I must see The Aristocrats. It looks so interesting.
It also flies in the face of our logic behind ratings & censorship. AMC theatres are refusing to carry the movie. They carried the Devil's Rejects and Saw, which are both pretty violent. They carried Kinsey - which was pretty sexually explicit. But the Aristocrats - armed only with words is too much for them. I mean, why would something like The Devil's Rejects get an R rating and something like The Aristocrats, with absolutely no sex and no violence have to be released unrated? Why is it getting such an uproar when the only thing in the movie is "obscene language"?
I don't know about all of you, but despite how much I love violence in movies as a guilty pleasure, I think it's fucked up that there is more of a social uproar about "colorful" language than about violence in movies and television. Wanna know why we're such an overly violent society? Because we treat violence like there's nothing special about it. We treat war like a game or a TV show.
But words... words lead to thoughts and ideas, and those can be truly dangerous.
29 July 2005
Yet another gender question
This came up in a discussion I had last week. Ladies, your opinions are welcome, but this is more a question for the guys.
A male friend of ours recommended that a female friend just "go club the man of your dreams and drag him home", jokingly, but referring that she should just go out and get'em. Though I'd never really thought about it, she responded that most men find that sort of aggressive woman as attractive at first, but usually not as someone they'd stay with for long?
Wha'tcha'll think?
A male friend of ours recommended that a female friend just "go club the man of your dreams and drag him home", jokingly, but referring that she should just go out and get'em. Though I'd never really thought about it, she responded that most men find that sort of aggressive woman as attractive at first, but usually not as someone they'd stay with for long?
Wha'tcha'll think?
Bored Beyond Belief (the answer)
For those of you who don't know where that came from and want to know where that came from (see the comments)
28 July 2005
Pantysniffer
Keep in mind while reading this that it's been 3 years since we had to share a washer/dryer with anyone. Our last place had w/d in unit. This place, while free, has shared laundry.
So our upstairs neighbor (the nice one, not the crotchmonkey who hates dogs - a story for another time) came down the other night asking if we'd done laundry that day. I said I didn't think so. I asked John, he said he did do laundry that morning (a perk of being able to work from home - he can do things like that). Our neighbor apparently left a few pairs of her squirrel-covers in the washer, and they were gone.
So I go look at the folded laundry, and there are four pairs of underwear that I do not recognize. I return them to her, she thanks me. Then I proceed to make fun of John for stealing the neighbor's panties.
In his defense, they really must all look the same to him. But it's still funny.
So our upstairs neighbor (the nice one, not the crotchmonkey who hates dogs - a story for another time) came down the other night asking if we'd done laundry that day. I said I didn't think so. I asked John, he said he did do laundry that morning (a perk of being able to work from home - he can do things like that). Our neighbor apparently left a few pairs of her squirrel-covers in the washer, and they were gone.
So I go look at the folded laundry, and there are four pairs of underwear that I do not recognize. I return them to her, she thanks me. Then I proceed to make fun of John for stealing the neighbor's panties.
In his defense, they really must all look the same to him. But it's still funny.
President or Fratboy?
Check out this Quicktime movie.
Do we really want someone as junvenille as this as our president? How sad is this, I mean, really.
Is this real? anyone know? It looks real.
Oh, and while we're talking about inappropriate, frat-boy like antics:
GOP sets bounty to convict Daley
By John Chase
Tribune staff reporter
Published July 27, 2005
Chicago Tribune
Although it doesn't actually have the money on hand to pay up, the Cook County Republican Party announced Tuesday it is offering a $10,000 reward for information that leads to the indictment and conviction of Mayor Richard Daley....
If the DNC offered a reward for information leading to the conviction of Karl Rove, or Ken Lay, or any number of alleged criminals allied with the Bush camp, we'd be lambasted as pulling a childish political prank, a morally corrupt organization that needs to bribe people for "proof" of wrongdoing.
It's just sick. My jury is still out on this whole Daley thing. If crimes are found, fine. If not, fine. But this should be a political stunt.
Do we really want someone as junvenille as this as our president? How sad is this, I mean, really.
Is this real? anyone know? It looks real.
Oh, and while we're talking about inappropriate, frat-boy like antics:
GOP sets bounty to convict Daley
By John Chase
Tribune staff reporter
Published July 27, 2005
Chicago Tribune
Although it doesn't actually have the money on hand to pay up, the Cook County Republican Party announced Tuesday it is offering a $10,000 reward for information that leads to the indictment and conviction of Mayor Richard Daley....
If the DNC offered a reward for information leading to the conviction of Karl Rove, or Ken Lay, or any number of alleged criminals allied with the Bush camp, we'd be lambasted as pulling a childish political prank, a morally corrupt organization that needs to bribe people for "proof" of wrongdoing.
It's just sick. My jury is still out on this whole Daley thing. If crimes are found, fine. If not, fine. But this should be a political stunt.
Bored beyond belief
Summer is always the worst. There's nothing to do but catch up on stuff I couldn't do during the school year. Once that's done (oh about August), there's ZIPPO! I can re-arrange my files, or maybe straighten out my bookshelves, but that's about it right now. I prefer to be busy than have nothing to do. Some people love those lulls where there's nothing going on. I hate them. They drive me nuts.
I will be cursing come Fall and work spikes back to maximum overload. Until then, you'll probably see a lot of blog activity. Problem is, I'm getting to the point where even the internet has become boring.
4 more hours to go... snore.
Whomever can tell me where the title of this post comes from gets a prize
I will be cursing come Fall and work spikes back to maximum overload. Until then, you'll probably see a lot of blog activity. Problem is, I'm getting to the point where even the internet has become boring.
4 more hours to go... snore.
Whomever can tell me where the title of this post comes from gets a prize
No Girly Girl
I was actually thinking about this for a few days and then I saw Jason put something on his blog sort of along the same lines, asking why most bloggers (or at least one's he knows) are women. Maybe soon-to-be-Professor Auntie Heathen has some thoughts on that one? I know you're busy, but this sort of question is right up your alley missy.
I was actually thinking about how un-girly I am this past weekend as I was making curtains for our downstairs bedroom. For those of you that know me - you say "Laura? doing something remotely domestic?". All I did was chop larger curtains down and iron them with stitch-witchery tape (a godsend for someone who has absolutely no working knowledge of how to sew anything beyond a button).
I never learned the girly stuff. I spent most of my childhood in the garage helping dad build stuff, much to mom's dismay who probably wished I would play tea party, or at least, like dolls. I was just never polly-pretty with bows in my hair kind of person. I absolutely refused to wear dresses or skirts unless forced, for many years. I hated cooking, chick-flicks, and most of my friends were guys. I share their sense of humor, have a mouth like a sailor, share their tastes in movies and music.
I was one of the guys and I used to purposefully avoid things that were "girly," I think because I relished being one of the guys. I never related to girls and the things they liked to do. Now I think I like my ability to dance between the two worlds. I wear dresses, occasionally spend more than 10 minutes on my hair and makeup, and know how to use tools, love a good bloody movie, and have won my share of belching contests.
I still remember New Year's Eve where I was out with two guy friends. I think we were around 16 maybe. We ran into some other guys and ended up back at my house. We were in the basement, watching movies or something. My parents had friends over and one of their friends asked "you're going to let her go down in the basement alone with six guys?"... I guess my folks never thought anything of it either. I still wonder what Bill thought we were going to do down there (and if that was, perhaps, a deflection of his mistrust of his own daughter).
I still can't really cook anything except jambalaya, a couple of italian dishes, roast a chicken, and I can cook anything on the grill. I really don't have the patience for baking (beyond cookies) though sometimes I can dust off the girl-power and do something like the sacrificial lamb.
But I can fix stuff (not plumbing and not electrical - I don't mess with those. Too expensive if you fuck it up). I remember at our wedding shower, despite knowing me forever, some of my family members assumed it was John who registered for tools at Sears. It's amazing to me how strong the traditional gender roles are for some people - that they can't realize, even after knowing me for 28 years, that John will play with the oven-mitts while I unwrap the toolchest. Last weekend as we're installing the new window a/c unit, what does John do as I'm measuring something? Drills a hole in my Aloe plant.
I am not maternal. I pretty much hate children - especially in large groups. One or two at a time, I can deal with as long as mommy or daddy are around, are taking the kid with them when they leave, and the kid's not screetching. I have felt this way for as long as I can remember, and pretty much realized that I shouldn't have kids when I thought it would be fun to teach them all the colors wrong, send them to school, and see what happens. I don't relate to children. I have no idea what to do with them. They're like weird alien beings to me and I have no desire to have any of my own. I'll just spoil Heather's and Valya's. There was one time when we were at Valya's and she was holding a screaming Maya (who was then less than a year old I think). Valya was trying to get something out of a closet and I asked if I could help. Valya said sure, and handed Maya off to me. To which I went "uhhhmmm" and looked like a deer in the headlights. Maya did stop crying though. Heather and Valya both laughed at me and said I had "the touch"... I'll never live that one down.
I, like many men, have absolutely NO idea what takes women so goddamn long in the bathroom. Ok, we have to take more clothing off and close a door behind us in the stall. Maybe that tacks on an extra 20 seconds. Even assuming that a few of the women standing in line are currently experiencing those delightful few days, that only tacks on an extra minute, maybe two - and only for a few women. There is no reason why those lines have to be so fucking long. Speed it up ladies.
I'm also very hard on 'helpless' women. I think because they give us all a bad name. I've always been independent - don't you DARE try to help me with something. I'll do it myself, dammit. If I need help, I'll ask for it (most of the time). I am generally critical of anyone who expects others to do everything for them (unless they are physically or mentally unable to do so). But I think because society still colors women as generally "weak," I am harder on women who live up to that stereotype. It makes life harder for me when the guy at the hardware store condescendingly tries to tell me what I need instead of telling me where I can find what I'm looking for. I'm a girl, I must need his help.
Look what making curtains can release from my brain. I better not do THAT again...
I was actually thinking about how un-girly I am this past weekend as I was making curtains for our downstairs bedroom. For those of you that know me - you say "Laura? doing something remotely domestic?". All I did was chop larger curtains down and iron them with stitch-witchery tape (a godsend for someone who has absolutely no working knowledge of how to sew anything beyond a button).
I never learned the girly stuff. I spent most of my childhood in the garage helping dad build stuff, much to mom's dismay who probably wished I would play tea party, or at least, like dolls. I was just never polly-pretty with bows in my hair kind of person. I absolutely refused to wear dresses or skirts unless forced, for many years. I hated cooking, chick-flicks, and most of my friends were guys. I share their sense of humor, have a mouth like a sailor, share their tastes in movies and music.
I was one of the guys and I used to purposefully avoid things that were "girly," I think because I relished being one of the guys. I never related to girls and the things they liked to do. Now I think I like my ability to dance between the two worlds. I wear dresses, occasionally spend more than 10 minutes on my hair and makeup, and know how to use tools, love a good bloody movie, and have won my share of belching contests.
I still remember New Year's Eve where I was out with two guy friends. I think we were around 16 maybe. We ran into some other guys and ended up back at my house. We were in the basement, watching movies or something. My parents had friends over and one of their friends asked "you're going to let her go down in the basement alone with six guys?"... I guess my folks never thought anything of it either. I still wonder what Bill thought we were going to do down there (and if that was, perhaps, a deflection of his mistrust of his own daughter).
I still can't really cook anything except jambalaya, a couple of italian dishes, roast a chicken, and I can cook anything on the grill. I really don't have the patience for baking (beyond cookies) though sometimes I can dust off the girl-power and do something like the sacrificial lamb.
But I can fix stuff (not plumbing and not electrical - I don't mess with those. Too expensive if you fuck it up). I remember at our wedding shower, despite knowing me forever, some of my family members assumed it was John who registered for tools at Sears. It's amazing to me how strong the traditional gender roles are for some people - that they can't realize, even after knowing me for 28 years, that John will play with the oven-mitts while I unwrap the toolchest. Last weekend as we're installing the new window a/c unit, what does John do as I'm measuring something? Drills a hole in my Aloe plant.
I am not maternal. I pretty much hate children - especially in large groups. One or two at a time, I can deal with as long as mommy or daddy are around, are taking the kid with them when they leave, and the kid's not screetching. I have felt this way for as long as I can remember, and pretty much realized that I shouldn't have kids when I thought it would be fun to teach them all the colors wrong, send them to school, and see what happens. I don't relate to children. I have no idea what to do with them. They're like weird alien beings to me and I have no desire to have any of my own. I'll just spoil Heather's and Valya's. There was one time when we were at Valya's and she was holding a screaming Maya (who was then less than a year old I think). Valya was trying to get something out of a closet and I asked if I could help. Valya said sure, and handed Maya off to me. To which I went "uhhhmmm" and looked like a deer in the headlights. Maya did stop crying though. Heather and Valya both laughed at me and said I had "the touch"... I'll never live that one down.
I, like many men, have absolutely NO idea what takes women so goddamn long in the bathroom. Ok, we have to take more clothing off and close a door behind us in the stall. Maybe that tacks on an extra 20 seconds. Even assuming that a few of the women standing in line are currently experiencing those delightful few days, that only tacks on an extra minute, maybe two - and only for a few women. There is no reason why those lines have to be so fucking long. Speed it up ladies.
