Evil Time Change

So I've been working with a customer on a new contract that they want to setup for a rather large client of theirs. This has been going back and forth for a couple of weeks now with teleconferences and emails. This morning at 10:30 we were to have what would probably be the final meeting before we kicked it off. The meeting was to consist of myself, the person handling the contract on our side, her counterpart and their developer. We were going to finalize requirements and a timeframe.

Well, I missed it. And didn't just miss it a little bit, either. I missed the three phone calls of people trying to reach me wondering where I was. I missed the emails and the voicemails. It was a total and utter whif.

What happened? The damn time change happened. Well, that and I totally forgot about the call and slept through my alarm. It was the perfect storm. Just check out how many different ways if I did something just a little bit different crisis could have been overted:

1) I could have read my email even once this weekend. Normally I do, for whatever reason I decided not to this weekend. I even thought I _should_ last night but ignored it. Will I ever learn?

2) I could have gotten up at 10 am when I woke up. At that point I would have only been 30 minutes late and the time change thing could have addressed that. But no, I wanted to sleep more!

Ok, so really only two things but it felt like a lot more.

Anyway, I talked to the person who manages my contract with our client first and then talked to the person that runs the contract for the client on our side of the fence. Not a happy camper. And it was that 'quite psuedo-calm voice' deal too. I decided to go with the truth instead of an excuse. That went over like a lead balloon. It went back and forth a while with me humbly taking it up the ass in a very calm manner, then she hung up on me. Hung up! Wow, that was just...wow.

In any case, the call has been rescheduled to 2 pm today at which point I get to try to smooth it over with the customer as well.

Fricken annoying time change.

Florida and Michigan

So back when the various states were jocking around and trying to become relevant in the primaries, Florida and Michigan tried to leap frog NH and Iowa. Before they did this, the DNC - which runs the primaries and scheduling - told them that if they did this their primaries would not count and their delegates would not be seated. They went ahead and did it anyway.

Now, even before the primaries started all the candidates knew that FL and MI broke the rules and thus, were not in-play. In fact, all of them pulled their names off the ballots in both states and didn't campaign there at all except for HRC. So when FL and MI held their pointless primary, HRC won. Big surprise.

So now we are in this situation where you have the HRC people demanding that those delegates be counted. How very fricken convenient that she was totally unopposed in those elections. Actually, I think the MI one had the Undecideds make up something like 30% of the voting electorate.

Anyway, this is what it boils down to. That whole demand is bullshit and playing unfairly. If FL and MI wanted to count they shouldn't have broken the rules. It isn't like they didn't know what the consequences were going to be. A straight reseating of delegates that were elected in an unopposed primary amounts to gaming the system and cheating.

Therefore, if the states want to pay for the primary let them have one in June and make it a real primary. Both campaigns should actually, you know, campaign in those states and give the voters the option to actually vote for the candidate they want, not just choose between HRC and Undecided in a primary that didn't count.

This whole ploy by the HRC campaign is just another example of what bothers the crap out of my about the way they are running. It's underhanded and cheap.

Play fair, win fair, or go home.

Can I Work Here Please

Love these ideas. Would be awesome if they caught on. I don't know that it would work for everyone but I think for the right type of people, it's spot on.

kthxbai

More on Obama's Grassroots

Rolling Stone released this very nice article that goes into the Obama ground game and why it is so revolutionary. If you are interested in why, win or loose, the way his campaign is hopefully changing the way the Dems run campaigns and the fullfillment of Dean's 50 State strategy, this'll give you a lot of good information.

Race Results

Just a couple of notes.

The delegates are still being counted and the numbers will probably change a bit since the Texas caucuses are still being counted, but right now the total counts for the four states are:

Clinton 191
Obama 178

HRC managed to turn around the ship a bit but not nearly enough yet. Unless Obama self-destructs he is still the leader by 148 delegates with 560 left to be handed out. HRC will need to win by bigger margins if she wants to close the lead. Plus, there is no reason to believe the super delegates are going to buck the popular delegate count, not if they don't want to screw the party for years.

PA is up next and I think it may be the only one that day. That'll be crazy.

One other point, the turn out. I haven't looked at the numbers today but last night both HRC and Obama, individually, had twice as many votes as McCain. That's nuts.

Transformation Politics - Different Standards

This article by one of my favorite political bloggers basically talks about why, with the possibility of the left getting back into the White House, there are suddenly calls for bi-partisanship and the like. Where were these calls during the last 7 years, etc.

It's a good topic and an important point, and it should be kept in mind going forward. Partisanship is good and healthy when practiced in good faith. Bi-partisanship for the sake of being bi-partisan is much more damaging. The entire point of having different parties and partisans is because people just DO NOT AGREE on certain key issues. Deal with it.

McCain Pandering

I said I would start talking about McCain some and this is the first in what will probably be a fair amount of posts on McCain, particularly once the general election gets underway. McCain has a reputation of being a straight-talker and maverick that stands up to the crazies. While this may have been true a decade ago, it certainly is no longer. This article is a good start to understand how, like any other politician who has been in Washington for a long time, his opinion shifts with the wind.

The reason this is an issue with McCain, or should be, is because he frames himself as someone that doesn't do exactly what it is he is doing. He is doing exactly what he accused Romney of doing...changing his song to match what people want to hear.

A story the Times published a week or two ago about a possible improper relationship with a lobbyist wasn't important because it implied he may have been screwing around on his 2nd wife - which he admitted to doing quite a bit with his 1st, btw - no, it was important because it showed just how connected he is to lobbyists despite the image he tries to portray.

And now the guy is trying to bypass the rules setup in one of the key pieces of legislation he passed on finance reform.

This is not a straight talker by any stretch of the imagination and maverick only in the eyes of the press.

More to come.

Curious

Ladies, please take a look at this up until the last few paragraphs where she moves on to talk about HRC.

Not having been a woman, I'm curious how often this sort of thing happens. I have no doubt it does.

'The Cake is a Lie'

Portal is easily one of the most engaging games I've ever played. The voice that taunts you throughout the game is a riot and the boss at the end is great. And really, you can't beat this for game credits. (That's the voice that taunts you all game, btw, taunting you again even after you whooped it.)

I shall always miss my companion cube.

Boo, Exxon

So Exxon feels like it shouldn't have to pay punitive damage for the spill in Alaska way-back when. Why shouldn't they? It's not like Alaska ran into them.

Punks.

Here is Roberts showing his hand. The lawyer's response is right on.

Obama Never Lost

With the exception of the superdelegates (which are starting to switch sides), Obama has never lost a primary voting day yet from the delegate count perspective. This was surprising. Check it out:

Each day delegates were won Obama first, followed by Clinton

1/3 (IA) 16 - 15
1/8 (NH) 9 - 9
1/15 (MI) 0 - 0
1/19 (NV) 13 - 12
1/26 (SC) 25 - 12
1/29 (FL) 0 - 0
2/5 (SuperTuesday) 842 - 828 (11 still to be decided)
2/9 (LA, NE, WA, VI) 105 - 56
2/10 (ME) 15 - 9
2/12 (DA, DC, MD, VA) 111 - 57.5 (6.5 to be decided)
2/19 (HI,WI) 56 - 38

In other words, you take the superdelegates out of the equation (since they aren't elected), if you add up the delegate count totals from each day of voting Obama has come out ahead every day.

Nuts.

Obama and the Grassroots

I talked yesterday about needing to get the heck away from the 50+1 strategy that has dominated politics over the past few decades, particularly since 2000 and the Rove-model. This model targets specific states and leaves others to rot, thereby screwing the local parties and hurting the party as a whole. Campaigns have traditionally been run from the top-down from within the establishment. HRC's is like that, for example. If you look at the endorsements in the states she gets most of the part machine (the governers, etc). The unfortunate bit about this is it really takes the power out of the little people and puts it in the hands of the power players. Those that 'know best', etc. The morons.

Enter Obama. The revolutionary thing about what he has been doing is that it has been TOTALLY grassroots built. He was a community activist long before a politication and has been a precient captaion. He knows what happens on the grass roots level and surrounded himself with people that know how to make it happen. And it shows. It is how he keeps closing a 20+ point cap between him and HRC over and over again. And it is how he is ahead in the polls in Texas and closing fast in Ohio.

This post has excerpts from volunteers involved in the ground game in Texas and how the Obama camp handles the situation. If this is indicative of his judgement regarding the people he surrounds himself with and his execution of goals, he will be a very compentent president.

Anyway, the big plus to all this that I kinda touched on yesterday is how it rebuilds the Democratic party in places where it has been decimated (namely heavy red states). I believe STRONGLY in the 50 state strategy where the party is competitive in all 50 states. Howard Dean started to implement this after 2004 and we reaped its benefits in 2006 by winning some seats that we wouldn't have otherwise because the party was competitive and able to leap on opportunities that prevented themselves through corruption, etc. With Obama pouring this money and talent into all 50 states and reinjuvinating the local parties he just strengthens the party as a whole across the country, regardless of who wins the presidency.

A choice quote to illustrate this:

The Obama campaign has singlehandedly done more to rebuild the Democratic Party of Texas in 2 weeks than the TDP [Texas Democractic Party] has been able to in probably 10 years.

