much breaks my cardinal rule on discussing titheing in sermons and the whole guilt-tripping bit and even moreso with the heavy lines about materialism... and encourages me to take myself to a pew elsewhere as if everything else hadn't.
I guess I should have refrained from using the name of the church... but then again, I want you to be warned if you decide that you should go yourself. For a different perspective, Wilson already has a review and I'm suspecting that some of the others with whom I went will as well... sooner or later.
Incidentally, here's the church doctrinal statement (I dug it out of the webpage, the actual provided link is broken.) Would you expect such a train wreck from such an innocent statement?
I am thinking that while I still have the edge left in me, I might want to say something with regards the IMPACT system and whatnot: generally reviewing it and seeing what makes it as defunct as it seems to be. If you have an opinion, feel free to email me or (preferably) leave a comment.
And I'm also working on the list of "101 Questions/Actions to piss off an IMPACT Leader"
1) Aren't you Peer Advisors payed over $1000 a year to be our friends?
2) Don't you have something better to do than try to be my mother?
3) So is it that Chaplains and Themelios don't matter that they don't get payed?
4) Why is Senate IMPACT at all?
5) Why are Themelios second-rate PA's?
6) Why are Senators forced to be second-rate Themelios during orientation?
I've been cranking away all morning at moving things up to home. Now all I really need to do is move the computer, some odds and ends and some clothes and then I'll be all moved in. Funny how it's so much easier and more enjoyable to move in then move out. Maybe it's because I'm moving back to where I've really wanted to be for the past 3 months.
On a varied note, I'm kind of working on a disclaimer and this is what I've cooked up thus far:
"Warning! As you should have noted by the name of the blogger, this page purports, nay preaches the tenets and virtues of cynicism. Ignorance and idiocy are decried at every corner and if you are foolish enough to respond with your fallacious ass-babble, you might be flayed for all to see.
Oh yes, and I am prone to using "strong language" (terminology courtesy of Shem) and offending everyone whom I can get my hands on. This especially includes liberals, feminazis, queers, foreigners and pacifists althought that list is nowhere near all-inclusive. If you feel I've been neglecting your particular sect, let me know and I'll see if
I can work you into the rotation.
And if you happen to be a member of some governmental agency or an administrator at a University which I hold near and dear to my heart, I would like to state for the record that anything posted here which might indicate some conflict between myself and a statute and guideline which I am required to uphold is either a misinterpretation, an error or a result of fictional prose on my part. I would never disobey the law... ever."
The Cynic Will Exact Vengeance Upon: O'hare International Airport
Well.... I'm back. I got in yesterday more or less on time, no thanks to American. My flight from Dayton left late enough that they bumped me off of the connecting flight from O'hare to Dallas, even though I made it to the gate with a minute or two left to spare. Bastards... leaving me in freaking O'hare like that. The worst part was that the delay was due to a new traffic regulation system that they have for flying into O'hare so that they won't have congestion. We sat for 20 minutes on the ground after a 10-minute delay, waiting for the air traffic control clowns to clear us.
This would be twice now that I have had problems flying through O'hare, although as my single-serving friend on the flight from O'hare to Dallas pointed out, any problem that merely results in a delayed arrival in the same day is just a minor problem. Any problem that just results in inconvenience of having to hurry though airports (which is what happened to me) is merely that, an inconvenience. The fun stuff is when you get delayed overnight or they lose your luggage or temporarily misplace it for a week or two.
Anyways, all that said, it is much better to be in Longview and not flying around the entire country. Although, I'm doing more of that flying around stuff later this week... but I really don't think it'll be so bad seeing as that I won't be going through O'hare.
Disturbed Link of the Day: Get Paid to use Bad Software
Days Until I'm Gone Again: 3
Days of Living in a Shitty Apartment: 35 (and sadly, counting again)
Days Until Summer is Over: 20
Days Since it Last Rained : ??
On analyzing the long string of bad waiter/waitress performances that I've been the unhappy victim of during the past two weeks, I have these thoughts about being involved in the personalized customer service end of food services (otherwise known as being a waiter.)
1) Be good at details. Memorize details in your head, take notes, do whatever the hell you have to... but I am not impressed when I o