I'm also very hard on 'helpless' women. I think because they give us all a bad name. I've always been independent - don't you DARE try to help me with something. I'll do it myself, dammit. If I need help, I'll ask for it (most of the time). I am generally critical of anyone who expects others to do everything for them (unless they are physically or mentally unable to do so). But I think because society still colors women as generally "weak," I am harder on women who live up to that stereotype. It makes life harder for me when the guy at the hardware store condescendingly tries to tell me what I need instead of telling me where I can find what I'm looking for. I'm a girl, I must need his help.
Look what making curtains can release from my brain. I better not do THAT again...
27 July 2005
Worst episode ever
Before I get into the actual topic, I have to report a great Chicago politics joke (especially in light of Hizzoner's recent scandals in the news). I just heard it on the radio:
Three kids are on the playground having that timeless discussion of "my dad is better than your dad".
The first kid says, "my dad is so fast that he shoots and arrow and he beast the arrow to the target".
The second kid says, "yeah, well my dad is so fast that when he shoots a gun he beats the bullet to the target".
The third kid says, "yeah? well my dad works for the city. He's so fast that he punches out at 4 and is home by 2:30".
Anyway.
I've been busy lately and haven't had time to do much but re-report stuff I've found on the web or other blogs. I was thinking the other day about the worst movies I've ever seen and thought that would make an interesting post. Now, these are worst in any genre - because unlike movies that I like, it's very easy for me to spot ones that I absolutely hate. Of course, there will be plenty of disagreement here and I'd love to hear yours.
Keep in mind, these are only movies that I have actually seen - so it is skewed because there are movies out there, like Glitter, that I just will refuse to see. Had I seen them, they might have made it on the list, but then I probably would have had to gouge out one of my eyes as well. Thankfully, most movies on this list I saw free on cable. Had I actually paid to see some of these I might have to wear a bag over my head in shame.
Honorable Mention. Hercules in New York: Now, I secretly love this movie but only because it is SO damn bad. It at least has entertainment value. Hercules (played brilliantly by Ahnuld) gets tired of his boring life on Mt. Olympus and travels from Greece to New York to explore the world. The mandolin music gets extremely annoying after the first 20 minutes. I mean, the Governator's first movie - they overdubbed his voice because of his accent, he has a scrawny sidekick named "pretzy" and he has a fistfight in Central Park with a guy in a bear suit! Need I say more?
10. Glen or Glenda: I am only putting one Ed Wood movie on the list, as that wouldn't be fair to all the other bad movies of the world. This movie is boring, makes absolutely no sense, and is just plain BAD. It does have Bella Legosi though.
9. The Talented Mr. Ripley: This is one we actually did pay for. We went on Christmas Day one year when the whole family thing fell through for some reason. John and I went with my parents, and man, I almost fell asleep. Part of me wishes I had, I wouldn't have memories of this movie then. In addition to this film being pretentious and boring, what was Gweneth Paltrow's purpose in the plot? They could have done so much more with this concept and instead went with homoerotic chess in the bathtub. This is the male version of Single White Female.
8. Exorcist: The Beginning: We rented this, I can't remember why. This was the lamest, most predictable movie in the entire Horror genre (and that's saying a lot considering such gems as Leprechaun in the Hood).
7. Ready to Wear: A friend of mine dragged me to this movie (she was always a bit of a fruitpie when it came to movies). I actually DID fall asleep in this one. Between Short Cuts and this one, I can never, ever watch another Robert Altman film.
6. The Triplets of Bellville: Yes, this movie was visually interesting and the art was very distinct, but I honestly sat through the whole movie waiting for something interesting to happen. It never did. Both John and I sat there saying "what the fuck is going on here?".
All right, I know many of you will cry foul at this one
5. Brazil: Maybe I should give this another chance given the circumstances under which I saw this film. It was Summer 1994, about midnight, I was tired, a group of us had just gotten back from some night out somewhere (I forget) and I was forced (lest I wanted to walk 3 miles home) to watch this movie against my will by a domineering fuckwad. So maybe that has colored my opinion of this film. Until I see it again though, it remains on my list.
4. Armageddon: Now, I admit I never actually saw the whole movie. I think I came home from work to find John watching it. It was in the middle of the movie, I sat down for 5 minutes, listened a bit and said "Bruce willis is gonna sacrifice himself for the good of all and tell Ben to take care of his daughter" and left. I'm sorry, but when a movie is THAT predictable, I don't want anything to do with it.
3. Showgirls: I actually had never seen this movie until recently when it was on cable. There's not much to say about this one. It's superficial and boring and the acting is horrible. The sad thing is that it was supposed to a serious film, and it ended up being a joke.
2. Gigli: Shut up! Just shut...up. I had to see just how bad it was after all the buzz, especially that part about "turkey time, gobble gobble". Again, free on cable. It wasn't nearly as bad as the next movie on the list, but it was pretty damn bad. I got a couple laughs out of it when Ben Affleck tried to pretend he was a real actor.
1. Battlefield Earth: Yes, I actually put myself through the agony of this piece of crap. There should be a trench a few miles wide between this and any other movie on the list, that's how absolutely horrible it is. It was free, on cable. So the only thing I lost was a couple of hours and a bit of my dignity. This is the bar from which I measure all other levels of "suck".
Three kids are on the playground having that timeless discussion of "my dad is better than your dad".
The first kid says, "my dad is so fast that he shoots and arrow and he beast the arrow to the target".
The second kid says, "yeah, well my dad is so fast that when he shoots a gun he beats the bullet to the target".
The third kid says, "yeah? well my dad works for the city. He's so fast that he punches out at 4 and is home by 2:30".
Anyway.
I've been busy lately and haven't had time to do much but re-report stuff I've found on the web or other blogs. I was thinking the other day about the worst movies I've ever seen and thought that would make an interesting post. Now, these are worst in any genre - because unlike movies that I like, it's very easy for me to spot ones that I absolutely hate. Of course, there will be plenty of disagreement here and I'd love to hear yours.
Keep in mind, these are only movies that I have actually seen - so it is skewed because there are movies out there, like Glitter, that I just will refuse to see. Had I seen them, they might have made it on the list, but then I probably would have had to gouge out one of my eyes as well. Thankfully, most movies on this list I saw free on cable. Had I actually paid to see some of these I might have to wear a bag over my head in shame.
Honorable Mention. Hercules in New York: Now, I secretly love this movie but only because it is SO damn bad. It at least has entertainment value. Hercules (played brilliantly by Ahnuld) gets tired of his boring life on Mt. Olympus and travels from Greece to New York to explore the world. The mandolin music gets extremely annoying after the first 20 minutes. I mean, the Governator's first movie - they overdubbed his voice because of his accent, he has a scrawny sidekick named "pretzy" and he has a fistfight in Central Park with a guy in a bear suit! Need I say more?
10. Glen or Glenda: I am only putting one Ed Wood movie on the list, as that wouldn't be fair to all the other bad movies of the world. This movie is boring, makes absolutely no sense, and is just plain BAD. It does have Bella Legosi though.
9. The Talented Mr. Ripley: This is one we actually did pay for. We went on Christmas Day one year when the whole family thing fell through for some reason. John and I went with my parents, and man, I almost fell asleep. Part of me wishes I had, I wouldn't have memories of this movie then. In addition to this film being pretentious and boring, what was Gweneth Paltrow's purpose in the plot? They could have done so much more with this concept and instead went with homoerotic chess in the bathtub. This is the male version of Single White Female.
8. Exorcist: The Beginning: We rented this, I can't remember why. This was the lamest, most predictable movie in the entire Horror genre (and that's saying a lot considering such gems as Leprechaun in the Hood).
7. Ready to Wear: A friend of mine dragged me to this movie (she was always a bit of a fruitpie when it came to movies). I actually DID fall asleep in this one. Between Short Cuts and this one, I can never, ever watch another Robert Altman film.
6. The Triplets of Bellville: Yes, this movie was visually interesting and the art was very distinct, but I honestly sat through the whole movie waiting for something interesting to happen. It never did. Both John and I sat there saying "what the fuck is going on here?".
All right, I know many of you will cry foul at this one
5. Brazil: Maybe I should give this another chance given the circumstances under which I saw this film. It was Summer 1994, about midnight, I was tired, a group of us had just gotten back from some night out somewhere (I forget) and I was forced (lest I wanted to walk 3 miles home) to watch this movie against my will by a domineering fuckwad. So maybe that has colored my opinion of this film. Until I see it again though, it remains on my list.
4. Armageddon: Now, I admit I never actually saw the whole movie. I think I came home from work to find John watching it. It was in the middle of the movie, I sat down for 5 minutes, listened a bit and said "Bruce willis is gonna sacrifice himself for the good of all and tell Ben to take care of his daughter" and left. I'm sorry, but when a movie is THAT predictable, I don't want anything to do with it.
3. Showgirls: I actually had never seen this movie until recently when it was on cable. There's not much to say about this one. It's superficial and boring and the acting is horrible. The sad thing is that it was supposed to a serious film, and it ended up being a joke.
2. Gigli: Shut up! Just shut...up. I had to see just how bad it was after all the buzz, especially that part about "turkey time, gobble gobble". Again, free on cable. It wasn't nearly as bad as the next movie on the list, but it was pretty damn bad. I got a couple laughs out of it when Ben Affleck tried to pretend he was a real actor.
1. Battlefield Earth: Yes, I actually put myself through the agony of this piece of crap. There should be a trench a few miles wide between this and any other movie on the list, that's how absolutely horrible it is. It was free, on cable. So the only thing I lost was a couple of hours and a bit of my dignity. This is the bar from which I measure all other levels of "suck".
Do you care about health care in the US?
I read about this on another blog and it just terrifies me that people are being legislated back to the Pullman era and they either don't care (because they take their labor rights for granted) or they don't know (because politics is "boring").
Read the attached link...
Read the attached link...
26 July 2005
Educating America
I swiped this off Rudy's blog, but I wanted to share it with all y'all.
I think there are far too many Americans who just don't think it's important to know what the rest of the world thinks about current events. That is, of course, why we've become the stupidest industrialized nation in the world - we're ignorant and we're proud! Only our point of view matters!. Fuck that.
This website translates articles from world newspapers into English (since we're also the only industrialized country that doesn't require students to learn at least one foreign language) so we can see how the rest of the world sees current news. I am guilty of this myself - I never learned a foreign language beyond the 2 years required in High School. By that age though, languages are harder to learn - we should require it from grammar school on - but I digress.
I'm not saying we should act only in ways that make other countries happy necessarily or that their takes on events are always correct - but understanding how they see the world and what they think about America is an important piece to navigating the global climate.
Globalization is a reality - there's no going back. We can't afford to live in our ignorant little bubble anymore.
I think there are far too many Americans who just don't think it's important to know what the rest of the world thinks about current events. That is, of course, why we've become the stupidest industrialized nation in the world - we're ignorant and we're proud! Only our point of view matters!. Fuck that.
This website translates articles from world newspapers into English (since we're also the only industrialized country that doesn't require students to learn at least one foreign language) so we can see how the rest of the world sees current news. I am guilty of this myself - I never learned a foreign language beyond the 2 years required in High School. By that age though, languages are harder to learn - we should require it from grammar school on - but I digress.
I'm not saying we should act only in ways that make other countries happy necessarily or that their takes on events are always correct - but understanding how they see the world and what they think about America is an important piece to navigating the global climate.
Globalization is a reality - there's no going back. We can't afford to live in our ignorant little bubble anymore.
Does Chicago really need the tallest cock in the sky?
Come on people, enough is enough. This thing is hideous. I don't want that on my lakefront!
25 July 2005
Review: Freethinkers
Susan Jacoby. Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2004. 399 pp. ISBN 0-8050-7442-2.
I started this book back in May but had to put it down for my class. I finally finished it and I thought it was an extremely interesting and pertinent look into America's founding and the continuous struggle between religion and secularism in the US since the 1770s. It's particularly relevant in light of the recent ideological battles in the US and the current demonizing of everything 'liberal' as anti-religious.
Starting with the revolution and the founding fathers, Jacoby details the adherence of these men to Enlightenment principles and their insistence that the Constitution have no endorsement of any particular religion. She also details the eventual ostracism of Thomas Paine and his demonization by anti-secularists for the publication of The Age of Reason, his atheistic views and his pronouncements against all religion. This begins the pattern in Freethinkers: demonstrating how the historical importance of certain individuals, whose views were particularly anti-religions, was downplayed (or completely omitted from history) and how future generations somehow always manage to dust-off The Age of Reason and re-discover these prominent Freethinkers.
Throughout several of the chapters, Jacoby demonstrates how American history has been made "religiously correct" by excluding those important figures with anti-religious or atheistic views and downplaying the role of secularism in the revolution, abolitionist and women's rights movements. She uses as an example, Abraham Lincoln, the hero of Republicans throughout the country. According to modern conservatives, many of Lincoln's speeches and many history books paint Lincoln as a pious Christian. Jacoby uncovers, however, that Lincoln never belonged to a church, that his speechwriter was Christian, and that many of Lincoln's close friends who knew him before his career in politics described him as an agnostic or an "unbeliever". So could it be that Lincoln was less of a Christian and more of a savvy politician - who knew that no one could ever have a successful political career in America while proclaiming their non-belief?
Jacoby covers many of the major political and moral struggles which faced America: Abolition of Slavery, Immigration, Anti-clericalsim, Women's Rights, Darwinism, and the stifling of civil liberties during wartime. She draws links between all of these movements, through the participation of various famous (and forgotten) freethinkers such as Thomas Paine, William Lloyd Garrison, Abraham Lincoln, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Ernestine L. Rose, Robert Ingersoll, Walt Whitman, Clarence Darrow, and many others.