And a quote that better illustrates the difference between the grass roots model Obama is using and the tradional model that HRC is using:

Obama's campaign shows the fruits of the very things kos and dkos in general has promoted. People powered politics, 21st century grassroots/netroots, internet fundraising, raising the level of involvement among the electorate, run a 50-state campaign.

Hillary's campaign represents the old way of running a political race. Lock up the establishment. Get endorsements, and do the usual GOTV operation, focus on the democratic strongholds, do traditional fundraisers with big spenders, etc.

That is just awesome and a great sign for the future.

UPDATE: Here is a brief post about early voter turn on in Texas.

In the top 15 counties with registered Democratic voters, there have been 419,904 early votes cast. Four years ago, the number was 72,688.

Nuts. Article talks a little more about the 50 state strategy long term briefly as well.

Why Obama Is Best Right Now

The choice for me between Obama and HRC was tough. I think HRC, on her own, would make a great president. She has a lot going for her. One thing she doesn't, though, are the idiots she surrounds herself with. That wasn't a good sign to me the way these people keep mishandling things and the message they are putting out. Some states don't matter because x,y and z? My ass they don't. That kind of talking hurts down ticket races and hurts our chances for picking up more seats in the senate and house. 50 state strategy is where it's at! That is what made the difference in 2006. Why would you abandon that kind of ground work now?

The last 8 years has been dominated by the 50+1 strategy on the right. That is to say, you don't need overwhelming majorities to claim a mandate...all you need is 50+1. It has been the polictics of division and leverage. 2004 was a great example of that with the constitutional ban against gay marriage lie to get the evangalicals out to the polls. I'm tired of that kind of polical calculation and from the way HRC campaign has been executed it is clear she is playing that same game. Enough.

Obama, on the other hand, really could lead to a mandate. He is playing working the 50 state strategy that Howard Dean setup when he took over the DNC in 2004. That does a couple of different things. 1) It helps down ticket races for house and senate because you energize the base in red states. 2) You get more people engaged and voting in the general which will help crush the other side and give the Dems the first over 50% popular win in decades.

He has the money. He is killing everyone in the money race. Both HRC and McCain are running into money problems and it isn't even the general yet. So Obama will be able to throw money around like no-bodies business and fight back against the smear machine during the general.

Believe it or not, he does have experience and a record to judge him on. Here are some resources: Project Vote Smart. Washington Post. And a very comprehensive review of his record here.

Sure he is an incredibale orator and draws HUGE crowds to the point of having to book sports arenas for appearances. He is helping to power the young vote like possibly never before (something like 80% plan to vote this year). I mean just the amount of people he brings out to the polls is insane. Every single primary has had record amounts of people voting. It isn't just him, of course, but I would argue he plays the majority of the role in it and he would be able to continue it into the general.

However, the biggest seller for me is that we finally have someone that is slapping down the stupid personal attacks from the right with the scorn they deserve. Instead of becoming all defensive he has been able to turn it around and make the attackers smell like the shit they are. This is a great post about exactly what I am talking about.

So I have more or less shifted my allegence to Obama. I would still vote for HRC in the general and get behind her if she pulls this out of her ass, but I think Obama would be a better choice overall at this point. Plus, he is KILLING McCain in general election polling while HRC and McCain are about even.

I'll post about McCain and why he isn't the straight-talking producer of change he claims to be later.

What Obama Has Done For You

Click me.

More serious one later.

VOTE!

Go Vote! Do it! I know where you live...

Pretty Much Sums it Up

So I came across this description as to why when you put people who don't believe in government in charge of government things go to shit. I think it pretty well sums it up:

If the Government is a car setting out to give every one a ride to work, then for 40 years the Republicans have been puncturing the tires, pouring sand in the gas tank, stealing the distributor cap, and, whenever they can get their hands on the wheel, driving it straight into the nearest ditch and then, pointing to the wreckage as the tow truck backs up to it, saying, See, this proves that people were meant to walk. And they do this so that they don't have to chip in on gas.

OVER RATED!!!

So before I tell you all why the Patriots piss me off so much, let me tell you a story. Ever since the talking heads started talking about uber the Patriots were and that they were the best team ever and Brady was God and could bring World Peace I've wanted to send one single text message to a friend. I thought I was going to be able to do it when the Colts first played them and were tearing them up, then the 2nd half happened. I thought I'd be able to do it when the crappy Ravens almost beat them, then that BS call in the in-zone at the end of the game gave it to the Patriots. I thought I'd be able to do it when the Chargers played them, then they fell apart. So it came down to the Uber Bowl, then with 4 minutes left the Giants decided to stop playing D and I thought I wouldn't be able to do it. But, as you all know, Eli drove them down and scored and the 'best team evah' lost. So I was finally able to send the text message I had been wanting to send all year. That text message was simply: OVER RATED!!!

It was promptly answered with a 'Fuck u'. ;)

Anyway, the Pats are a good team. Brady is a good QB. The thing that pisses me off the most though is the way the media pumps it up like Brady IS the reason they are so dominate. Bullshit. You give any good QB that offensive line and those receivers and they are going to tear up the opposition. The key is Belichick. After years coaching other teams he finally figured it out and knows how to just make it work. He game plans better than anyone in the league and he knows how to use his players to their greatest effect. The man should get a lot more credit for what he does and not this damn Brady lovefest.

Destiny my left nut.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

Maria Shriver endorses Obama. Take that, you Republican shill. I bet the house is warm and fuzy between Arnold and her now. Whose the girly man now, punk?

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

Origin of Super Bowl Sunday

From the Germans, of course.

Obama Closing

Check out how fast Obama has been closing on HRC in this chart. It is pretty remarkable.

The more I look and listen then more I think Obama is the best choice for the country. I think he'll set the right tone world-wide and within the country. Too my surprise I've read and heard some pretty die-hard republicans say they will vote for Obama over McCain and I think that is a pretty good sign. With Edwards out I think Obama will attact more of his peeps than Hillary and with the Kennedy blessing he should start making in-roads on the Hispanic vote as well.

From a policy perspective I think they are both pretty similiar. I still think HRC would be a great president too but I think Obama will have a easier time getting things done overall. I really hope he can pull it off on Tuesday, it'll be a landslide in the general if he can.

I also think the last debate between the two of them was fantastic in how civil it was. I, for one, think civility is over-rated but it was nice to see them really focus on the issues and differences between Dems and Repubs instead of beating each other over the head. It would AWESOME if you have whomever looses the primary be the VP for the eventually winner. You get Bubba back in the WH either way that way.

Finally, the money Obama is pulling in is just nuts. $32 million in Jan is more than McCain brought in the ENTIRE year of 2007. Plus, he really motivates people. Look at the voter turn outs in the states for all of the primaries so far...in most states it is almost double what was in the past. That's a FANTASTIC thing.

Very interesting and cool primary.

GMail and Spam

Has anyone else seen a big up-tick in spam they receive in their gmail account? What's the dealio?

Yellow Journalism

Am I the only person that sees parallels in yellow journalism and today's cable and, to a lesser degree, news print media? The lead up to the Iraq war and the Spanish-American War is particularly interesting.

Abu Ghraib and the Stanford Prison Experiment

Don't even ask how I came open the Stanford Prison Experiment but I found it extremely interesting, particularly in the light of the abuses at Abu Ghraib a few years ago.

In a nutshell, this guy at Stanford took a bunch of students and stuck them in a basement to replicate a jail. Half played prisoners and the other half guards. The experiment was to run for two weeks. It was shut down after six days because the guards became too sadistic and the prisoners really started to suffer a lot of emotional damage. Six days. That's fricken nuts. Read the Results section to see some of the craizness.

So this is what I take away from that experiment and the Abu Ghraib ordeal. In normal prisons you have a pretty exhaustive training and screening process to weed out the 'bad apples'. I assume prisons are also regularly supervised from outside sources to prevent abuses, etc. As a result, while abuses probably still happen, they are as systemic or widespread as the Abu Ghraib and the Standford ones become.

These kids playing guards weren't throughouly screened nor trained so it makes sense to me that you end up with more people that have sadistic tendencies than you would in professional prisons. I think a similiar thing happened in Abu Ghraib and who knows where else where you have soldiers put into a position they weren't screened or training for enough and you end up with more people with sadistic tendencies in those positions of power. As a result, you end up with the abuses that came to light. I think the Stanford experiment supports this pretty well.

Anyway, just thought it was pretty interesting.

Country Today vs. Jan 20th 2001

The chart in this article puts a really nice perspective on where the country was when Bush came into office and where it is now a year from when he leaves (give or take a few days).

Depressing.

Fasting

So I'm toying with the idea of trying an extended fast sometime in the next couple of months. Has anyone ever done this? I don't mean a 12 or 24 hour fast but more along the 7-day deal or something like that. I've been reading A LOT about that stuff recently and the more I read the more it seems like a healthy thing to do once or twice a year to clear our the system and give it a chance to repair a bunch of damage that occurs during modern living.