After the World War I, and the creation of the ACLU, Jacoby details how Freethinkers not only defended the rights of secularists and political dissidents but also of religious minorities whose rights were being trampled by the Protestant majority. No matter who the defendant, Freethinkers have always defended the separation between Church and State as a fundamental principle of American freedom.
Freethinkers also covers the Red Scare and the use of blanket associations with Bolsheviks, of any cause anti-secularists wanted to defeat:
"...Innumerable other gentlemen now discovered that they could defeat whatever they wanted to defeat by tarring it conspicuously with the Bolshevist brush. Big-navy men, believers in compuslory military service, drys, anti-cigarette campaigners, anti-evolution Fundamentalists, defenders of the moral order, book censors, Jew-haters, Negro-haters, landlords, manufacturers, utility executives, upholders of every sort of cause, good, bad and indifferent, all wrapped themselves in Old Glory and the mantle of the Founding Fathers and allied their opponents with Lenin." --Fredrick Lewis Allen "Only Yesterday" (1931).
This tactic was revived in the McCarthy era by linking religiosity and patriotism as the foes of communism and secularists. I don't know about you, but substitute "terrorist" for Bolshevist and Lenin and you've got a pretty good picture of our current climate toward political dissent.
Overall, the book does a great job of taking you step-by-step from the Revolution's secular roots to explain how we arrived at George W. Bush calling Jesus his political adviser and holding prayer at cabinet meetings.
I started this book back in May but had to put it down for my class. I finally finished it and I thought it was an extremely interesting and pertinent look into America's founding and the continuous struggle between religion and secularism in the US since the 1770s. It's particularly relevant in light of the recent ideological battles in the US and the current demonizing of everything 'liberal' as anti-religious.
Starting with the revolution and the founding fathers, Jacoby details the adherence of these men to Enlightenment principles and their insistence that the Constitution have no endorsement of any particular religion. She also details the eventual ostracism of Thomas Paine and his demonization by anti-secularists for the publication of The Age of Reason, his atheistic views and his pronouncements against all religion. This begins the pattern in Freethinkers: demonstrating how the historical importance of certain individuals, whose views were particularly anti-religions, was downplayed (or completely omitted from history) and how future generations somehow always manage to dust-off The Age of Reason and re-discover these prominent Freethinkers.
Throughout several of the chapters, Jacoby demonstrates how American history has been made "religiously correct" by excluding those important figures with anti-religious or atheistic views and downplaying the role of secularism in the revolution, abolitionist and women's rights movements. She uses as an example, Abraham Lincoln, the hero of Republicans throughout the country. According to modern conservatives, many of Lincoln's speeches and many history books paint Lincoln as a pious Christian. Jacoby uncovers, however, that Lincoln never belonged to a church, that his speechwriter was Christian, and that many of Lincoln's close friends who knew him before his career in politics described him as an agnostic or an "unbeliever". So could it be that Lincoln was less of a Christian and more of a savvy politician - who knew that no one could ever have a successful political career in America while proclaiming their non-belief?
Jacoby covers many of the major political and moral struggles which faced America: Abolition of Slavery, Immigration, Anti-clericalsim, Women's Rights, Darwinism, and the stifling of civil liberties during wartime. She draws links between all of these movements, through the participation of various famous (and forgotten) freethinkers such as Thomas Paine, William Lloyd Garrison, Abraham Lincoln, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Ernestine L. Rose, Robert Ingersoll, Walt Whitman, Clarence Darrow, and many others.
After the World War I, and the creation of the ACLU, Jacoby details how Freethinkers not only defended the rights of secularists and political dissidents but also of religious minorities whose rights were being trampled by the Protestant majority. No matter who the defendant, Freethinkers have always defended the separation between Church and State as a fundamental principle of American freedom.
Freethinkers also covers the Red Scare and the use of blanket associations with Bolsheviks, of any cause anti-secularists wanted to defeat:
"...Innumerable other gentlemen now discovered that they could defeat whatever they wanted to defeat by tarring it conspicuously with the Bolshevist brush. Big-navy men, believers in compuslory military service, drys, anti-cigarette campaigners, anti-evolution Fundamentalists, defenders of the moral order, book censors, Jew-haters, Negro-haters, landlords, manufacturers, utility executives, upholders of every sort of cause, good, bad and indifferent, all wrapped themselves in Old Glory and the mantle of the Founding Fathers and allied their opponents with Lenin." --Fredrick Lewis Allen "Only Yesterday" (1931).
This tactic was revived in the McCarthy era by linking religiosity and patriotism as the foes of communism and secularists. I don't know about you, but substitute "terrorist" for Bolshevist and Lenin and you've got a pretty good picture of our current climate toward political dissent.
Overall, the book does a great job of taking you step-by-step from the Revolution's secular roots to explain how we arrived at George W. Bush calling Jesus his political adviser and holding prayer at cabinet meetings.
Keyboard vs. Mouse?
I've been a keyboard person for about 9 years now. What do I mean by that? I mean, with few exceptions like surfing the web or certain tasks in Excel where the mouse is easier, I use the keyboard commands for pretty much everything. A guy at my old office at DePaul taught me how to use them, and I think that I actually work much faster this way than I ever did with the mouse. Formatting, data manipulation/entry, opening/closing/moving files is so much faster.
So I'm curious: what are you? I'd say I'm about 80% keyboard, 20% mouse.
So I'm curious: what are you? I'd say I'm about 80% keyboard, 20% mouse.
Devil's Rejects
I liked House of 1,000 Corpses and I like the genre of the old-school, fucked-up, sadistic horror movie. So what better movie to see than the Devil's Rejects.
I was a little disappointed in this one actually. It wasn't bad, but it could have been better. It starts off with a police raid on Firefly House (the farmhouse from 1,000 Corpses) - and of course, a few members of the psycho-killer family get away. This movie is about their attempts to evade the law, and in particular, a vindictive sherrif whose brother was killed by the family.
As usual, Sid Haig is so creepy that he's hard to look at. He is one WEIRD looking mofo.
I also had to see it because a girl I went to high school with is in it - and she has, in my opinion, the best quality kill of the movie. Go Katie.
So, if you're into this sort of thing, it's worth seeing as a mantinee - but I wouldn't spend $9 on it.
I was a little disappointed in this one actually. It wasn't bad, but it could have been better. It starts off with a police raid on Firefly House (the farmhouse from 1,000 Corpses) - and of course, a few members of the psycho-killer family get away. This movie is about their attempts to evade the law, and in particular, a vindictive sherrif whose brother was killed by the family.
As usual, Sid Haig is so creepy that he's hard to look at. He is one WEIRD looking mofo.
I also had to see it because a girl I went to high school with is in it - and she has, in my opinion, the best quality kill of the movie. Go Katie.
So, if you're into this sort of thing, it's worth seeing as a mantinee - but I wouldn't spend $9 on it.
22 July 2005
All right...
I secretly like this fruity shit... Actually, these are better as they're not in chain-letter format.
I didn't come up with the questions, so don't blame me...
1. Who are you?
2. Are we friends?
3. When and how did we meet?
4. Do you have a crush on me?
5. Would you kiss me?
6. Give me a nickname and explain why you picked it.
7. Describe me in one word.
8. What was your first impression?
9. Do you still think that way about me now?
10. What reminds you of me?
11. If you could give me anything what would it be?
12. How well do you know me?
13. When's the last time you saw me?
14. Ever wanted to tell me something but couldn't?
15. Are you going to put this on your blog and see what I say about you?
I didn't come up with the questions, so don't blame me...
1. Who are you?
2. Are we friends?
3. When and how did we meet?
4. Do you have a crush on me?
5. Would you kiss me?
6. Give me a nickname and explain why you picked it.
7. Describe me in one word.
8. What was your first impression?
9. Do you still think that way about me now?
10. What reminds you of me?
11. If you could give me anything what would it be?
12. How well do you know me?
13. When's the last time you saw me?
14. Ever wanted to tell me something but couldn't?
15. Are you going to put this on your blog and see what I say about you?
21 July 2005
You had me at "Dianetics"
So I was talking to Donna yesterday about Katie Holmes and her Scientology chaperone (no, I'm not kidding) and decided today, since I have no motivation to do my actual job, to delve into the world of dearly departed L. Ron Hubbard. I'm not sure how we got started on that.
In any case, I decided to go to the Scientology website, just to see what was there and I've been converted (just kidding). No, I noticed one of those personality quizzes - so I start it. Damn! It asks for your name and address so they can "contact you" to discuss your test results... Uh huh.
So I put in:
Dr. Tom Cruise
1313 Mockingbird Lane
Looneytown, CA
and used the phone number for the American Psychological Association.
So I embark on the journey to discover my true personality through the battery of 200 questions! Such gems as:
Needless to say, being sane, I didn't fare too well. They give you a little chart, but no explanation. I'm supposed to seek out my local Scientology center in Looneytown, California for a more in-depth analysis... no thanks.
Well according to the Happy Fun Cult - almost every aspect of my life is "Undesireable" and I should seek to give them money to help rectify my pathetic existence. Go ahead and try it, it's fun, and it wastes a good half hour.
In any case, I decided to go to the Scientology website, just to see what was there and I've been converted (just kidding). No, I noticed one of those personality quizzes - so I start it. Damn! It asks for your name and address so they can "contact you" to discuss your test results... Uh huh.
So I put in:
Dr. Tom Cruise
1313 Mockingbird Lane
Looneytown, CA
and used the phone number for the American Psychological Association.
So I embark on the journey to discover my true personality through the battery of 200 questions! Such gems as:
- Do you browse through railway timetables, directories, or dictionaries just for pleasure?
- Could you agree to “strict discipline”?
- Are you perturbed at the idea of loss of dignity?
- Would you use corporal punishment on a child aged ten if it refused to obey you? (emphasis added)
- Is your facial expression varied rather than set?
- Would it take a definite effort on your part to consider the subject of suicide? (Jonestown anyone?)
- Are you in favor of color bar and class distinction?
- Are you sometimes convinced of the correctness of your opinions about a subject even though you are not an expert? (say, like Dr. Tom on the Today Show??)
Needless to say, being sane, I didn't fare too well. They give you a little chart, but no explanation. I'm supposed to seek out my local Scientology center in Looneytown, California for a more in-depth analysis... no thanks.
Well according to the Happy Fun Cult - almost every aspect of my life is "Undesireable" and I should seek to give them money to help rectify my pathetic existence. Go ahead and try it, it's fun, and it wastes a good half hour.
20 July 2005
Think this would work in the Bible Belt?
KAMPALA, Uganda (Reuters) -- A Ugandan member of parliament has pledged to reward girls for their chastity by paying their university fees if they are virgins when they leave school, a local newspaper said on Wednesday.
Bbaale County MP Sulaiman Madada said any girl in his district who wanted to take part in the scheme aimed at promoting girls' education would be given a gynecological examination by health workers to check they were virgins."
I'm all for improving educational opportunities in the Third World, especially for women and girls, but this is a blatant Human Rights violation. Not to mention yet another way the double-standard for men & women's sexual rights is enforced and reinforcing the use of women's chastity as some sort of moral measurement of society.
19 July 2005
Stop teasing damn you!
Yesterday it rained in the Loop for about 5 minutes. We need rain and I wish the clouds would stop teasing me.
I miss central air. Our new place gets kinda hot during days like these. Those bastards lied to us when we asked how hot it got in there. They said it's "not bad".
They must be from Venus or Mercury... sigh
Annie still has that damn bacterial infection. She has such a sensitve digestive tract. Back to the bland diet for her.
She's also developed a sudden phobia of any loud noise. The fireworks scare from July 3rd has apparently generalized, and now any sudden noise makes her want to scurry back home when we're out for a walk. We're considering consulting a trainer/behaviorist - since she no longer wants to play in the park (and we're afraid to let her off leash until we know she won't bolt). So now she has nowhere to play, as our new yard isn't exactly set up for doggie play.
This place seems like a big mistake. We must make it worth the sacrifice by saving enough to buy a place.
I miss central air. Our new place gets kinda hot during days like these. Those bastards lied to us when we asked how hot it got in there. They said it's "not bad".
They must be from Venus or Mercury... sigh
Annie still has that damn bacterial infection. She has such a sensitve digestive tract. Back to the bland diet for her.
She's also developed a sudden phobia of any loud noise. The fireworks scare from July 3rd has apparently generalized, and now any sudden noise makes her want to scurry back home when we're out for a walk. We're considering consulting a trainer/behaviorist - since she no longer wants to play in the park (and we're afraid to let her off leash until we know she won't bolt). So now she has nowhere to play, as our new yard isn't exactly set up for doggie play.
This place seems like a big mistake. We must make it worth the sacrifice by saving enough to buy a place.
17 July 2005
Charlie & the Chocolate Factory
I don't do much in the way of standard movie reviews, I just can't write that way. But I'll try because this was one of the best movies of the year.
First off, you must check your memories of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory at the door. I'm not saying you won't enjoy the this one if you love the last one, but you'll definitely have less fun if you are intent on comparing the two. They are very different. I still love Willy Wonka, Gene Wilder was fantastic, and I'll never forget the damn Oompa Loompa songs. That said, this film is far superior in emotion and I think that is because Johnny Depp and Freddy Highmore have such a great rapport.
Charlie is a very poor boy living with his very loving family. He gets one Wonka bar, the best chocolate in the world, each year for his birthday. Years ago, Wonka closed his factory because employees were selling his secret recipies to competitors. He fired all his workers and disappeared. One day, the factory began production again, but no one ever went in or came out.
Out of the blue, Wonka issues 5 golden tickets, each in a bar of chocolate. 5 children, accompanied by a parent will win a tour of the factory, a lifetime supply of chocolate and one lucky child will win a prize beyond their wildest imagination. Charlie has no illusions that he is just about the most unlikey child to wind a golden ticket. We see the first four winners: The gluttonous Agustus Gloop, the spoiled rotten Veruca Salt, the ultra competitive Violet Beauregarde, and the TV addicted Mike Teavee. Then through a stroke of luck, Charlie finds his golden ticket and he and Grandpa Joe are off to the Chocolate factory.
From here, we all know the basic premise of the story - each rotten child is expelled from the tour in appropriately rotten ways. I won't give away details since Burton's vision and creativity took charge of the story and the results are amazing. The new Oompa Loompas and their songs are so much fun, and it's an amazing accomplishment in special effects (all the Oompa Loompas are played by one guy. I will only say that the squirrel room is hilarious and movie buffs will be in absolute awe of the Mike Teevee/Wonkavision scene. It was pure genius. I couldn't take my eyes off it and saying to myself "oh that is SOOO cool".
The sets and costumes are pure Burton all the way. He was made to create the Chocolate Factory - his drastic and cartoonish style are absolutely perfect for every child's dream - the greatest chocolate factory in the world. The acting was far superior to the original in my opinion, with the exception of Gene Wilder who was brilliant. I just think we have higher standards for child actors nowadays. I'm not saying the original was bad. But you cannot top Johnny Depp in this role - he is creepy, strange and loveable all at the same time. He is a large pasty-white manchild who dresses extravagantly - the only difference between him and Michael Jackson is that Wonka doesn't like to be alone with children...
The movie is fun for adults and children, it still has its profound statements about selfishness and greed, and it's pure Tim Burton.
I want it on DVD and I want it NOW daddy!
Actually, next weekend we're going to see it again at the IMAX - that'll be trippy.
First off, you must check your memories of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory at the door. I'm not saying you won't enjoy the this one if you love the last one, but you'll definitely have less fun if you are intent on comparing the two. They are very different. I still love Willy Wonka, Gene Wilder was fantastic, and I'll never forget the damn Oompa Loompa songs. That said, this film is far superior in emotion and I think that is because Johnny Depp and Freddy Highmore have such a great rapport.
Charlie is a very poor boy living with his very loving family. He gets one Wonka bar, the best chocolate in the world, each year for his birthday. Years ago, Wonka closed his factory because employees were selling his secret recipies to competitors. He fired all his workers and disappeared. One day, the factory began production again, but no one ever went in or came out.
Out of the blue, Wonka issues 5 golden tickets, each in a bar of chocolate. 5 children, accompanied by a parent will win a tour of the factory, a lifetime supply of chocolate and one lucky child will win a prize beyond their wildest imagination. Charlie has no illusions that he is just about the most unlikey child to wind a golden ticket. We see the first four winners: The gluttonous Agustus Gloop, the spoiled rotten Veruca Salt, the ultra competitive Violet Beauregarde, and the TV addicted Mike Teavee. Then through a stroke of luck, Charlie finds his golden ticket and he and Grandpa Joe are off to the Chocolate factory.
From here, we all know the basic premise of the story - each rotten child is expelled from the tour in appropriately rotten ways. I won't give away details since Burton's vision and creativity took charge of the story and the results are amazing. The new Oompa Loompas and their songs are so much fun, and it's an amazing accomplishment in special effects (all the Oompa Loompas are played by one guy. I will only say that the squirrel room is hilarious and movie buffs will be in absolute awe of the Mike Teevee/Wonkavision scene. It was pure genius. I couldn't take my eyes off it and saying to myself "oh that is SOOO cool".
The sets and costumes are pure Burton all the way. He was made to create the Chocolate Factory - his drastic and cartoonish style are absolutely perfect for every child's dream - the greatest chocolate factory in the world. The acting was far superior to the original in my opinion, with the exception of Gene Wilder who was brilliant. I just think we have higher standards for child actors nowadays. I'm not saying the original was bad. But you cannot top Johnny Depp in this role - he is creepy, strange and loveable all at the same time. He is a large pasty-white manchild who dresses extravagantly - the only difference between him and Michael Jackson is that Wonka doesn't like to be alone with children...
The movie is fun for adults and children, it still has its profound statements about selfishness and greed, and it's pure Tim Burton.
I want it on DVD and I want it NOW daddy!
Actually, next weekend we're going to see it again at the IMAX - that'll be trippy.
15 July 2005
Check this out
SecretRudy posted this - there's some really funny one's but I think this is my favorite one:
It's here! It's finally here!
We're going to see Charlie & the Chocolate Factory tonight at the Davis. I have waited so long for this. I have a feeling it's going to be really fucked-up!
I was watching the HBO: First look a while back. They actually trained squirrels.
Tim Burton, with his surreal and cartoonish styles is the perfect person to direct this.
I can't wait.
I was watching the HBO: First look a while back. They actually trained squirrels.
Tim Burton, with his surreal and cartoonish styles is the perfect person to direct this.
I can't wait.
14 July 2005
Support Karl
Send an e-mail to Karl Rove telling him how much you love him, despite all the evidence that he may well in fact be, a turd blossom...
from whitehouse.org
from whitehouse.org
Where's Kenny Boy?
So Worldcom's ex-chief got 25 years for his role in the financial shananigan's of his company. Personally, I think he should get 25 years AND have to sell all his property to pay back the money he stole to the people who actually earned it for him.
That got me thinkin though. Whatever happened with Enron and Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay? You never hear about them anymore. I personally think they're stalling that investigation because there are too many ties to current Whitehouse officials. You know once they crack those evidence files they're going to find gubenatorial misconduct by our Clueless Leader.
Bush has an awful lot of connection to criminals huh?
That got me thinkin though. Whatever happened with Enron and Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay? You never hear about them anymore. I personally think they're stalling that investigation because there are too many ties to current Whitehouse officials. You know once they crack those evidence files they're going to find gubenatorial misconduct by our Clueless Leader.
Bush has an awful lot of connection to criminals huh?
Inherit the Stink**
So John said I should post the story of how we got Annie, our dog. I suppose her origins shed some light on my recent hissyfit and my fear of her ever feeling abandoned, and John's persistent habit of spoiling her rotten.
This was three years ago in May, and we had just moved into our place on Racine. As we were moving in, the woman in the top-level apartment was moving out. She works with the Illinois Doberman Rescue. Since we had wanted a dog for a long time and John worked from home and our new place had a yard which was basically a giant dog run and our new landlords were total dog-lovers, we decided to start looking.
I grew up with a fuzzy mutt, and I didn't like the idea of purebreds, since unless (and even if) you pay an arm and a leg, you may get a purebred dog with genetic disorders. Plus, I don't like the idea of purchasing a cat or dog - there are so many that need homes. John, however, like purebreds because you knew what you were getting, for the most part, personality wise. With a mutt, you could have some breeds with bad personality traits and not know it. Well our soon-to-be-ex-neighbor gave John her card and we started looking at the Dobie rescue website. We (or at least I) didn't want a puppy since they're so hard to train and I didn't think we had the time for housebreaking and the like. Plus, unless you buy them, puppies are hard to come by. John was working from home, so he didn't think the training was as big an issue as I did. He could work with her during the days.
So we look and I start warming up to the idea of a Doberman. They are pretty dogs, especially when their ears are left natural. I also liked the idea of a rescue dog, since they all need homes, and since they are fostered with people, they're socialized, unlike many shelter dogs. We saw one dog that we really wanted to check out. A red Doberman named Queen, who was about 4 years old. We called the foster-woman and made an appointment. She was out in Barrington, so we were going to rent a car. I get the chronology screwed up here, but a day or two before we were going to go see her, we get a call saying she's been adopted. We were very sad, but glad she found a permanent home.
Serendipity.
John's coworker, Ken, who knew we were thinking about getting a dog, sent John a message that his sister found a stray dog in their yard. I was a little leery, since strays usually come with baggage, but as I learned more I couldn't help but feel sorry for the little dear. Not just a stray, but a stray puppy the vet would later tell us was 3 months old, who was tossed over their fence and left in their backyard. They had a high wood fence with a lock, so there's no other possible way she could have gotten there. She had a tiny pink collar but no tag. Ken sent John a picture and man was she cute.
So we said, sure, come on by and we'll see. Unless there was something terribly wrong with her, we were pretty much decided that we'd keep her. So Ken's sister & brother-in-law come up from the South Side with this poor little abandoned puppy. They pretty much dropped her off and left, and we were left with this little tiny puppy. She immediately felt right at home, though puzzled by the strange creatures (2 cats) who would later become her nemisises (nemisi?). She fell asleep on John's leg and we knew we had a dog.
The next day we went and got puppy supplies and a few toys including a little stuffed carrot, which she summarily executed - developing the fun habit that endures to this day of slowly biting at the seams of a stuffed toy to find a weakness, and then pulling all the stuffing out.
We took her to the vet and found out she had worms (eeeeew) and got her on medication.
We had our ups and downs with training. I was getting really frustrated with potty training. I thought she'd never get it.
She has a very sensitive tummy - we have to give her special easy-to-digest food and be very careful what she eats, lest she gets the squirts. Needless to say, our dog eats a lot of chicken & rice (the standard bland diet for treating prolonged bouts of the shits).
She turned out pretty well I think. She has a few personality quirks, and is extremely suspicious of strangers - a reaction I think stems from whatever happened to her during those first few months. But the few select people she knows and trusts - she loves dearly.
**The title comes from John's habit of calling her Stink-dog, so now we refer to her sometimes as "the stink," though she smells quite good most of the time.
This was three years ago in May, and we had just moved into our place on Racine. As we were moving in, the woman in the top-level apartment was moving out. She works with the Illinois Doberman Rescue. Since we had wanted a dog for a long time and John worked from home and our new place had a yard which was basically a giant dog run and our new landlords were total dog-lovers, we decided to start looking.
I grew up with a fuzzy mutt, and I didn't like the idea of purebreds, since unless (and even if) you pay an arm and a leg, you may get a purebred dog with genetic disorders. Plus, I don't like the idea of purchasing a cat or dog - there are so many that need homes. John, however, like purebreds because you knew what you were getting, for the most part, personality wise. With a mutt, you could have some breeds with bad personality traits and not know it. Well our soon-to-be-ex-neighbor gave John her card and we started looking at the Dobie rescue website. We (or at least I) didn't want a puppy since they're so hard to train and I didn't think we had the time for housebreaking and the like. Plus, unless you buy them, puppies are hard to come by. John was working from home, so he didn't think the training was as big an issue as I did. He could work with her during the days.
So we look and I start warming up to the idea of a Doberman. They are pretty dogs, especially when their ears are left natural. I also liked the idea of a rescue dog, since they all need homes, and since they are fostered with people, they're socialized, unlike many shelter dogs. We saw one dog that we really wanted to check out. A red Doberman named Queen, who was about 4 years old. We called the foster-woman and made an appointment. She was out in Barrington, so we were going to rent a car. I get the chronology screwed up here, but a day or two before we were going to go see her, we get a call saying she's been adopted. We were very sad, but glad she found a permanent home.
Serendipity.
John's coworker, Ken, who knew we were thinking about getting a dog, sent John a message that his sister found a stray dog in their yard. I was a little leery, since strays usually come with baggage, but as I learned more I couldn't help but feel sorry for the little dear. Not just a stray, but a stray puppy the vet would later tell us was 3 months old, who was tossed over their fence and left in their backyard. They had a high wood fence with a lock, so there's no other possible way she could have gotten there. She had a tiny pink collar but no tag. Ken sent John a picture and man was she cute.
So we said, sure, come on by and we'll see. Unless there was something terribly wrong with her, we were pretty much decided that we'd keep her. So Ken's sister & brother-in-law come up from the South Side with this poor little abandoned puppy. They pretty much dropped her off and left, and we were left with this little tiny puppy. She immediately felt right at home, though puzzled by the strange creatures (2 cats) who would later become her nemisises (nemisi?). She fell asleep on John's leg and we knew we had a dog.
The next day we went and got puppy supplies and a few toys including a little stuffed carrot, which she summarily executed - developing the fun habit that endures to this day of slowly biting at the seams of a stuffed toy to find a weakness, and then pulling all the stuffing out.
We took her to the vet and found out she had worms (eeeeew) and got her on medication.
We had our ups and downs with training. I was getting really frustrated with potty training. I thought she'd never get it.
She has a very sensitive tummy - we have to give her special easy-to-digest food and be very careful what she eats, lest she gets the squirts. Needless to say, our dog eats a lot of chicken & rice (the standard bland diet for treating prolonged bouts of the shits).
She turned out pretty well I think. She has a few personality quirks, and is extremely suspicious of strangers - a reaction I think stems from whatever happened to her during those first few months. But the few select people she knows and trusts - she loves dearly.
**The title comes from John's habit of calling her Stink-dog, so now we refer to her sometimes as "the stink," though she smells quite good most of the time.