The thing is, unless you grow your own stuff you are going to be taking in a lot of garbage with what you eat. That stuff builds up and causes all sorts of weirdness to happen. So I want to give a fast a try and see what happens.

From what I can gather, day 2 and 3 are REALLY bad. After about 24 hours your body stops the digestion process and starts processing fat and such from your reserves. The toxins that you take in are mostly stored in the fat so your bloodstream just gets flooded with this crap. Additionally once the digestion process stops your body can start looking for dead or damaged cells and start to fix them. Between these two actions your can have 10x the toxicity in your blood than you normally have. This leads to, apparently, a REALLY BAD TIME for a couple of days while your body gets rid of all this crap that has been building up. The more toxic you are, the worse it is. Apparently it can be similar to a really bad hang over, vomit included. All kinds of weird crap comes out of your body in all kinds of weird ways. Sounds positively delightful.

However, once you get past that 2 day hellish period things start to look up and start to cycle between these really intense highs and these more mild lows as your body switches between detox and healing cycles. By the time you get to the end of the fast (if you do it for 7 days in a water fast) your body has more or less cleansed itself off the majority of toxins and your digestive track has regenerated itself. Several other systems reset and, apparently, you feel fricken awesome for quite some time. Then if you fast once a week for 24 hours or so and/or do a 7-day water fast twice a year you can maintain a more healthy system and those two days won't be as hellish.

So, wtf, right? I just feel like I am full of garbage in my system. I've been eating super healthy the past two weeks and have noticed a marked difference in my energy and mood. I just keep coming back to thinking if just eating a lot of fruit and nuts and cutting out the majority of processed foods can make that much of a difference, what would really cleaning my system out and resetting do? Everything I read about it and people I talk do that have done an extended fast all tell me that it really makes a difference.

There are two different types of fasts. A water fast, which is just absolutely brutal but is the shorter 7-10 day one. And a juice fast which is much longer but a lot more gentle. My current plan is to make an appointment with my doctor next week to talk to him about it. I am leaning to the 30 day juice fast but I'd like to see if he would be willing to monitor me to make sure the toxicity doesn't get to such a level that I my body can't deal with it. I'm also not sure how to deal with my medication in a fast. So I figure with his guidance I can give this a shot sometime in February or March and see what happens. If (when) I do it I will be updating my blog with my experience as it goes (I hope) with the good, the bad and the ugly.

Thoughts?

Flying

The last flight I was on was between the coasts several years ago. It was the first time I flew in five years or so and it went pretty smoothly. I remember being somewhat anxious and I couldn't sleep a damn on the red eye home, but other than that it wasn't bad.

I'm about to fly west again this afternoon and for some reason the anxiety is really building up this time. I'm writing this to try to rid myself of some of it because it helps to just talk it out sometimes, so bear with me.

I'm not sure what gets me anxious. I think, since I don't fly that often, it seems a very unnatural experience to me. There is definately a control issue involved. And it also triggers some of my anxiety about being stuck in a situation I can't move around freely in. I'm not sure that any particular fear of crashing or such really enters into it that much, surely a bit but it's not what really drives my anxiety. It has to be the 'moving freely' trigger more than anything else I think. That stinks, I thought I was more or less past that.

Oh well, now that I kinda pin pointed it I feel better. Yay!

Fate versus Destiny - My Take

Ok, so I've gotten a couple of comments on this. This is my take.

I believe fate and destiny, while related, are different. To me, fate is unnavoidable. If you believe in fate or that you are fated to do something, nothing you can do, no choice you make, will change that. It will happen. You are fated to it.

Destiny, on the other hand, is what you are meant to do and that there are paths you can follow that will take you to your destiny, but there is no promise that you will meet it. I think if you listen to yourself and are just aware you know if you are on the right path to whatever your destiny may be. I also believe that you know damn well when you aren't on the right path, even if you choose not to listen.

Now neither of these talk to how your fate or destiny is set and that is a different subject all together.

I don't believe in fate but I do believe in destiny. To me, fate, as I defined it above, is just the easy way to avoid responsibility for your decisions and actions.

Lies!

A study was released today that reviewed the statements made in the run-up to the Iraq war that came up with 950+ direct, provable lies that led us to war. The report is an interesting read.

I'd like to say a bit about holding our elected representatives responsible. It is the nature of our government to make things difficult to prove wrongdoing sometimes. While I believe that some efforts can turn into witch hunts, this is not one of them. We are in this mess because of lies by public officials and they need to be held accountable for it in order to help stem this sort of thing happening on this scale again. That is why I believe studies like these and continuing investigations into pre-war rationale, intelligence, and other factors must continue and must end with people being held responsible, even if they are no longer in office at the time.

UPDATE: Check this fricken awesome tool out.

Fate versus Destiny - The Question

I've had this conversation with two different people over the last two days so I decided it was blogworthy. In this post I'll just ask the question to get input from everyone without poluting it with my beliefs. In a follow-up post in the next day or two I'll talk about what I believe.

The question: To you, is fate and destiny the same thing or different? If they are different, how are they different?

A Religious Question

So I was in the shower where I do my best thinking this morning and religion popped into my mind. I don't recall the train of thought that led me there but I'm sure it was weird.

Anyway, I got to thinking about what the peeps that wrote the various cannon's believed before they believed in Christ? Particularly the old-testament peeps. What they heck were they into before Christianity came along? I know the answer if you buy into the 6000 year old earth thing but how do you square it if you don't buy into that?

I realize this may be totally naive so educate me?

Links!

Some fun stuff, after the more serious stuff below:

An Auto-Commenter with such comments as 'all your a[i] are belong to us'
http://www.cenqua.com/commentator/

Hobbit House
http://www.simondale.net/house/index.htm

A Religous One
http://www.humanistsofutah.org/2002/WhyCantIOwnACanadian_10-02.html

Relationships and the Plan of Three

I am a serial monogamist. What that means is I meet someone, fall in love, think they are the one, really get into the relationship, start to have doubts, relationship goes to shit, takes forever to end, swear of women for a time then rinse and repeat. One of the problems with that is it really limits experience and confidence and forces me to settle instead of really shooting for the moon.

My therapist has a solution for serial monogamist..it is called The Plan Of Three! Here is how it works.

First, you define your type on three levels. And yes, everyone has a type. Each level is the perfect one, a perfect 10. The first level is physical and doesn't need an explanation. The second level is emotional and intellectually which also probably doesn't need an explanation. The third level is the tough one to put into words. Basically it whether or not the person feels like they are on the right path and far along that path they are that you are comfortable with. It doesn't mean they know what their 'destiny' is but more like if they feel like they are moving along in their life and if you are comfortable with whatever level that may be.

Second, you only date people that are 9's and 10's in all three levels. The idea is to NOT settle but to shoot for the moon. The ones that make you do a double-take are who you are shooting for. Don't settle is the mantra.

Third, it is non-sexual dating. You want to get to know these people on a friendship level with the intent of dating before you start banging pelvises. Kissing and that sorta thing is totally ok but you don't want to move into the type of intimacy that changes relationships until you are sure he/she fits 9/10 on all three levels.

Forth, you date multiple people and make sure everyone knows you are dating others, not necessarily who. The idea is date three people or so for a while until you really land on that one person.

Fifth, if you do decide to move into a more intimate relationship with someone, you break it off with everyone else. This part is key, for obvious reasons.

Ok, so what is the goal here? Why date three, etc? One thing to keep in mind is that this plan is totally not for everyone. It is mainly aimed at people (like me) with a somewhat limited dating experience, a lack of confidence in initiating relationships and a lack of perspective in what works for you and what doesn't on all three levels. For example, I can sit here and tell you, intellectually, what my type is. What I like physically, emotionally and whatever. However, I don't know for sure. How can I without something to really base it on? So by dating multiple people and, yes, comparing experiences I can really start to figure out what I really want. What the ideal is for me. And in doing so, if I really REALLY click with someone and I am totally open and honest with myself, then I make the next move and go exclusive with that person.

With me so far? That is the Plan of Three and it has worked for quite a few of my therapists clients'. Basically, as long as you are honest with it and really work it, it'll work. All of the things that make me uncomfortable about it hit on areas that I am not confident and tend to shy away from. So it makes sense to me.

Moving on. Shana and I decided to just be friends and she is dating someone we both know and they are quite taken with each other, so good for her! I am dating a wonderful woman named Melissa (Mel) and so far things have been going very well.

Good times.

Quotes

I've been wanted to write a Quote post for a while with some quotes that mean something to me. I figure this will be a living post and I'll just add to it. Please comment and some of your favorites.

"Dreamers may leave, but they are here ever after." -- David Gilmore, "On An Island"

"Life is hard."
"Compared to what?"
--Voltaire

"The universe will unfold the way it is meant to." -- Lazy Boy

Songs That Move You

There are songs that mean something to me and songs that I just like to listen to...and then there are the songs that really move me. The ones that I refuse to listen to covers of or the radio versions because they always cut off the good part. These are the songs that bring back very vivid memories or give me goosebumps. The songs I close my eyes to listen to and just let them take me away.

I wanted to write a post about a few of these songs so I picked three. I'm going to list the song and then why it means something to me, why it moves me so. And away!