13 July 2005
Disappointment
So I was on the Chicago Park District website looking at events at the park by our new apartment. It's apparently a flagship park, with a gym and a pool and they have lots of events and music in the park. Seeing how it's right there, and many of the events are free, there's no excuse not to go, right?
So I saw on the site that on 7/12/05 there was going to be a Big Band concert. I love Big Band Jazz. So I told my folks, since it's something they might enjoy too. They decide, sure, they'll come up.
Shame on the Chicago Park District for not updating their website information. It turned out to be Bavarian "Ooompa" music (Lincoln Square is the old German neighborhood). Mom was not about to sit an listen to an absolutely HORRIBLE rendition of Edelweiss. John wanted to go and ask them if they could play Springtime for Hitler. He does a good Dr. Strangelove voice too, that could have been fun. So we went and had a beer instead.
I was very disappointed.
There's supposed to be more Big Band concerts in coming weeks, but I think I'll call and confirm with a human being before asking my parents if they want to schlep all the way up and have it wind up being Classical Accordian hour or something.
So I saw on the site that on 7/12/05 there was going to be a Big Band concert. I love Big Band Jazz. So I told my folks, since it's something they might enjoy too. They decide, sure, they'll come up.
Shame on the Chicago Park District for not updating their website information. It turned out to be Bavarian "Ooompa" music (Lincoln Square is the old German neighborhood). Mom was not about to sit an listen to an absolutely HORRIBLE rendition of Edelweiss. John wanted to go and ask them if they could play Springtime for Hitler. He does a good Dr. Strangelove voice too, that could have been fun. So we went and had a beer instead.
I was very disappointed.
There's supposed to be more Big Band concerts in coming weeks, but I think I'll call and confirm with a human being before asking my parents if they want to schlep all the way up and have it wind up being Classical Accordian hour or something.
12 July 2005
why?
As I check my daily list of blog readings, many appear to have not been updated and I move on. Then sometimes I'll hit refresh and voila` a new post. Is it just Firefox or is there something wrong with blogspot where it doesn't recognize new content when a version of the page is cached? Does anyone know why this happens or have a way to prevent it, it's extremely frustrating.
11 July 2005
Different Paths
So the "Great White Bear Challenge" got me thinking about all those points in your life where if you had done something else, your whole life would be different. Does anyone else ever backtrack an event like that? It's interesting to see how far back you can go, and to realize that if one thing had been different, you wouldn't be where you are. For instance:
John and I met at a Halloween party - a party he almost didn't go to. Our friend Karen, who has apparently dropped off the face of the planet, was good friends with John's old roommates and invited John to our annual Halloween birthday party (I think that tradition started in 1994). He was going to go out with Tony and Ed, but he didn't. What if either of us had brought a date?
Even further, had I not decided to go to DePaul, I never would have met Karen - who was the roommate of my friend Chuck's then girlfriend. So if Chuck never transferred to DePaul, I most likely never would have met Karen. I have since lost touch with that crowd. I did see Chuck this past weekend though, that was fun. What's ironic is that a lot of my high-school friends started hanging out with the DePaul people because they'd come down to visit me. So had I not gone to DePaul, had I not joined the DePaulia newspaper (at Chuck's suggestion), many of them would probably not have met either.
Back farther to high school, had I not befriended Erin I would probably still be a shy, squirrelly basketcase. She was, I suppose, the one who 'taught' me to start saying "what the fuck". I started to hang out at "the park" and that's where I met Chuck, Brett and a number of other people I no longer see.
It's just interesting - had one of those things been different - not just in my life, but in anyone else involved, I'd be in a different place. Maybe in some other universe, I am.
I could go back farther, but that may dredge up memories of grade-school that are best left in the cobwebs of my brain, at least for now.
John and I met at a Halloween party - a party he almost didn't go to. Our friend Karen, who has apparently dropped off the face of the planet, was good friends with John's old roommates and invited John to our annual Halloween birthday party (I think that tradition started in 1994). He was going to go out with Tony and Ed, but he didn't. What if either of us had brought a date?
Even further, had I not decided to go to DePaul, I never would have met Karen - who was the roommate of my friend Chuck's then girlfriend. So if Chuck never transferred to DePaul, I most likely never would have met Karen. I have since lost touch with that crowd. I did see Chuck this past weekend though, that was fun. What's ironic is that a lot of my high-school friends started hanging out with the DePaul people because they'd come down to visit me. So had I not gone to DePaul, had I not joined the DePaulia newspaper (at Chuck's suggestion), many of them would probably not have met either.
Back farther to high school, had I not befriended Erin I would probably still be a shy, squirrelly basketcase. She was, I suppose, the one who 'taught' me to start saying "what the fuck". I started to hang out at "the park" and that's where I met Chuck, Brett and a number of other people I no longer see.
It's just interesting - had one of those things been different - not just in my life, but in anyone else involved, I'd be in a different place. Maybe in some other universe, I am.
I could go back farther, but that may dredge up memories of grade-school that are best left in the cobwebs of my brain, at least for now.
09 July 2005
In response to the GWB
In response to GWBs post: We all pretty much know what we believe. But ever ask yourself why you believe what you do? Did you have an epiphany? Ever think about who might have influenced your thought process? Do you believe the things you do simply because it's what your parents believed? My challenge to you.... Tell me who you are, what you believe, why. Who influenced you, who you admire. Post it on your blog or in my comments (let me know if you blog it).
I wasn't particularly influenced by writers or great thinkers directly, but by the abstracts of their ideals and ideas...
I'll start with the religion part.
We weren't very religious family, Christmas was more of a family gathering than a religious celebration. My father is a recovering Catholic my mom is a sometimes-Lutheran. On the rare occasions we went to church, I didn't really buy it, even when I was young. I remember getting thrown out of Sunday school one day for laughing at something when I was like 8. I think we were talking about why animals are named what they are and the teacher asked this kid "what would you call a dolphin" and he shouted "PIGGIE". I found that funny and couldn't help but laugh and when it came my turn I was like - this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard, who cares!
Then I discovered science. I'm a very analytical/logical person, and took to it quite naturally. But I couldn't reconcile some of the unexplainable things. I was part of a Christian youth group for a while in High School - mainly because some of my friends went - not because of the preaching. They weren't very preachy either, so it was more like a well-mannered social club.
When I was in high-school, a friend of mine and her mother were wiccan, and they invited me to circle. This was a bit much for me also, as it was a lot of flakiness. There are always a few flakes in any group - but paganism seems to have a bundle. I guess the fringes naturally attract a larger proportion of the whackos. I started reading up on wicca, paganism, etc. I found a lot of people, same as me, didn't buy into the rules of most religion - even wicca.
Being relatively young, I went through the immature phase of 'dissing' everything mainstream, and for a while was very anti-christian. It was around college when I started getting into comparative religion that I realized christians weren't the problem, christian doctrine was. And also that most religions have more in common than most of us realize. I had a bunch of college friends and we formed a pagan student group - at a Catholic university, with a faculty advisor from the religious studies department. She was awesome too. Her specialty was pre-conquest meso-America.
Some folks from this group I still keep in contact with, some, not so much. Actually, H-bomb is probably the person I keep in best contact with, and through her is how I know cillic and the Queen of the Universe. Everyone in the group brought a different set of experiences and that allowed us all to learn from each other. I think that's why I have such a mish-mosh of traditions in the way I practice. There are, after all, no real rules save one "harm none".
I'm more of a deist now I guess, with a splash of pagan/celtic tradition thrown in. There's something out there bigger than us, but I don't think it's what we see as a traditional 'god' or 'goddess' who rules from above playing dice with the universe. It's more like energy. In many Native traditions, living things (and some non-living) are infused with energy that they believe can be harnessed and controlled to some extent. This was a belief that I could reconcile with my scientific leanings. The universe, made up of energy, maybe from the big-bang. The Earth and it's oceans, atmosphere and volcanoes are all emitting energy. So it made sense that if you knew how, you might be able to effect change through harnessing some sort of 'higher power'. Some may call this witchcraft, others may call it prayer.
This also helped me deal with some of the scientific notions with which I disagreed, such as the notion of abstracts like the mind, or love, or what it means to be alive. Pure science would say that we're just a bunch of chemical reactions - love for instance is a chemical/ electrical/ physiological response to stimuli just like a hiccup or a fart. I don't agree with that. The notion that there is something, whether you call it a soul or energy or essence or Ashe, helps reconcile these intangible human experiences as more than just a chemical reaction.
On to the more rational side of things. In life, and in general, I believe:
-In the principles of the Enlightenment upon which our constitution is founded. Democracy, equal representation, liberty, freedom of (or from ) religion, free speech.
-The indivisibility and universality of human rights. Our constitution was the first of its kind, but it falls short of the standards now put forth by international human rights conventions. Our constitution is based on civil & political rights, while virtually ignoring economic, cultural and social rights. Those of us who believe in indivisibility believe that these rights cannot be separated out from one another. That, for instance, someone without adequate education and economic opportunity is not equally able to participate in the political realm of his/her country.
-The majority of people are generally good, though often misled.
-That my fat orange cat is either retarded or a genius.
-That if people took the time to learn about people who are different from themselves, the world would be a much better place.
-That organized religion and squabbles over who's rules are "right" and "true" has caused more death and destruction than anything else in human history.
-That there is always more to learn.
And finally, to quote George Carlin: I believe that "There's no problem in this country, no matter how big, that Americans, when they roll up their sleeves, can't completely ignore".
I wasn't particularly influenced by writers or great thinkers directly, but by the abstracts of their ideals and ideas...
I'll start with the religion part.
We weren't very religious family, Christmas was more of a family gathering than a religious celebration. My father is a recovering Catholic my mom is a sometimes-Lutheran. On the rare occasions we went to church, I didn't really buy it, even when I was young. I remember getting thrown out of Sunday school one day for laughing at something when I was like 8. I think we were talking about why animals are named what they are and the teacher asked this kid "what would you call a dolphin" and he shouted "PIGGIE". I found that funny and couldn't help but laugh and when it came my turn I was like - this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard, who cares!
Then I discovered science. I'm a very analytical/logical person, and took to it quite naturally. But I couldn't reconcile some of the unexplainable things. I was part of a Christian youth group for a while in High School - mainly because some of my friends went - not because of the preaching. They weren't very preachy either, so it was more like a well-mannered social club.
When I was in high-school, a friend of mine and her mother were wiccan, and they invited me to circle. This was a bit much for me also, as it was a lot of flakiness. There are always a few flakes in any group - but paganism seems to have a bundle. I guess the fringes naturally attract a larger proportion of the whackos. I started reading up on wicca, paganism, etc. I found a lot of people, same as me, didn't buy into the rules of most religion - even wicca.
Being relatively young, I went through the immature phase of 'dissing' everything mainstream, and for a while was very anti-christian. It was around college when I started getting into comparative religion that I realized christians weren't the problem, christian doctrine was. And also that most religions have more in common than most of us realize. I had a bunch of college friends and we formed a pagan student group - at a Catholic university, with a faculty advisor from the religious studies department. She was awesome too. Her specialty was pre-conquest meso-America.
Some folks from this group I still keep in contact with, some, not so much. Actually, H-bomb is probably the person I keep in best contact with, and through her is how I know cillic and the Queen of the Universe. Everyone in the group brought a different set of experiences and that allowed us all to learn from each other. I think that's why I have such a mish-mosh of traditions in the way I practice. There are, after all, no real rules save one "harm none".
I'm more of a deist now I guess, with a splash of pagan/celtic tradition thrown in. There's something out there bigger than us, but I don't think it's what we see as a traditional 'god' or 'goddess' who rules from above playing dice with the universe. It's more like energy. In many Native traditions, living things (and some non-living) are infused with energy that they believe can be harnessed and controlled to some extent. This was a belief that I could reconcile with my scientific leanings. The universe, made up of energy, maybe from the big-bang. The Earth and it's oceans, atmosphere and volcanoes are all emitting energy. So it made sense that if you knew how, you might be able to effect change through harnessing some sort of 'higher power'. Some may call this witchcraft, others may call it prayer.
This also helped me deal with some of the scientific notions with which I disagreed, such as the notion of abstracts like the mind, or love, or what it means to be alive. Pure science would say that we're just a bunch of chemical reactions - love for instance is a chemical/ electrical/ physiological response to stimuli just like a hiccup or a fart. I don't agree with that. The notion that there is something, whether you call it a soul or energy or essence or Ashe, helps reconcile these intangible human experiences as more than just a chemical reaction.
On to the more rational side of things. In life, and in general, I believe:
-In the principles of the Enlightenment upon which our constitution is founded. Democracy, equal representation, liberty, freedom of (or from ) religion, free speech.
-The indivisibility and universality of human rights. Our constitution was the first of its kind, but it falls short of the standards now put forth by international human rights conventions. Our constitution is based on civil & political rights, while virtually ignoring economic, cultural and social rights. Those of us who believe in indivisibility believe that these rights cannot be separated out from one another. That, for instance, someone without adequate education and economic opportunity is not equally able to participate in the political realm of his/her country.
-The majority of people are generally good, though often misled.
-That my fat orange cat is either retarded or a genius.
-That if people took the time to learn about people who are different from themselves, the world would be a much better place.
-That organized religion and squabbles over who's rules are "right" and "true" has caused more death and destruction than anything else in human history.
-That there is always more to learn.
And finally, to quote George Carlin: I believe that "There's no problem in this country, no matter how big, that Americans, when they roll up their sleeves, can't completely ignore".
08 July 2005
The gift of chicken
This happened last week, but I haven't had time to post it. Let me give some background to those unfamiliar with John's dietary preferences. He's a person who literally could eat the same exact thing every day of his life: chicken. To him, chicken is a food group. I think that is why we eat out so much, to be quite honest - I require much more diversity in my food than he does and there's no way we're cooking separate meals.
Now, the purpose of this post wasn't to dog on John's food preferences, and he does eat other things. It could be worse, his favorite food could be Haggis or Ludfish. His most favorite food in the whole wide world is fried chicken. Fried chicken is the staff of life, the end-all, be-all of culinary existence. This is important, and you'll see why.
Ok, so last Thursday we went to this restaurant on the corner. We're trying to go to new places and see what's good in the new hood. We go into the bar area (we later figure out there's a dining room in back) and it's kinda empty. We sit down, and the waiter brings us menus. The selection is very good. They actually had dry-rub ribs (a rarity in Chicago) which were OK - a little bland, but I don't like bbq sauce. I can't remember what John ordered. Anyway, we're eating and a guy sits down in the booth behind us. A different waitress brings him a menu and tells him that the special that day is a half fried chicken.
John lets out an audible "UAAAHH". Now he's upset that our waiter did not inform him that the crown jewel of cuisine was available for purchase that evening and sulks over the rest of his dinner.
Just as we're finishing our meal, out comes the fried chicken. John's eyes followed it like a puppy watching you eat M&Ms and says "ooooh that looks SO good".
The guy looks up and says to John (I was facing the other way) "do you want a piece? There's no way I can finish all this". John, shocked that anyone would willingly give up fried chicken said "uh, suuuure".
John offers to pay for the man's dinner, of course is refused. You have to admit, it's a nice gesture to offer food from your plate (especially fried chicken) to a complete stranger, even if he is twice your size and eyeballing it like a starving Dingo.
So John is devouring his piece of gift chicken, exclaiming how good it is. He repeats his offer to pay for the guy's dinner and is refused again. After we pay our bill, and I'm finishing my beer, he goes to the waitress and pays the guy's bill (and buys him another beer too). We leave, he thanks the guy again for his act of generosity.
We went back there last night (because Thursday has apparently now been declared fried chicken night in our household) and the same waitress was there. She remembered John. She said the guy was pretty jazzed when he found out his bill was paid.
Somehow, I think I will be spending many a Thursday at 42N Latitude.
At least they have a diverse menu and have Blue Moon on tap.
Now, the purpose of this post wasn't to dog on John's food preferences, and he does eat other things. It could be worse, his favorite food could be Haggis or Ludfish. His most favorite food in the whole wide world is fried chicken. Fried chicken is the staff of life, the end-all, be-all of culinary existence. This is important, and you'll see why.
Ok, so last Thursday we went to this restaurant on the corner. We're trying to go to new places and see what's good in the new hood. We go into the bar area (we later figure out there's a dining room in back) and it's kinda empty. We sit down, and the waiter brings us menus. The selection is very good. They actually had dry-rub ribs (a rarity in Chicago) which were OK - a little bland, but I don't like bbq sauce. I can't remember what John ordered. Anyway, we're eating and a guy sits down in the booth behind us. A different waitress brings him a menu and tells him that the special that day is a half fried chicken.
John lets out an audible "UAAAHH". Now he's upset that our waiter did not inform him that the crown jewel of cuisine was available for purchase that evening and sulks over the rest of his dinner.
Just as we're finishing our meal, out comes the fried chicken. John's eyes followed it like a puppy watching you eat M&Ms and says "ooooh that looks SO good".
The guy looks up and says to John (I was facing the other way) "do you want a piece? There's no way I can finish all this". John, shocked that anyone would willingly give up fried chicken said "uh, suuuure".
John offers to pay for the man's dinner, of course is refused. You have to admit, it's a nice gesture to offer food from your plate (especially fried chicken) to a complete stranger, even if he is twice your size and eyeballing it like a starving Dingo.
So John is devouring his piece of gift chicken, exclaiming how good it is. He repeats his offer to pay for the guy's dinner and is refused again. After we pay our bill, and I'm finishing my beer, he goes to the waitress and pays the guy's bill (and buys him another beer too). We leave, he thanks the guy again for his act of generosity.
We went back there last night (because Thursday has apparently now been declared fried chicken night in our household) and the same waitress was there. She remembered John. She said the guy was pretty jazzed when he found out his bill was paid.
Somehow, I think I will be spending many a Thursday at 42N Latitude.
At least they have a diverse menu and have Blue Moon on tap.
An interesting take
I don't agree with everything he says, but some of it makes sense. When we kill civilians in the name of the "war on terror" it's a "whoops - collateral damage"...
Terrorism in any form, whether it hides behind religious extremism, national security or military operations should be delegitimized as a form of combat.
Terrorism in any form, whether it hides behind religious extremism, national security or military operations should be delegitimized as a form of combat.
07 July 2005
Just an observation
I know it's a tragic event and all, but can the CNN headline get ANY bigger? I mean look at the difference between CNN and the Guardian (UK)... sensationalism in US media - naaaahhhh.
HEA Drug Provision
For those of you unfamiliar, in a nutshell the HEA Drug Provision suspends financial aid for anywhere from a year to indefinitely, depending on the offense. This includes misdemeanor posession of marijuana. Our argument is that those people who have been convicted (who most often are middle/lower class and minority - upper class whites often get a slap on the wrist), have already been punished by the criminal justice system and often their schools. The provision is just another barrier to our "second-chance" society as George Bush called it once. They've paid whatever debt a judge decided they owed.
From SSDP:
Committees on Capitol Hill are beginning to consider re-authorizing the Higher Education Act. It is time for students nationwide to DEMAND the FULL REPEAL of the Higher Education Act DRUG PROVISION.
TAKE ACTION NOW!
Send your senators and representative an updated, pre-written email:
Call your senators and representative to urge them to fully repeal the ban on federal financial aid in the Higher Education Act (Find out who your Senators and Representatives are through this website:
Swing votes from target senators and representatives could determine the fate of the HEA Drug Provision. Please contact SSDP (202-293-4414 or abby@ssdp.org) if you are a constituent of one of the target senators or representatives.
The last time Congress re-authorized the HEA was in 1998, when Congressman Mark Souder (R-IN) authored and introduced the Higher Education Act Drug Provision amendment. Since 1998, more than 160,500 students have lost access to federal financial aid.
This is our BEST CHANCE to FULLY REPEAL the Drug Provision! Call and email your senators and representatives, even if you have already contacted them.
TAKE ACTION NOW:
1. Email your representatives:
2. Call your representative and two senators and urge them to FULLY REPEAL THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT DRUG PROVISION. A sample phone script is pasted at the bottom of this post. Find your congressman:
3. Contact SSDP if you live, go to school, or vote in any of the target states or districts listed below (202-293-4414 or abby@ssdp.org).
4. Activate your chapter members, friends, family, and supporters.
TARGET SENATORS:
Lamar Alexander (R-TN), (202) 224-4944
Mike DeWine (R-OH), (202) 224-2315
John Ensign (R-NV), (202) 224-6244
Mike Enzi (R-WY), (202) 224-3424
Tom Harkin (R-IA), (202) 224-3254
James Jeffords (I-VT), (202) 224-5141
TARGET REPRESENTATIVES:
Howard "Buck" McKeon (R-CA), (202) 225-1956
Judy Biggert (R-IL), (202) 225-3515
Ric Keller (R-FL), (202) 225-2176
Bob Inglis (R-SC), (202) 225-6030
Cathy McMorris (R-WA), (202) 225-2006
Kenny Marchant (R-TX), (202) 225-6605
Tom Price (R-GA), (202) 225-4501
Luis G. Fortuño (R-PR), (202) 225-2615
Bobby Jindal (R-LA), (202) 225-3015
Charles Boustany (R-LA), (202) 225-2031
Virginia Foxx (R-NC), (202) 225-2071
Thelma D. Drake (R-VA), (202) 225-4215
John Randy Kuhl (R-NY), (202) 225-3161
Dale Kildee (D-MI), (202) 225-3611
Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX), (202) 225-2531
Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), (202) 225-5516
Ron Kind (D-WI), (202) 225-5506
David Wu (D-OR), (202) 225-0855
Rush Holt (D-NJ), (202) 225-5801
Susan Davis (D-CA), (202) 225-2040
Betty McCollum (D-MN), (202) 225-6631
John Barrow (D-GA), (202) 225-2823
Sample Phone Script:
Hello, my name is ______ and I am calling from _____. I am calling to urge Senator/Representative ______ to do everything he or she can to fully repeal the ban on federal financial aid for applicants with drug convictions.
Right now, the author of the law, Congressman Mark Souder (R-IN) is offering a proposal to "fix" the Drug Provision. His proposal is a 10% solution for a 100% flawed law. Under his proposal, the Drug Provision would still disproportionately affect minorities and students from low- and middle-income families. It would still only affect students who are doing well in school.
The Drug Provision is a bad law that CANNOT be fixed. Please tell Senator/Representative X to FULLY repeal the ban on federal financial aid for drug offenders.
Thanks so much! Don't hesitate to contact SSDP if you have absolutely any questions.
Onwards,
Abby Bair, Outreach Director
Students for Sensible Drug Policy
1623 Connecticut Ave NW Suite 300
Washington, DC 20009
From SSDP:
Committees on Capitol Hill are beginning to consider re-authorizing the Higher Education Act. It is time for students nationwide to DEMAND the FULL REPEAL of the Higher Education Act DRUG PROVISION.
TAKE ACTION NOW!
Send your senators and representative an updated, pre-written email:
Call your senators and representative to urge them to fully repeal the ban on federal financial aid in the Higher Education Act (Find out who your Senators and Representatives are through this website:
Swing votes from target senators and representatives could determine the fate of the HEA Drug Provision. Please contact SSDP (202-293-4414 or abby@ssdp.org) if you are a constituent of one of the target senators or representatives.
The last time Congress re-authorized the HEA was in 1998, when Congressman Mark Souder (R-IN) authored and introduced the Higher Education Act Drug Provision amendment. Since 1998, more than 160,500 students have lost access to federal financial aid.
This is our BEST CHANCE to FULLY REPEAL the Drug Provision! Call and email your senators and representatives, even if you have already contacted them.
TAKE ACTION NOW:
1. Email your representatives:
2. Call your representative and two senators and urge them to FULLY REPEAL THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT DRUG PROVISION. A sample phone script is pasted at the bottom of this post. Find your congressman:
3. Contact SSDP if you live, go to school, or vote in any of the target states or districts listed below (202-293-4414 or abby@ssdp.org).
4. Activate your chapter members, friends, family, and supporters.
TARGET SENATORS:
Lamar Alexander (R-TN), (202) 224-4944
Mike DeWine (R-OH), (202) 224-2315
John Ensign (R-NV), (202) 224-6244
Mike Enzi (R-WY), (202) 224-3424
Tom Harkin (R-IA), (202) 224-3254
James Jeffords (I-VT), (202) 224-5141
TARGET REPRESENTATIVES:
Howard "Buck" McKeon (R-CA), (202) 225-1956
Judy Biggert (R-IL), (202) 225-3515
Ric Keller (R-FL), (202) 225-2176
Bob Inglis (R-SC), (202) 225-6030
Cathy McMorris (R-WA), (202) 225-2006
Kenny Marchant (R-TX), (202) 225-6605
Tom Price (R-GA), (202) 225-4501
Luis G. Fortuño (R-PR), (202) 225-2615
Bobby Jindal (R-LA), (202) 225-3015
Charles Boustany (R-LA), (202) 225-2031
Virginia Foxx (R-NC), (202) 225-2071
Thelma D. Drake (R-VA), (202) 225-4215
John Randy Kuhl (R-NY), (202) 225-3161
Dale Kildee (D-MI), (202) 225-3611
Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX), (202) 225-2531
Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), (202) 225-5516
Ron Kind (D-WI), (202) 225-5506
David Wu (D-OR), (202) 225-0855
Rush Holt (D-NJ), (202) 225-5801
Susan Davis (D-CA), (202) 225-2040
Betty McCollum (D-MN), (202) 225-6631
John Barrow (D-GA), (202) 225-2823
Sample Phone Script:
Hello, my name is ______ and I am calling from _____. I am calling to urge Senator/Representative ______ to do everything he or she can to fully repeal the ban on federal financial aid for applicants with drug convictions.
Right now, the author of the law, Congressman Mark Souder (R-IN) is offering a proposal to "fix" the Drug Provision. His proposal is a 10% solution for a 100% flawed law. Under his proposal, the Drug Provision would still disproportionately affect minorities and students from low- and middle-income families. It would still only affect students who are doing well in school.
The Drug Provision is a bad law that CANNOT be fixed. Please tell Senator/Representative X to FULLY repeal the ban on federal financial aid for drug offenders.
Thanks so much! Don't hesitate to contact SSDP if you have absolutely any questions.
Onwards,
Abby Bair, Outreach Director
Students for Sensible Drug Policy
1623 Connecticut Ave NW Suite 300
Washington, DC 20009
Holy Shit
I think I'm taking the bus home tonight...
Chicago has upped security on the CTA in response, and I doubt there will be anything happening here today, but I've been meaning to test the bus routes to our new place anyway...
Chicago has upped security on the CTA in response, and I doubt there will be anything happening here today, but I've been meaning to test the bus routes to our new place anyway...