Comfortably Numb
Pink Floyd "The Wall"

In 1994 I went to see Pink Floyd play at RFK stadium in DC during there 'Division Bell' tour. It turned out to be their last tour, unfortunately. In any case, they put on this amazing show. It is absolutely astounding. They have this huge arch over the stage that is some 8 stories tall and suspended in the middle is this huge circular screen with lights around the outside of it that they project video onto. At the very back of the stadium they have a huge speaker setup and to the left and right halfway back as well so you end up with this huge stereo system. During some songs they swirl the music around the stadium from speaker to speaker that just makes the pot smokers minds explode.

Anyway, 'Comfortably Numb' is the last encore song they perform. I've always enjoyed the song, particularly the guitar solo at the end which, in my mind, is the best guitar solo ever. The lyrics have meant something to me at different points in my life and play a part in why I like the song so much, but mostly it is the Gilmore's guitar work.

So throughout the song they have these amazing light show that goes with it. During the part when they give Floyd a shot and he screams all these lights come on and kinda move from the top of the stadium to the bottom...very cool. Song continues and then we get to the solo at the end. Now on the radio they cut the solo off maybe 1/3 of the way through. Live it goes on and on in sonic bliss for quite a while. The thing that makes the solo so cool is the way it builds and how edgy it is...you can just feel the emotion from it. So Gilmore is up there playing his heart out and slowly this big circular screen starts to move! It starts to rotate so that the screen faces down toward the stage. This happens pretty slowly so you don't even notice it at first but eventually the screen is perpendicular to the stage right above Gilmore's head. At a key point in the solo all the lights in the stadium go out except for the ones around the circle...those lights come on and you end up with this amazing cone of light that just totally surrounds him. Man I get goosebumps just describing this.

While that screen was moving something was happening in the middle of the stadium that you don't notice. Out of the control station or whatever it is in the middle on the field this HUGE disco ball had been slowly rising out of the ground. There is a point in the solo where it has built to this crazy sorta wailing and it climaxes with some really high powerful stuff. At this moment a bunch of lights come on to the ball and the entire 50,000+ (or whatever) packed RFK stadium is full of swirling lights. It was absolutely amazing because everyone was so fixated on the stage that you didn't even see it coming. The solo goes into this kinda wavy back-and-forth thing and I'm like 'How the hell do you top this?' Well, you top it by slowly opening the disco ball up. It folds back on itself and has these crazy lights inside. The solo is going nuts, lights and lasers and crap are all over the place and people are literally jumping up-and-down. What a fucking amazing thing.

Every time I hear that song now and it gets to that solo I close my eyes and listen and just remember. It was a really comfortable night, perfect weather...couldn't hear a damn thing for a week afterwards.

It literally brings tears to my eyes.



99 Flavors
Chick Corea "Beneath the Mask"

This song is a Jazz Fusion song - purely instrumental. On my first trip to Europe I had a walkman and had a tape with this album on it. The trip involved a lot of riding on a bus through some amazing scenery. During these trips I would just listen to this album from start to finish over and over, never rewinding to repeat a song or anything. The '99 Flavors' song is relatively short but has a part that is almost spiritual. Every time I'd get to that part I would again close my eyes and just really let myself go in the music. That bit of music - actually the entire album - now brings back memories of the countryside we traveled through. In particular one bit of Austria near the Crow's Nest where Hitler hung out. It was a highway that was on the side of a mountain and you could look over the edge all the way to a lake with the most blue water I have ever seen.



On An Island
David Gilmore "On An Island"

Most songs I get into because of the music, not the lyrics. In this case, it is both. David Gilmore is the guitarist and lead singer for Pink Floyd and 'On An Island' is his third (and latest) solo album. I just recently found it in the fall and totally fell in love with this song. The music is beautiful but has this undercurrent of hardness to it that just fits perfectly. The chorus goes like this:

Let the night surround you,
Halfway to the stars.
Ebb and flow,
Let it go
Feel the warmth beside you.

The song is about a time he spent with his wife on an island but it really hits home to me on a lot of different levels, particularly the chorus. There is also one line near the end that I love both because of it's lyrical beauty (to me) and because of what the music does to complement it. The line is:

Dreamers may leave, but their here ever after.

Text really can't do the song justice because the lyrics and the music fit together so perfectly.


Anyway, those are probably my top three. What are yours?

Movies!

I decided to review a couple of movies for you all. These reviews will contain some things that could be considered spoliers. In order to protect anyone from being spoiled I will begin each paragraph with the name of the movie it reviews. If you don't want spoilage, don't read that paragraph. However, be warned that you will miss some witty and funny descriptions that will make you snort and, in the case of drinking a beverage, would make you snarf it. That would be unfortunate because I would like to be there to watch you snarf and then laugh at you and since I cannot you would be wasting a perfectly good snarf. Onward!

NATIONAL TREASURE 2.
Crap. Ok, not total crap, but not nearly as good as the first one. I just couldn't care less about Cage's character wanting to clear his families name. So your family shot Lincoln, who cares! It's not like you did it. Get a grip, man. And what was up with the bad guy suddenly turning good and redeeming himself? That was a little abrupt, after going out of your way to show how evil he was he flips on the turn of a dime? Blah. I will say the big ass table balancing act thingy was fun.

I AM LEGEND.
Think '28 Days Later' meets 'Cast Away' with a black Tom Hanks (think about it, both Will Smith and Tom Hanks come from similiar comedy backgrounds and then proved they are incrediably versitle actors). Well, 'Cast Away' if it happened in New York city and a bunch of crazies that used to be people were trying to eat you. Oh, and there seems to be one crazy that leads the show even though you spent part of the movie explaining how all social behavior has left them and then never quite explaining how that one guy was the ring leader. Smith's performance was amazing, however and the movie itself is actually very good and enjoyable.

RAMBO!
Come on, it's RAMBO! You can't go wrong! It comes out on Jan 25th and my ass is there for the opening. I've been waiting to see a Rambo in the theater and I can't wait for this. I have no idea who he is taking out all by his lonesome this time but I bet it'll be just as unbelievable as the rest. I hope they don't even bother with a plot this time. Just plop him down in some random jungle and have the blood bath start. That's the Rambo I like.

Yay Movies!

Innate Talent or Beginner's Luck

I was sitting on the shitter reading a book the other day and I thought occurred to me, although it is kinda hard to put into words. I shall try.

Have you ever been in a situation where you started something new, something that involved a skill set you have not used before, and you were just really good at it. More established people were impressed. Then, as time went on and you learned more about the rules and structures around whatever it is you were now doing, your 'innate ability' kinda waned and you became more average?

I'm probably not describing it really well or coming across as being a cocky bastard. Let me try a different tact. Have you ever come into something new knowing nothing about the way it is supposed to be done and performed surprisingly well? There, that sounds better. Happens all the time in sports. New QB comes in because the other one was injured and turns the game around. Then the next week he tanks and you find out why he was the backup in the first place.

What the hell is all that about? Is it some innate ability that was never tapped before or just beginner's luck? And what is beginner's luck?

I feel like it is more than that. I like to believe that because you don't know what you aren't supposed to be able to do, the pressure is off and you are free to just do. So a lot of the stress/anxiety/whatever is missing that occurs during later attempts.

Does this make sense to anyone else or was I pushing too hard on the shitter? ;)

And Now, For Something Completely Different

I've been on a streak with the political and religious stuff so I figured I'd shift gears back to the third leg in my posting stool and talk about me again.

I think, as a human as most of us are, that we react to how other people react to us. No matter how much you may deny it, a certain part of your personality and self-worth is going to be defined in this way. The amount of that self-worth will vary greatly between person and during your lifetime.

For example, it wasn't too many years ago that I derived a great part of my self-worth from how I felt people related to me. And it was even less time ago that critisim of any sort really cut to the bone (like a matter of months on that one). That isn't to say that critisim still doesn't hurt or that if everyone suddenly turned their back on me I wouldn't be crushed, it just means that I have an easier time now taking it stride and not letting if affect my self-worth.

To put it another way, you can't control what a person says or does to you but you can control your reaction to it. If someone says something hurtful, whether purposely hateful or supposedly constructive, you can either internalize that and start doubting yourself and your motives...or you can really be in touch with who you are and let it slide off your back or take it for the constructive critisim that it is. I certainly picked the first option quite a bit in the past and still do from time to time, but I am falling on the second option more and more.

What are your experiences with this?

Jimmy Carter - The Man

See, if we only listened to Jimmy back in the day...

The Media, The Primaries and Sexism

So by now everyone should know how much I loathe the media, primarily the TV gas bags and blow hards. Last night was AWESOME in-so-much that it was egg on their collective faces. I would love to see that happen more often. Maybe get these dipshits to talk about the canditates based on their issues and now their 'tears'. Jesus.

Anyway, here in Lou Dobbs saying pretty much the same thing. Although his claiming independence is shit, but whatever.

And because my bitching at Mathews went over so well last time, here he is again proving my point. Oh, and this. I like how she totally brushes him off at the end and he is all red faced. Good lovin.

Speaking of sexism, here is an article I lined to in the Iowa thread that talks about it. And here is the famous back rub to the Germany Chancelor by the Frat-Boy-In-Chief back at the G8 summit. What an embarassement that guy is.

So do I think sexism has something to do with the HRC compagin, whether for it or against, you damn well bet I do. I think the evidence is clear.

It'll be a REAL interesting 11 months.

The HRC 'Upset' In NH

Bullshit.

Clinton won in NH because she has been aiming at it for the past year. She had much more of a network there than anyone else and she has been working the state longer than anyone. To think that the tears or whatever is what pulled her ahead of Obama is silly. It only became an 'upset' because our all-knowing press corp made it one, not because of reality.

God I hate the press.

I will add that I love how wrong the press got this one. They were already writing HRC off and I find that funny. Almost as funny as Huck, but not quite. They fancy themselves king makers and that is just wrong.

NH and South Carolina

Since I rocked with my Clinton win prediction in NH I figure I'll toss some out for South Carolina. Michigan doesn't really count because it really isn't a contest.

South Carolina is interesting. The primary system as it is today was put in place in the 60's. I'm not totally sure on the exact dates but I believe during the Goldwater revolution in the Republican party and the rise of the 'southern strategy' during Reagan and the exodus of the Dixiecrats from the Democratic party, South Carolina was envisioned as a fire wall from any non-establishment canaditate in the Republican party (how do you like that run-on sentence). A recent example of this strategy in work was the 2000 election when Bush beat McCain in SC and then on to win the nomination. Bush was the establishment canaditate and SC did exactly what it was meant to do, it weeded out the garbage. Of course, the famous 'McCain fathered a black son' push poll helped.

So, it is with a fair amount of glee and irony that SC, the firewall to protect the establishment, may very well propel Huckabee towards the nomination against the establishments wishes. So funny. You can't write this stuff.

On the Dem side, this one is tough. Edwards is very strong in SC and he could make a strong showing. I'm betting he pulls in second if he decides to make a stand there, although I'm betting he makes his stand on Feb 5th. It'll be a fight for 1st but I bet Obama wins with Hillary in 3rd...basically a repeat of Iowa just closer.

In summary, on the Repub side Huck, McCain then Romney. On the Dem side Obama, Edwards, Clinton.

"Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion"

I saw this quote and it doesn't sit well with me. Why wouldn't a freedom of religion also include a freedom from religion? This quote, to me, implies that as long as you worship something that is ok, but if you don't worship anything that isn't accepted.

Why The Hate, Part Two

So after writing my first post about this and kinda exploring where I was coming from I've had some time to think about it and chat about it with some others. In doing so a couple of events I had forgotten about came up and some further thoughts, so I thought a follow-up would be a good thing.

I was actually kinda surprised of the conclusion I finally ended up with...although it totally makes sense. The whole 'preying on the weak' thing really gets under my skin and that is what I feel keeps happening. A better way to describe the 'weak' however, and to tie it into stuff I have been saying for a while, is that the people must vunerable and whom tend to be targetted simply lack perspective. They don't have anything to compare what is being told to them against. Therefore, why wouldn't it make sense? As far as they know, it is what everyone does, right? While is more true for the younger people I think someone in a confused state (like High School) can fall into this as well.

Ok, so they experience I had forgotten about was with Young Life. This is, on the surface, a pretty cool organization. They get a bunch of High School kids together and go do stuff with them. It is very social and a good way to hang out and get to know people. However, just like the guy at the High School with his flyers I feel they misrepresent themselves to you at the start. Maybe not everyone but in my case I thought it was just a social organization, I didn't realize the purpose was to bring people together to experience Christ or whatever. That didn't start happening until later and it really just turned me off from them.

Anyway, to wrap all this up. Religion serves a good purpose when it is up-front and personal. When it prays on those that lack perspective and have nothing to compare it against, or hides what the true goals are, that is when it crosses a line and I think does a dis-service.

LOST!

So let me tell you about one of the many reasons I really like LOST!.

I was watching TV about 15 minutes ago and saw a commerical for Oceanic Airlines. If you are a follower of LOST! you may recall that Oceanic Airlines is the airline that crashed on the island in LOST!. The commerical had a website URL at the end: www.flyoceanicair.com. Now even if you have never seen LOST! click on it and watch the video to the end. It's good stuff.

This isn't the first time they have done this. Two summer's ago it was an entire online mystery spread out all over the Internet through secret pages and clues embedded in some sponsers like Jeep. Last summer was something a bit similiar but required more cooperation from fans to work out. In both cases (and this one too) it adds back story and answers some questions (such as what those numbers mean).

Apparently this one just started. The first episode is what I stumbled on 15 minutes ago. The next one comes out in 18 hours.

Yay LOST!

Why The Hate

So Bunny brought up a question and it is one I've heard before. Did someone in my past shove religion down my throat so hard that it scarred me and thus sent me on this crusade to rant against it so much. Ok, maybe not that starkly but you get the idea.

The answer in a nutshell is I can't point to one or two events that soured me. My views evolved over time and they continue to evolve. Who knows if I will be on the same lines I am now in 10 years, I doubt it. That is part of the fun, though.

Anyway, time to explore. I'm just more or less going to write down what I think influenced me and see what pops out.

My parents took my brother and I to First Christain Church in Hagerstown somewhat regularly. We would also go to Bible School over the summer's for a few years and did the one hour class after the main ceramony each Sunday as well. There would be times I would skip going or feign sickness, but I did that with school as well. I certainly wasn't against religion or anything at that age, it was all that I knew and I just assumed everyone went through it. I was just soooooooo bored in the ceramonies.

Time passed and we started going less and less and then just on special occasions, which was fine with me. I discovered some of my friends didn't go regularly and I remember a particular episode of a that TV show with the rich family taking in the two black kids regarding switching of to Judaism that started my first thoughts that not everyone was Christian. Looking back that was a bit of a shock to me.

Believe it or not, and I am somewhat ashamed to admit this now, I was a Rush fan for a bit and read two of his books. Some of what he said made sense to me and fit with some of the lessons I learned through church. Leslie can vouch that I refused to have sex for quite a while, for example. And I had other much more socially conservative values through High School. However, I was anything but a practicing Christian although I was very confused for a while. I recall an someone coming to the High School and passing out flyers that there would be a conference in the auditorium after school to talk about self-confidence and such. It turned out to an evangelical Christain talking about God and offering everyone to come down and be saved. At the time I actually went through it and became 'saved'. Now I look at that very differently.

Never during this time was I political in any real way, certainly not progressive like I am now. I hated Clinton during the 1992 election and was not happy when he was elected. I liked Reagan and Bush, etc. However, as I look back at all this now I can honestly say these views came from listening to other people and not really looking at what was going on nor by challenging my views. They were just adopted from others I assumed knew more and had my best interests at heart.

So when did it change? I have written about when my politics changed and I guess to a degree my views on religion started to then as well. My politics changed, and this happened pretty starkly, when I was in California working for Postal Innovations for 5 weeks. All I had was the job, so no social life. I remember every morning it would be all OJ all the time, and I remember being absolutely disgusted with it. That is what clued me in to how silly the mainstream media became and I started to not trust it as more. Then the Whitewater/Lewinsky witch hunt started and that is what pushed me left in a big way very fast. You want to talk about a fishing expedition that is example A of one.

That is when the I started to realize that the religious right had really gotten into power and was faith as a basis for law and not logic. That is probably the point I started to really examine motives and such. However, I was still not really pissed about stuff yet.

In steps the 2000 election and all the crap that has happened in the past 7 years. The Terri Shavio case puts what I rant against into perspective better than anything I could ever say. That entire episode shows just how powerfull faith has become in a place where faith is more of an obstacle than not. You can't argue with people about faith by its very nature. You have the Brownbeck's and Santorum's of the world pushing faith as the basis of law and that is clearly outlawed in the constitution.

In addition, you have a pretty underhanded way some people go about preying on people. That guy in High School is a prime example of it and it does bother me a lot. There was nothing about religion in the flyer and that type of person preys on people at age when they are confused and are looking for something with more meaning. The 'Jesus Camp' people are even scarier because they are preying on kids that don't even know what the heck is going on.

I guess what really bothers me, and what really fuels me, is that I was in a position that these people were in and looking back more people did try to prey on my insecurities and almost were successfull. I just happen to be lazy enough not to follow up on stuff that I let it slide and never went anywhere with it. As I said before, religion is deeply personal and I believe should be discovered by yourself. When it is 'passed down' or, worse, indoctrinated based on your insecurities or confusion or doubts it crosses a line and becomes dangerous. And this is true for any religion, hell for anything really.

Oh, one other point. Back when I really started becoming poltical I talked with a guy who was solidly in the religious right corner, nice guy though. Anyway, this was at a time when Bush was nominiating Ashcroft as the AG. I let this guy actually convince me that because Ashcroft was so devotely religious he could be trusted and would be a good choice. God what a dumbass I was. That was more or less the final nail in the coffin for me and believing that just because you were devotely religious you would be trustworthy in office.