30 Days
For those of you who saw, and liked, Super Size Me, Morgan Spurlock has created a new show on the FX network called 30 Days. It's been on for about 3 weeks now, and each episode I've seen has been superbly done. The premise is that either Morgan (in the Minimum Wage episode) or someone he chooses, lives for 30 days in a situation completely alien to them. The first episode was on Minimum Wage and I won't review that one since AuntiHeathen has done that too well for me to top.
Last week's episode was about Islam in America, and they chose an every-day Christian man from West Virginia. David is married, has a family, goes to church. Your average, straight-laced American Joe. He moves in with a family in Dearborn, Michigan and has agreed to adhere to their rules and customs. This includes going to Mosque and attending the five daily prayers and growing a beard.
Editorial note: I did not like that Morgan Spurlock did not address the fact that the community David went to live in was Shia, which really is a minority in the Muslim world. Many people would not pick up on this I'm sure, but only Shias have Imams, touch their foreheads to a stone during prayer and are required to grow beards. The Imam also had a portrait of a Shia martyr in his office.
Most Muslims are Sunni and have less restrictive rules, for instance, beards are not mandatory. I hope he chose Shias intentionally maybe to expose David to the more conservative side of Islam, but no attempt to explain to the audience the difference was made. If most people are as ignorant of Islam as the episode seemed to imply, this was an irresponsible omission. It would be like explaining Christianity from only the Orthodox point of view, without regard to the majority of believers, to someone who knows nothing of Christianity.
At first, he was resistant, especially with the prayer, since it was against his beliefs. Which begs the question - why agree to go live as someone of another religion if you are going to reject it outright? I mean, I don't take communion when in a Catholic church (usually for weddings), but it's not because it's against my beliefs as much as it is that I am not confirmed and so I am adhering to the rules of the church that I should not be taking communion, and shouldn't do it just to fit in. He, on the otherhand, seemed to reject the principle outright.
His meetings with the local Imam were a bit unsettling for me to watch. Rather than trying to find a middle ground or explain things to David, the Imam simply tried to tell him why he was wrong. Eventually David found a teacher willing to meet him halfway and help him understand the principles of Islam. That you don't have to believe someone else's faith to understand where they're coming from, is eventually what David eventually realized.
In order to subject him to the discrimination felt by many Muslims in America, they send him out, dressed as a Muslim (he even grew a beard) with a petition against racial profiling. He was stared at, sworn at, insulted - I think he got the message. He left with a better understanding of Islam (he didn't even know Allah was the same as God) and of Muslims.
Throughout the episode, Morgan's man-on-the-street interviews are interjected. He asks everyday people what they think of Muslims and Islam, he talks to some religious experts. It breaks up the episode a bit and gives you a broader context - that David is not the lone American who knows nothing of Islam.
Last Night's episode was a straight man, Ryan, from rural Michigan who goes to live in the Castro district of San Francisco in the gay lifestyle. Ryan is an all-American, god-fearin, football-playin homophobe. WHY would he want to do this? I'm not sure. Pretty much through the entire episode he repeated over and over that the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, so therefore he believes it's wrong. He also believes it's a choice, not something you're born with. This is a belief a lot of anti-gay activists hold - makes it easier to condemn someone for a choice rather than who they are, right?
Anyway, Ryan becomes the roommate of Ed, a gay 30-something professional who lives near Castro. Ryan hangs out with Ed's friends, goes to gay church, works out at the gym (the other gay church), learns about wine and cheese, and meets Ed's family. As in the Muslim episode, Ryan met with the pastor of the gay church, who rather than meet him halfway, appeared to simply say he is wrong to believe the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. Rather than have an open discussion, she simply shoots down his arguments - which only makes his beliefs stronger.
The most powerful experiences Ryan has is on the personal-level. Speaking in generalizations and absolutes, he is able to defend his beliefs that gays don't belong in the military, that homosexuality is wrong, that gay marriage is wrong. However, after meeting Ed's family in a rural area of California and shooting some rounds, Ryan can't say that Ed wouldn't benefit the military if he joined. After speaking with P-Flag representatives, Ryan can't tell them that their lesbian daughter should have less rights than her two straight brothers. They've made a dent.
I think the show is brilliant. They don't expect that David will become a Muslim or that Ryan will come out of the closet - they just expect a little more understanding of the "other" - and they get it.
The show illustrates a very important point: You can preach all you want from upon high about whatever your chosen issue, but unless you have personal experience with that issue, you don't know shit. Personal experience is the only way to learn about other people, cultures, and experiences.
It's a great show - catch it if you can.
Last week's episode was about Islam in America, and they chose an every-day Christian man from West Virginia. David is married, has a family, goes to church. Your average, straight-laced American Joe. He moves in with a family in Dearborn, Michigan and has agreed to adhere to their rules and customs. This includes going to Mosque and attending the five daily prayers and growing a beard.
Editorial note: I did not like that Morgan Spurlock did not address the fact that the community David went to live in was Shia, which really is a minority in the Muslim world. Many people would not pick up on this I'm sure, but only Shias have Imams, touch their foreheads to a stone during prayer and are required to grow beards. The Imam also had a portrait of a Shia martyr in his office.
Most Muslims are Sunni and have less restrictive rules, for instance, beards are not mandatory. I hope he chose Shias intentionally maybe to expose David to the more conservative side of Islam, but no attempt to explain to the audience the difference was made. If most people are as ignorant of Islam as the episode seemed to imply, this was an irresponsible omission. It would be like explaining Christianity from only the Orthodox point of view, without regard to the majority of believers, to someone who knows nothing of Christianity.
At first, he was resistant, especially with the prayer, since it was against his beliefs. Which begs the question - why agree to go live as someone of another religion if you are going to reject it outright? I mean, I don't take communion when in a Catholic church (usually for weddings), but it's not because it's against my beliefs as much as it is that I am not confirmed and so I am adhering to the rules of the church that I should not be taking communion, and shouldn't do it just to fit in. He, on the otherhand, seemed to reject the principle outright.
His meetings with the local Imam were a bit unsettling for me to watch. Rather than trying to find a middle ground or explain things to David, the Imam simply tried to tell him why he was wrong. Eventually David found a teacher willing to meet him halfway and help him understand the principles of Islam. That you don't have to believe someone else's faith to understand where they're coming from, is eventually what David eventually realized.
In order to subject him to the discrimination felt by many Muslims in America, they send him out, dressed as a Muslim (he even grew a beard) with a petition against racial profiling. He was stared at, sworn at, insulted - I think he got the message. He left with a better understanding of Islam (he didn't even know Allah was the same as God) and of Muslims.
Throughout the episode, Morgan's man-on-the-street interviews are interjected. He asks everyday people what they think of Muslims and Islam, he talks to some religious experts. It breaks up the episode a bit and gives you a broader context - that David is not the lone American who knows nothing of Islam.
Last Night's episode was a straight man, Ryan, from rural Michigan who goes to live in the Castro district of San Francisco in the gay lifestyle. Ryan is an all-American, god-fearin, football-playin homophobe. WHY would he want to do this? I'm not sure. Pretty much through the entire episode he repeated over and over that the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, so therefore he believes it's wrong. He also believes it's a choice, not something you're born with. This is a belief a lot of anti-gay activists hold - makes it easier to condemn someone for a choice rather than who they are, right?
Anyway, Ryan becomes the roommate of Ed, a gay 30-something professional who lives near Castro. Ryan hangs out with Ed's friends, goes to gay church, works out at the gym (the other gay church), learns about wine and cheese, and meets Ed's family. As in the Muslim episode, Ryan met with the pastor of the gay church, who rather than meet him halfway, appeared to simply say he is wrong to believe the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. Rather than have an open discussion, she simply shoots down his arguments - which only makes his beliefs stronger.
The most powerful experiences Ryan has is on the personal-level. Speaking in generalizations and absolutes, he is able to defend his beliefs that gays don't belong in the military, that homosexuality is wrong, that gay marriage is wrong. However, after meeting Ed's family in a rural area of California and shooting some rounds, Ryan can't say that Ed wouldn't benefit the military if he joined. After speaking with P-Flag representatives, Ryan can't tell them that their lesbian daughter should have less rights than her two straight brothers. They've made a dent.
I think the show is brilliant. They don't expect that David will become a Muslim or that Ryan will come out of the closet - they just expect a little more understanding of the "other" - and they get it.
The show illustrates a very important point: You can preach all you want from upon high about whatever your chosen issue, but unless you have personal experience with that issue, you don't know shit. Personal experience is the only way to learn about other people, cultures, and experiences.
It's a great show - catch it if you can.
06 July 2005
Graceless Georgie
GLENEAGLES, Scotland -- President Bush collided with a local police officer and fell during a bike ride on the grounds of the Gleneagles golf resort while attending a meeting of world leaders Wednesday.
Bush suffered scrapes on his hands and arms that required bandages by the White House physician, said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
The police officer was taken to a local hospital as a precaution, McClellan said. Police said the officer suffered a "very minor" ankle injury.
It was raining lightly at the time.
Can this guy ride a bike and not fall off? Most 10 year olds can do that...
Bush suffered scrapes on his hands and arms that required bandages by the White House physician, said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
The police officer was taken to a local hospital as a precaution, McClellan said. Police said the officer suffered a "very minor" ankle injury.
It was raining lightly at the time.
Can this guy ride a bike and not fall off? Most 10 year olds can do that...
Smoking bans
I may ruffle some feathers with this one...
This has been on my mind for a while, and it appears Chicago is jumping on the smoking-bandwagon. Who knows if it will pass, but this new proposed ordinance would ban smoking in any public place, including bars. I can hear all the whiners now: I have asthma, what about my child's health, blah blah blah blah. Sure, sometimes smoke bothers me too, but I have a choice of where I would like to sit and what types of establishments I would like to patronize, same as everyone else.
Personally, I think all this smoking-bans in the name of health bullshit is just a way to rally the lemmings into forgetting about the millions of tons of toxic sludge that is spewed into our air and water and soil on a daily basis. No one seems to think about that. But ban smoking - that will make us SO much healthier. Right.
Maybe I'm an anomaly, but I grew up in a smoking household and we sat in the smoking sections of restaurants, and I don't have asthma or any other chronic health condition. I personally think people as a species are getting weaker because of all this health-crazy crap we subject ourselves to. Antibiotics and anti-bacterial wipes for instance, do two things - create stronger strains of bacteria and prevent your body from developing proper immunities. My mother used to leave meat to defrost on the counter during the day, a practice that would surely have her carted off by DCFS now for child endangerment, and we never got salmonella, or e-coli. But I digress.
Back to smoking. "It stinks", "it triggers asthma or allergies", "It makes me nauseous", "I don't like it" - I can say all those things about the half-bottle of cologne some douchebag on the el was wearing this morning. But I'm not about to go to my Alderman and ask that cologne be banned from public places. That would be ridiculous.
I'm getting sick of all this petty regulation. Don't we have more important things to worry about? If I don't want to be around smoke, I won't go where the smokers are going. Just like if I didn't want to see sex or violence on television, I'd change the station - not whine to my government.
At least in Chicago, there is already an ordinance that a certain percentage of space be non-smoking. There are also plenty of non-smoking establishments already, and plenty more where smoking is only allowed in the bar area. Implement decent ventilation systems, and I don't see the problem?
Plus, smoking sections serve a very vital purpose in my opinion. They're where I sit in a restaurant if I want to virtually guarantee that I won't be sitting next to 3 screaming children.
This has been on my mind for a while, and it appears Chicago is jumping on the smoking-bandwagon. Who knows if it will pass, but this new proposed ordinance would ban smoking in any public place, including bars. I can hear all the whiners now: I have asthma, what about my child's health, blah blah blah blah. Sure, sometimes smoke bothers me too, but I have a choice of where I would like to sit and what types of establishments I would like to patronize, same as everyone else.
Personally, I think all this smoking-bans in the name of health bullshit is just a way to rally the lemmings into forgetting about the millions of tons of toxic sludge that is spewed into our air and water and soil on a daily basis. No one seems to think about that. But ban smoking - that will make us SO much healthier. Right.
Maybe I'm an anomaly, but I grew up in a smoking household and we sat in the smoking sections of restaurants, and I don't have asthma or any other chronic health condition. I personally think people as a species are getting weaker because of all this health-crazy crap we subject ourselves to. Antibiotics and anti-bacterial wipes for instance, do two things - create stronger strains of bacteria and prevent your body from developing proper immunities. My mother used to leave meat to defrost on the counter during the day, a practice that would surely have her carted off by DCFS now for child endangerment, and we never got salmonella, or e-coli. But I digress.
Back to smoking. "It stinks", "it triggers asthma or allergies", "It makes me nauseous", "I don't like it" - I can say all those things about the half-bottle of cologne some douchebag on the el was wearing this morning. But I'm not about to go to my Alderman and ask that cologne be banned from public places. That would be ridiculous.
I'm getting sick of all this petty regulation. Don't we have more important things to worry about? If I don't want to be around smoke, I won't go where the smokers are going. Just like if I didn't want to see sex or violence on television, I'd change the station - not whine to my government.
At least in Chicago, there is already an ordinance that a certain percentage of space be non-smoking. There are also plenty of non-smoking establishments already, and plenty more where smoking is only allowed in the bar area. Implement decent ventilation systems, and I don't see the problem?
Plus, smoking sections serve a very vital purpose in my opinion. They're where I sit in a restaurant if I want to virtually guarantee that I won't be sitting next to 3 screaming children.