In summary, I guess it is the preying on the weak that I get the most upset about because I was one of the weak for quite some time and I was preyed upon. That's why I keep saying that when people have well-thought out views and know why they believe what they believe, I have no problem with that. But when a person just spouts what they heard the last gasbag on TV say or whatever, I get kinda bent out of shape. I feel like they are being taken advantage of and so I challenge the heck out them.

Hurray for self discovery. Thanks for the question, Jesse.

Die, Spam, Die

Ha ha! Take that evil doer!

Marriage, Progressive Tax Codes and State Rights

Figured I would answer Joe's comments to the 'I Am Progressive' post in a new post since it would be more fun that way.

Regarding marriage, he brings up a good point. Basically he is saying (if I understand correctly) that marriage, being conducted by churchs and the like, is a religious institution and as such, the special benefits married couples received is a violation of church and state. I actually agree with this arguement. Ideally the government should be in the business of civil unions and the churches the marriage bit. That way, you take the entire 'marriage is the union of a man and a woman' out of the equation of whether or not you receive government tax breaks and the like and just leave it to the churchs to work that out. When people get hitched, they go down to the City Hall, get it notorized or whatever as a civil union, then do whatever religious or pagan or whatever ceremony they want to do as far as marriage goes and yer all done. To me that makes a lot more sense then what you have now.

Regarding the progressive tax code question. A progressive tax code is what we have now in which you are taxed at a higher rate the more you make. This is different than a regressive or flat tax where everyone is taxed at the same rate or you levy a heavier sales tax to make-up the short fall. The theory is 10% of someone's income for someone making $20,000 is a lot more to them than 10% of someone making $200,000 in terms of standard of living, etc. This is something I agree with.

Finally, state's rights. I believe Joe's question boils down to stronger state's rights equals more division between the states and within the country as a whole. While there is a certain amount of truth to this, I believe states are in a better position to identify the needs of their population and to react to those needs faster and more effeciently than the federal government. Additionally, the needs of your California's and New York's are very different thatn the needs of your Kansas's and Texas's, so the 'one size fits all' of the Feds doesn't always make sense. With that said, I also believe the Federal government has a strong role to play. I'm just not sure where the line is. What I do know is that it is too far on the fed side now.

Iowa

So Obama wins big, Edwards is second and HRC is third. Not a bad turn out. Obama wins that big because Richardson played king maker and asked that his caucus members vote for Obama, otherwise those results may have turned out the same but it would have been A LOT closer.

Unfortunately, I fear Obama's victory may be short lived. The HRC machine was never really banking on Iowa and has always focused on NH first. That kinda sucks because I would prefer an Obama presidency over a HRC one and an Edwards over both. Hopefully some miracle happens but there it is.

On the other side of the fence you have Huck trashing everyone else. Mitt came in second but pretty weakly. I think that was more or less predicted. What is interesting on that side is how well Paul and McCain did and how lousy Rudy did. Although Rudy is betting on Florida and bigger states so he more or less didn't campaign in Iowa or NH, so I guess that isn't that much of a surprise. But Paul and Thompson tied for 4th and McCain is 3rd, not bad. NH will be really interesting.

Go Huck!

I bet you never saw me saying that coming!

It's awesome. It is almost as good as a Ron Paul victory. Why? Because it is TOTALLY screwing the Republican elites that have been using the religious right to do their bidding but screwing them in the end. Bush was never more than a token but Huck is the real thing and it has the power players of the right flipping out.

Check this out for some insight. Here is the money line that more or less sums it up:

But Huckabee, despite an inept last week of campaigning, has forced the Republican party to face the Wal-Mart shoppers that they have long taken advantage of. He’s here. He’s Gomer. And he’s not going away.

So funny.

Go Huck!

Religious Clarification

Meant to do this a week or so ago.

Over a very enjoyable discussion with some friends before x-mas it was expressed to me that I tend to generalize in my rants about religion. I believe that as far as this blog goes that view is probably correct. When I discuss religion with people in person I tend to lay out the following clarification and I don't believe I ever did the same here.

Most people of the religious type, and I mean the vast majority, I have absolutely no issue with and, in fact, am jealous of to some degree. I believe religion is deeply personal and can provide a person with a certain comfort that I just don't have in my life.

When I rant about religion I am mostly ranting against those that try to push religion down my throat. Those people that mix religion and politics or who are just as busy brainwashing the young of America as those they rail against are in Islam or whatever (see Jesus Camp, for a great example of this). I believe that kind of religion is extremist and that is what I rant against, not the everyday average believer with whom I have no problem.

So while my language can be interpreted sometimes as being generalist, I do not mean it to and I hope this post clarifies that.

I Am Progressive

I believe in the separation of Church and State.
I believe in the power of the individual voter.
I believe that, when run effectively, social programs are a vital part of a thriving society.
I believe that the free market needs some regulation, although perhaps not as much as it currently has.
I believe in stronger state's rights.
I believe in labor unions.
I believe in evolution.
I believe that marriage doesn't have to be between a man and a woman.
I believe in a woman's right to choose and that stem cells are not babies.
I believe in government transparency.
I believe in three separate but equal branches of government, not in a unitary executive.
I believe there is too much special interest money in government.
I believe the War on Terror is not a war but should be a police action, as it is in the rest of the world.
I believe in a progressive tax code and the estate tax.
I believe that a strong middle class is the key to a strong economy and that ours is shrinking.
I believe that politics in Washington are very partisan and combative but that is a sign of strong democracy.
I believe the Federal government does have a lot of waste and can be run more effciently, but a certain amount of red tape is desireable.
I believe in some common sense gun control measures but am undecided where to draw the line.
I believe universal healthcare is not socializim and that our society could benefit greatly from it.
I believe that a strong, questioning press corps is vital for a successful democracy and that ours is anything but strong and questioning.
That is what being a progressive means to me.

Iraq

Yes, another one. However, I'm going to endeavor to keep away from the snark and just lay down some general history here.

Long before Iraq was Iraq, there were the Shia and Sunni tribes, or Islam denominations. The differences between the two are religious and have been for a very long time. There is no love lost between the two.

Before WWI the two tribes were at something of an uneasy peace. I believe they existed within the vast Ottoman Empire so there wasn't a lot of competition for resources and the like. I'm not totally sure on this, they may have been beating on each other then as well but it was an internal matter within the Empire.

Anyway...after WWI, the Ottoman Empire was split up into the Middle East as it is now. The borders were drawm up by the western powers and were mostly drawn around oil supplies. The peoples culture was not taken into account (see Israel and Palestine for another example). This is when it all started to go to hell.

Artifical borders were placed around the Sunni and Shia and they were made to inhabit the same land. It is like taking blood rivals and sticking them in a cage match.

Iraq went through a variety of attempted monarchs and other puppet governments of Britain before the Brits gave up and a dictatorship was born. The dictators were able to keep the Sunni's and Shia's from tearing each other apart through some pretty nasty means and by regulating one tribe to second class citizens.

In steps Saddam. Saddam was a Sunni. The Sunni sect is the majority in Iraq and is indeed the largest denomination of Islam. Saddam brutally repressed the Shia minority for years.

Then we step in and kill Saddam. This is where it starts to get messy and ironic. By killing Saddam and attempting to force a democratic government in Iraq, we take the Sunnis out of power and put the Shia minority in power. This happened because the Sunnis did not believe the elections were fair and boycotted them, thus assuring themselves a minority in the new government despite being the majority of the population. Without someone to brutally enforce order the Shia and Sunnis start to shoot at each other. The Shia minority wanted revenge for being stepped on al those years and the Sunni, well who knows. I guess they didn't like being shot out or being kicked out-of-power.

Here is where the irony comes in. The Shia are more-or-less in power in Iraq. Iran is supposedly the next immenient threat. Guess what most of Iran's population is and their entire government? You guessed it, Shia. You see despite Saddam's faults, and there were many, his Sunni Iraq was a counter-balance to Shia Iran. With the Shia now in power in Iraq, and the Shia in control in Iran, and Sunni's running the show in most of the rest of the Middle East...it seems a pretty sure thing that once we leave Iraq there will be a Iran/Iraq alliance of some sort.

That is the pickle we have gotten ourselves in. The deal was done as soon as we invaded. The only thing staying in Iraq does at this point is delay the inevitable and just gets our people killed. There is no way to leave without all hell breaking loose but that was a given the moment we envaded. It is not a justification for staying there.

Dread Then Not

So for the past few months I had this unsettling feeling of dread regarding 2008. I don't know why. It bothered me for a while, even though I tried not to focus on it.

Last week, it went *poof*. It is no longer there. Now I feel excited about 2008.

The changed happened about the same time I decided to stop letting my life continue on its little downward spiral. I have just been going through the motions for sometime now. Heck, not even all the motions. My house is a wreck, bills were piling up, etc. So one day last week I finally got tired of it. I sat down, made a budget that will put me in the black by the end of January (don't expect anything expensive for x-mas this year), made appointments with my shrink, psychologist and a medical doctor (haven't seen one in years) for a general checkup. And I started cleaning the house last night.

This is a general cycle for me but this time it went deeper than usual. That bothers me but at least I feel like I'm on the up swing finally.

Yay me.

Gitmo!

So I was coming into work today and I was listening to CSPAN Radio because they sometimes have some testy stuff that is interesting to me. Today they were listening to the testimony Mark Denbeaux, a professor at Seton Hall. What he and some of his students did was to take the official DoD files on all of the Gitmo detainees and analyze them. Their premise was to take whatever the files said as fact and try to categorize what the population at Gitmo actually looks like. The findings were surprising, to say the least.

There are two statements that are put out into the public discourse that are taken as fact regarding Gitmo. First, that the majority of the population in Gitmo were captured on the battlefield firing at US Troops. Second, that 30 prisoners that have been released have rejoined the fight on the battlefield. The study speaks to the first point, the second he addressed in his testimony.

Regarding the first point - and remember, this is all from the official DoD files - only 5% of the detainees were captured by US Forces. 55% of the total were found not to have committed any hostile acts against US or coalition forces. He testified that only 21 of the combatants were captured on the battlefield. Of those 21, only 1 was actually engaged in a hostile act against US Forces.

Pretty remarkable.

Regarding the second point, 15 of the 30 released cannot be located. Of the 15 that they know of, 3 made a documentary in London which somehow equates to returning to the fight. 7 are in a refugee camp which somehow equates to returning to the fight.

Seems the message and justifications for Gitmo may just be a little misleading.

Here is the report. The testimony should be available at Congresses website sometime later this week. It was in the Judiciary Committee.

Product Lifecycle

This more or less accurately describes the product lifecycle.

Religious Hirearchy

Ok, this one is funny, not serious. The Buddas are what crack me up.

Chris Mathews

To expand on my post yesterday, specifically about Mathews, check out this series of posts for an eye-opening look into this well respected 'journalist'.

You know, challenge your assumptions and stuff.

Politcal Media (and HRC!) Rant

I admit I am torn about HRC. Well the right tries to paint her as a socialist I have yet to see an argument that gets even close to making that case once you look at what she actually said. I do believe that the level of neurotic obsession with Bill and Hillary will make it hard to ever get any sort of respectable reporting out of the media, however...and I don't know that that will be helpful.

Just look at all the bullshit stories about her hairstyle, clothing, cleavage and her laugh and the continued obsession with her marriage. When do we get the adolescent coverage of Rudy's multiple marriages? Or Fred's? Don't hold your breath.

Some of these pundits, even 'respectable' ones like Mathews or Russert, just have this fascination with the Clintons that just doesn't make sense. It is like an addiction and they can't let go. And don't even get me started on Fox 'News'.

Maybe if the media could stop being gossip mongers and actually do real journalism we could start to really get to know the candidates positions, not just what the anchors think about their hair. When the hell did news anchor's go to shit anyway? I have a theory that it was when they started to become stars. Bastards.

Don't construe this post with my support for HRC, as I said at the top I am torn. I would much rather see Edwards as candidate but if it turns out to be HRC as the candidate I'll be behind her versus any of the crazies the Republicans have as possibilities. Honest-to-god, they are trying to out-torture and out-manly each other. It's sad. Rudy can't say two sentences without making something up and he's the front-runner!

Can we maybe get some real coverage on these people's actual policies? I know it doesn't make as exciting television as Hillary's cleavage or Edwards' haircuts but it is a bit more important, I think.

Watch Atlanta Run Out of Water

You can all join in the fun! Just scroll down to the table here and watch the resevoir level slowly drop. Wee!

Hmm..maybe more prayer will fix the problem?

Overhyped Threats

A hostile country led by anti-American ideologues appears close to developing its first nuclear weapon and, as a U.S. election approaches, the president and his advisers debate a pre-emptive military strike. Newspaper columnists demand action to stop the nuclear peril.

Iran? Nope:

The country was China, the year was 1963 and the president was Lyndon Baines Johnson.

However, the same is happening with Iran. Can we get some perspective here? Why are people listening to the same idiots that over-hyped the Iraq threat and are once again beating the drums? Here is the article.

At the risk of pissing of Shana again, can we elect some adults this time?

Mitral Valve Prolapse

Have I written about this before? Well, even if I have, some of this is new.

I was diagnosed with Mitral Valve Prolapse in the mid 1990's after waking up several nights in a row thinking I was having a heart attack. MVP is pretty benign and most people that have it don't even know it. I just happened to show symptoms for it, which mimic that of a heart attack in some ways, so that's nice. My particular level of it is very responsive to lifestyle changes. Basically, as long as I eat somewhat regularly, get sleep and stay mostly away from coffee and the like I don't have any symptoms.

So I was looking into again today for certain reasons and I came across this study that says most cases of MVP have been misdiagnosed. Where they originally thought upwards of 35% of the population has it they discovered that number is closer to 2.7%. And, even better, the association with stroke or heart attack, particularly in those under 45, doesn't hold up. Basically they refined the diagnosis process and are able to achieve more accurate results.

I had an echocardiogram done to diagnose mine originally. The article I linked to has a number to call for a referral to a cardiologist affiliated with this study to be re-evaluated. I'm thinking maybe I should do it?

Suitcase Nukes

On noes! If we don't bomb Iran, day give da terrorists a suitcase nuke! Oh noes!

Or maybe not.

Why The Writers Strike

UNIVERSAL: Well, in a Nutshell...
"Every day after picketing, I come home and work on my long, elegant essay articulating why we're on strike. It's meant for the general public and attempts to summarize the issues. But today, I overheard something that took care of my essay in one fell swoop.

Guy (into cell phone): The writers are on strike out here.

[PAUSE]

Guy (into cell phone): Because the corporations are dicks.

I don't need to finish my essay. Instead, I can rest up for picketing tomorrow.
-Irving Belateche

From here.

Myers-Briggs Personality Test

I meant to post this a while back with the left brain/right brain stuff. This is the famous Myers-Briggs test that gives you your four letter personality code.

Take it here. Ignore their descriptions and go here for a much more in-depth description. Select your type and start reading. At the bottom there are career and relationship descriptions as well.

When you take the test go with your first impulse when you read the question. If you analyze it you may change the result. Also, the degree to which you are a particular type can change depending on your mood, etc but you will almost always be the same type or close to it. For example, I just retook the test and ended up as an ESFP, when I took it two weeks ago I was ENFP. However, both times degree I was a N or an S was very low (16% N the first time and 1% S this time) so I straddle that particular type. The other three are pretty strong and don't change much, although I was introverted when I was younger.

Anyway, here is my type:


ENFP
Extraverted Intuitive Feeling Perceiving
Strength of the preferences %
33 12 50 67


Last week:
ESFP
Extraverted Sensing Feeling Perceiving
Strength of the preferences %
E S F P
56 1 100 56

NOTE: ENFP is my usual type. I don't know what was going on when I came up ESFP, particulary that 100% Feeling thing. The ENFP numbers are about what I usually come up as.

What is yours and does the description match how you perceive yourself?

Phone Calls

I hate them. Never been a fan of them. Its something about talking to a disembodied voice that makes it hard for me. I pick up _alot_ from visual clues when talking that helps me process what they say in the proper context of what they actually mean...you know, mood, attitude, gut feeling...that sorta thing. But on a phone, I just can't do it. It makes me feel...self conscious.

So I prefer email or face-to-face. Mostly email when it comes to business because I can think out my reply (you know, let the emotion go) and have a record of it.

Outside of business relationships I prefer face-to-face because that is when my personality really comes through. It is hard to make sarcasm work in email.

Byzantine Process

Just what is a "byzantine process" anyway? Wasn't Byzantine an empire? How can an empire be a process?

As far as I can tell it is a process that excludes newcomers. I guess that makes some degree of sense.

Anyone have a better definition?

Post Secret

What an incredibly awesome idea! Gives me chills just reading it.

Income Tax and that Top 1%

So I've always been torn by the arguement that 'the top 1% pay the majority of taxes' and the arguement for a flat tax. I came across this article that fills in the what is left out.

Federal income tax alone for 2005 brought in 45% of the federal governments income (2.143 billion). It is true that the top 1% (average salary $1.6 mil/year) paid about 40% of the federal income tax part of the pie. However, what is often left out of that arguement is payroll taxes, which is where the middle class gets fucked and the rich don't. Payroll taxes (Social security and the like) are capped one you hit $94,200/year in salary. Anything above that isn't taxed. Social Security taxes made up 37% of the entire federal income in 2005. 37%. That's 37% coming from the first $94,200/year of salary. Do you make more than that?

So to put it another way, for someone earning exactly $94,200 their effective tax rate is 6.2% for payroll taxes. For the average 1%er at $1.6mil/year, their effective tax rate is around 0.36%! Wow, no wonder they leave out payroll taxes when making that arguement.

A lot of the 'raise your taxes' stuff is talking about raising that cap on payroll taxes and making it an actual progressive tax. When the right rolls out the 'they will raise your taxes' boogyman, if you are in the middle class making under or around $94,200 you won't see a dime more taken out. If anything, alot of the plans circulated by the left lower taxes on the middle-class. Stop voting against your best interestes and research this stuff.

Challenge your assumptions.

Daylight Savings

Despite popular beliefe, daylight savings time has nothing to do with farmers.

This is a pretty good run down on the history.

In fact, farmers generally oppose daylight saving time.

I was surprised to see that.

Challenge your assumptions.

OMG OMG OMG OMG

Bruce Campbell, of Evil Dead, Bubba Ho-Tep and anything-Sam-Rami-has-ever-directed-fame, has a new movie coming out called My Name is Bruce.  The plot sounds awesome if you are fan of Evil Dead (or know anything about it):

The plot revolves around Campbell, playing himself, who, after being harassed and mistaken by fans to be a character much like Ash from the Evil Dead series of horror films, is abducted from his trailer park home to fight against Guan Di, a Chinese war deity.

This is so up my alley.  I can't wait!

A Question

Simple question for you: How big of a threat do you believe terrorism is to your way of life?

Geek Quotes

Love it

Read the comments of that thread. Lots of good stuff in there.

Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's Off To Work I Go

On Wednesday, the 17th I rejoin the grind in an office.  I have taken a Software Developer position at Tiber Creek Consulting in Tyson's Corner.  As far as an office job goes, they are about as flexible as it is going to get.  They are focused on project deadlines and not face-time in the office, so the schedule is flexible.  I get 21 days of vacation up-front (15 days + 9 holidays) and they have the rest of the benefit package including a health care package that doesn't draw from my paycheck.  And they do quarterly reviews, usually with a bonus on each one and profit sharing at the end-of-the-year.  Oh, and tuition reimbursement.

The interview was brutal and kicked my ass, so I'm somewhat surprised they even offered me a position.  I guess it was just force of personality alone.  Apparently I showed 'great potential'.

Hopefully I can get into the architecture-side of stuff where I am best and not just be a code monkey, where I'll be miserable.

Wee.

The Horrors of "Socialized" Healthcare

So one of the arguments I keep hearing against a universal healthcare system is along the lines of "Think of all the red tape we would have. " etc etc.  I think one of the main parts that this argument misses is that we already have a ton of red tape.  The insurance companies are in the business of minimizing how much they have to pay out, so you have to jump through a ton of hoops to get them to pay you while you pay them. 

This is a good example of what the difference between a 'socialized' healthcare system (Britain's) treats a wounded vet versus the privatized healthcare system we have here.  Here is a good quote (from a version of the post that is no longer online, unfortunately) that puts the incentives into place:

The government wants to minimize the amount it pays out in benefits. This causes it to give you crap when you ask it for money for an injury incurred on its behalf. The private insurance industry wants to minimize the amount it pays out in benefits. This causes it to give you crap when you ask it for money for an injury you incurred while you were giving them money.

If the purpose of the system were to  take care of people's health, though, perhaps there would be a bias in favor of... actually providing healthcare, instead of denying it.

Check it out.  It's a good piece and offers some perspective.

Right Brain vs Left Brain

So Shana and I just took this test: http://www.web-us.com/brain/braindominance.htm to further determine our left/right brain scores.  There are 18 questions.  Shana answer 4 right brian and 14 left brain, making her decidedly left brainy.  I answered 16 right and 2 left, making me decidedly right brain.

Does that mean we are a good match? :)

Take the test!

Wet Dreams

Been looking for this for the longest time.  The video isn't important, it's the song lyrics you should listen too.  This is one of the songs we used to listen to while flying around the back roads of Washington county.

Good times.

Shifting Ideology

In the late 80's, early 90's I was probably more conservative than liberal.  I'm ashamed of this but I actually read Rush and related a bit.  That was back when the Republican party hadn't gone insane yet.  It wasn't until the witch hunt of a blow job that I started to shift to the left to where the adults live. 

So it was very interesting to me to read this post by a once staunch conservative on why he left the party.  I have to say I couldn't agree more.  I will never be a social conservative but I do believe in a smaller government and some other economically conservative ideals.  However, until the GOP kicks out the crazy fear mongers (and Rudy is by far the worst right now of the contenders) I too will be willing to pay more in taxes in the short term than see the country continue to go down the tubes.

Seriously.  Is the threat of paying a little more in taxes really enough of a reason to turn your back on sanity?

US State Renamed for Countries with Similar GDP

This is a cool map.

Ha Ha

Star Trek Meets Monty Python

Monty Python Job Interview

And It All Comes Crashing Down

So for months now I've been just able to make ends meet.  My full-time job hasn't been paying me a full-time salary since I came back on early in the year.  That is ok, I knew that going in.  The idea was I would work full-time for my contractor pay until they are funded then I would be retroactively paid the difference.  The problem is, they still haven't been funded.

So I've been working a second contract to make the ends meet.  This contract has been pretty good to me but it doesn't always pay timely.  As a result, I've been late with some payments due to cash flow issues.  The money was coming, I just didn't have it on time. 

Over time I ended up in a situation where I had missed a couple of mortgage payments and had to make an arrangement with them to spread the two I missed out of six months.  As long as I paid the new mortgage amount on time I'd be ok but if I missed or was late with even one payment the agreement would be voided and the past payments would be due in full immediately.

Can you see where this is going?

All would be find as long as I could invoice my second contract on time and they could pay me before the 15th each month.  I spoke with them and expressed the critical nature of this and they were on board.

So imagine my surprise to find out today that they can't fund anymore work for at least 30 days, including the already outstanding invoice that I am counting on to pay October's bill.  Practically, what this means is I can't even do any work until November which means I probably wouldn't get another paycheck from them until December.

Now I'm screwed.  Without that income there is no way I'm making ends meet.  Not even close.  I'm not sure what I'm going to do about it. 

Boo.

How Is This Socialism

Ok you libertarians, how does this,  this, or this= socialism?  Below is a brief summary of what most of them all have in common:

"...plan includes an individual mandate to ensure universal coverage, offers all Americans access to the same menu of regulated private insurance options that members of Congress use, creates a new public insurer based off of Medicare that anyone can buy into, bars the insurance companies from price discriminating based on preexisting conditions, and uses refundable tax credits to limit the percentage of a family's income that health costs can consume ..."

Admittedly I don't know much about the details yet but it sure seems to me that the aim of the Edwards, and now HRC plans, is to make private insurance available on-top of universal health plan for those that can't afford the premiums we pay now.  That seems like a good way to get around some of the arguments (the delays in treatment) that are made when talking about the universal health care the rest of the modern world has. 

Maybe I'm totally naive and this is the evil socialism.  Educate me, please.

Oh, and regarding that oft-repeated quote that proves HRC is a socialist: "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."... Here is the context in which that quote and others attributed to her have been made.  Stupid context, always getting in the way of a perfectly good slam.

One note here, HRC is my least favorite candidate on the Democratic side.  I think she'll be divisive no matter what she does and that isn't really the best thing right now.  However, I also believe more crap has been flung at her than any of the other candidates to date and a lot of it is misleading or not true, as the above paragraph illustrates.  Not that this doesn't happen to all candidates, but her in particular. 

"Free and responsible government by popular consent just can't exist without an informed public." --Bill Moyers

Mail Call

Here is the mail that I picked up, on the Jeep for perspective.  It is just over two weeks worth. 

Here is the mail sorted.  On the right we have the mail I actually want/need.  On the left is the shit.  Can you believe that?  I knew a lot of crap came in the mail but I didn't realize it was that stupid.

Yet another reason to put a stupid person on the flag.  Do we really need that much crap coming to the mailboxes?  I hardly even look at any of it.

Wicked Hands

For the first 30 seconds or so this is crap, then it becomes awesome.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=K2cYWfq--Nw

The American Flag

I was camping last weekend on Assateague Island and this one woman came down from Toronto just to camp with us because, in her words, "No one else was camping that weekend".  She was interesting, very outdoorsy.  Had some interesting conversations with her.

In any case, in one of my random questions that just popped out of my mouth I asked her why there was a big ass maple leaf on the Canadian flag.  I figured there would be some cool story behind it.  Nope.  It's because they have a lot of maple trees. 

So that got me to thinking.  What the American flag needs is a picture of a stupid person on it, because we have a TON of stupid people. 

Here is an example, as if you need any.  I read a post from one of Shana's friends about these two couples in a Buick or something getting it on.  The guy in the back didn't want to knock his woman up but he didn't have a condom, so he asked his buddy up front if he could use his.  Used.  He turned it inside out because it would be too yucky otherwise, and they continued on their way.  Well, the chick is pregnant and the father is that other dude. 

That, my friends, is the poster boy for the American flag.

Oblivious Dumbass

I would like everyone to meet Shana.  On September 2nd at the Brassballs Saloon in Ocean City, MD we decided to date.  We would have been dating earlier but I was too much of an oblivious dumbass to do anything about it.  But now things are very good. :)

And speaking of being a dumbass, I haven't bothered to get to mail from my mailbox since I returned from Colorado.  I just went out there to pick it up and low-and-behold there was just a single note that the Post Office has decided that my mailbox is vacant and returned everything to sender.  That'll be fun sorting out.

Dumbassery.  Ugh.

MoveOn Ad and the General's Testimony

This guy almost always sums up what I'm feeling about political issues nice and bluntly. 

Who fucking cares indeed.