05 July 2005
Movies, Movies
We saw Batman Begins and Land of the Dead this past weekend. Batman was playing at the Davis, just up the street. Rather than truck all the way down toward Navy Pier (on the 3rd of July => mass insanity because of the fireworks) we decided to try the Lincoln Village multiplex. It was a nice day and we took the bike. On the way, we passed by the Near East Asian, Arab and Jewish neighborhoods on Devon. Something occurred to me that was quite ironic: Arabs and Jews who move halfway across the globe and still end up being neighbors. Says something about fate I guess.
Anyway.
Batman was pretty good. I enjoyed the story and tried to ignore Katie Holmes as much as possible. The backstory was well told and I found the whole film interesting and engaging. The Scarecrow was pretty damn cool I must say. I agree with cillic though that the fight scenes were over-edited to the point where you couldn't tell what was going on. I felt myself tuning out and just waiting for the end of the scene to put the events together in my head.
If you like the Batman story, and you didn't like "Forever" or "Batman & Robin" then you'll probably like this one. I'm still partial to the Tim Burton movies, but that's more because I like his style. And you can't beat Jack Nicholson as the Joker.
I also couldn't help but catch glimpses of the Wrigley building in the background of cityscapes. I didn't know this was filmed in Chicago?
Land of the Dead was exactly what you expect it to be. Unlike many movies in the horror genre, LotD (and any Romero film) has embedded within it a strong social commentary. The commentary of this one was not so subtle - it was right out there in the open. The elite, living in security and luxury by way of the dealings of a corrupt man (Dennis Hopper) who employs a band of, for lack of a better word, professional looters who raid the zombie-ridden towns for supplies. The rest of the schleps are left to fend for themselves in what's left of a fenced-in city.
The Zombies are different in this movie. No longer mindless robots, they retain memory of their former lives, at least in rudimentary form, and are led by a Zombie who was a former gas-station attendent. Romero, one of the first to employ a black man in a leading role, does so again with the Zombie leader. They can learn new things and quickly follow their leader to raid the city. The fact that they still go about their daily lives as zombies is also a commentary on the ordinary lives of most people, I think.
In any case, the leader of the mercenary/looting crew becomes disgruntled when he realizes that no matter how much money he earns, he'll never be good enough to fit in with the elites. He threatens to destroy the luxury compound, and of course, things go wrong. Great gore, a decent plot and script. All in all, enjoyable.
If you like horror movies, you'll like this. Defintely worth seeing.
Yesterday we spent at home, comforting our poor dog who discovered that despite how scared she is of fireworks, she will never fit under the bed.
Anyway.
Batman was pretty good. I enjoyed the story and tried to ignore Katie Holmes as much as possible. The backstory was well told and I found the whole film interesting and engaging. The Scarecrow was pretty damn cool I must say. I agree with cillic though that the fight scenes were over-edited to the point where you couldn't tell what was going on. I felt myself tuning out and just waiting for the end of the scene to put the events together in my head.
If you like the Batman story, and you didn't like "Forever" or "Batman & Robin" then you'll probably like this one. I'm still partial to the Tim Burton movies, but that's more because I like his style. And you can't beat Jack Nicholson as the Joker.
I also couldn't help but catch glimpses of the Wrigley building in the background of cityscapes. I didn't know this was filmed in Chicago?
Land of the Dead was exactly what you expect it to be. Unlike many movies in the horror genre, LotD (and any Romero film) has embedded within it a strong social commentary. The commentary of this one was not so subtle - it was right out there in the open. The elite, living in security and luxury by way of the dealings of a corrupt man (Dennis Hopper) who employs a band of, for lack of a better word, professional looters who raid the zombie-ridden towns for supplies. The rest of the schleps are left to fend for themselves in what's left of a fenced-in city.
The Zombies are different in this movie. No longer mindless robots, they retain memory of their former lives, at least in rudimentary form, and are led by a Zombie who was a former gas-station attendent. Romero, one of the first to employ a black man in a leading role, does so again with the Zombie leader. They can learn new things and quickly follow their leader to raid the city. The fact that they still go about their daily lives as zombies is also a commentary on the ordinary lives of most people, I think.
In any case, the leader of the mercenary/looting crew becomes disgruntled when he realizes that no matter how much money he earns, he'll never be good enough to fit in with the elites. He threatens to destroy the luxury compound, and of course, things go wrong. Great gore, a decent plot and script. All in all, enjoyable.
If you like horror movies, you'll like this. Defintely worth seeing.
Yesterday we spent at home, comforting our poor dog who discovered that despite how scared she is of fireworks, she will never fit under the bed.
04 July 2005
Why the "insurgents" will win in Iraq
In response to King George II comments I saw on CNN:
First off, I think the title "insurgent" is a misnomer. I've done a bit of research on this topic for my latest class and have kept up with the goings on of the "insurgency" and while it may have started out as an uprising of Sunni minorities who did not want to lose their political monopoly, it has evolved into much more than that.
Anyone who still believes the insurgency is just a few disgruntled Sunnis should go read about the insurgency from non-American sources and from some academic, non-journalism sources.
What is the insurgency then? It is an organized revolt comprised of secular and religious, Arab and Kurdish, Sunni and Shia against what they view as the new colonial power in their country. Iraq, like much of the Middle East, has a colonial history. This is why many Arab and other Middle Eastern countries are so sensitive to the idea of colonialism. Many of the countries were CREATED by colonial powers from the fragments of the Ottoman Empire.
Iraq was created by the British in order to secure their oil trade routes through Palestine. In 1920, just after the creation of the country and the installation of a British puppet government, groups of Iraqis who were hostile to one another put aside their religious, political and ethnic differences and united against the interloper government. Sound familiar? In order to restore order, the British withdrew and installed King Faisal, an Arab, to lead the country.
Many people think that if we withdraw, that Iraq will sink into civil war. These people view the insurgency as inter-factional fighting. If you see the insurgency for what it is, a united revolt against occupation, then the civil war threat doesn't seem nearly as feasible.
Our government tells us they fear civil war. What they really fear is that if they pull out, Iraq may truly be free. Free to choose its own government, which may be anti-american. But if we're truly fighting for freedom and democracy over there, then isn't that a risk we should have been willing to take?
The insurgency won't stop until our troops leave. Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves. The insurgents will win precisely because they are fighting for their own freedom from an occupying, pseudo-imperial power. A cause that should ring true to every American today.
First off, I think the title "insurgent" is a misnomer. I've done a bit of research on this topic for my latest class and have kept up with the goings on of the "insurgency" and while it may have started out as an uprising of Sunni minorities who did not want to lose their political monopoly, it has evolved into much more than that.
Anyone who still believes the insurgency is just a few disgruntled Sunnis should go read about the insurgency from non-American sources and from some academic, non-journalism sources.
What is the insurgency then? It is an organized revolt comprised of secular and religious, Arab and Kurdish, Sunni and Shia against what they view as the new colonial power in their country. Iraq, like much of the Middle East, has a colonial history. This is why many Arab and other Middle Eastern countries are so sensitive to the idea of colonialism. Many of the countries were CREATED by colonial powers from the fragments of the Ottoman Empire.
Iraq was created by the British in order to secure their oil trade routes through Palestine. In 1920, just after the creation of the country and the installation of a British puppet government, groups of Iraqis who were hostile to one another put aside their religious, political and ethnic differences and united against the interloper government. Sound familiar? In order to restore order, the British withdrew and installed King Faisal, an Arab, to lead the country.
Many people think that if we withdraw, that Iraq will sink into civil war. These people view the insurgency as inter-factional fighting. If you see the insurgency for what it is, a united revolt against occupation, then the civil war threat doesn't seem nearly as feasible.
Our government tells us they fear civil war. What they really fear is that if they pull out, Iraq may truly be free. Free to choose its own government, which may be anti-american. But if we're truly fighting for freedom and democracy over there, then isn't that a risk we should have been willing to take?
The insurgency won't stop until our troops leave. Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves. The insurgents will win precisely because they are fighting for their own freedom from an occupying, pseudo-imperial power. A cause that should ring true to every American today.
03 July 2005
Welcome to the Neighborhood: the diary of the crazy lady with red underpants
Ok. So, we're in the park today, which is about 2 blocks from our apartment. John has been taking Annie there pretty much every day at lunch and in the mornings. She's normally pretty good off-leash in the park when there's no one around. I tried it once by myself and she doesn't listen very well to me. So now we only let her off leash if John is there. She's also afraid of fireworks, something we should have thought about before bringing her there today in the first place.
Well there weren't many people in the park today, but they were doing things that took up a lot of space, like frisbee and one guy practicing golf swings. So we stayed closer to the building, and therefore, closer to the street. The first day we brought her there, we used this area since it's sort of secluded and we can bounce the ball off the wall and she plays catch.
Needless to say, noises also amplify and echo off this wall. A fact of physics and acoustics that we should have realized.
So we're playing, and having fun. The frisbee boys are leaving and we consider going deeper into the park, but decide we'll only throw the ball a few more times anyway. Then, we hear some fireworks, which echo off the wall. Annie freaks. She starts walking (not quite running) towards the exit of the park (which is not fenced). We call her, and call her, she keeps going.
John says I went from zero to hissyfit in under 10 seconds. See the park is bordered by a fairly busy street, and Annie, now running TOP speed, was heading straight for it.
The frisbee boys, seeing what's about to happen, try to catch her. I was screaming at the top of my lungs. I think I gave Jamie Lee Curtis a run for her money.
Now, as John repeatedly reminded me after we got home, and as I already knew, this is exactly the wrong thing to do. However, my emotions got the better of me and I couldn't help but envision Annie getting run over in the middle of Lincoln Avenue. So I'm screaming, running as fast as I can. She miraculously makes it across the street safely. John said it was my screaming that made the cars stop. Frisbee boys chase her down the block, while I'm out of breath and freaking out. We realize she's going home, and I start to calm down a bit, but still running down the street. Annie made it to our porch and the Frisbee boys were watching her. I put her on her leash and gave her a big hug.
Frisbee boys head back the way they came, passing John along the way. John told me later that one of them motioned with his finger by his head, indicating that I was crazy. I was a bit offended by that, but looking back on the incident, pretty much everyone within a two block radius must have heard me screaming. John said he got several looks along the way home.
I had stopped yelling by the time we crossed the intersection, since I realized she was going home. So thankfully our immediate neighbors didn't get the full "psycho" treatment. One neighbor did pop her head out to ask if everything was ok.
As we are sitting on the couch, hugging the dog and laughing at what a complete ASS I made of myself, John told me that my pants were falling down and my underwear were hanging out as I was running down the street. Great. Welcome to the neighborhood.
Now everyone is going to take a step away when they see me and, after I'm out of earshot, tell their friends "that's the crazy lady with the red underwear".
Well there weren't many people in the park today, but they were doing things that took up a lot of space, like frisbee and one guy practicing golf swings. So we stayed closer to the building, and therefore, closer to the street. The first day we brought her there, we used this area since it's sort of secluded and we can bounce the ball off the wall and she plays catch.
Needless to say, noises also amplify and echo off this wall. A fact of physics and acoustics that we should have realized.
So we're playing, and having fun. The frisbee boys are leaving and we consider going deeper into the park, but decide we'll only throw the ball a few more times anyway. Then, we hear some fireworks, which echo off the wall. Annie freaks. She starts walking (not quite running) towards the exit of the park (which is not fenced). We call her, and call her, she keeps going.
John says I went from zero to hissyfit in under 10 seconds. See the park is bordered by a fairly busy street, and Annie, now running TOP speed, was heading straight for it.
The frisbee boys, seeing what's about to happen, try to catch her. I was screaming at the top of my lungs. I think I gave Jamie Lee Curtis a run for her money.
Now, as John repeatedly reminded me after we got home, and as I already knew, this is exactly the wrong thing to do. However, my emotions got the better of me and I couldn't help but envision Annie getting run over in the middle of Lincoln Avenue. So I'm screaming, running as fast as I can. She miraculously makes it across the street safely. John said it was my screaming that made the cars stop. Frisbee boys chase her down the block, while I'm out of breath and freaking out. We realize she's going home, and I start to calm down a bit, but still running down the street. Annie made it to our porch and the Frisbee boys were watching her. I put her on her leash and gave her a big hug.
Frisbee boys head back the way they came, passing John along the way. John told me later that one of them motioned with his finger by his head, indicating that I was crazy. I was a bit offended by that, but looking back on the incident, pretty much everyone within a two block radius must have heard me screaming. John said he got several looks along the way home.
I had stopped yelling by the time we crossed the intersection, since I realized she was going home. So thankfully our immediate neighbors didn't get the full "psycho" treatment. One neighbor did pop her head out to ask if everything was ok.
As we are sitting on the couch, hugging the dog and laughing at what a complete ASS I made of myself, John told me that my pants were falling down and my underwear were hanging out as I was running down the street. Great. Welcome to the neighborhood.
Now everyone is going to take a step away when they see me and, after I'm out of earshot, tell their friends "that's the crazy lady with the red underwear".
Ask the Plumber
Jason has definitive proof that the Qu'ran couldn't possibly have been flushed down the toilet. Not whole anyway. If a pear don't fit, neither could a holy book...
This is too funny. As he was telling us this over dinner a while back, I almost spit my wine...
This is too funny. As he was telling us this over dinner a while back, I almost spit my wine...
01 July 2005
The photo post (or fuck Internet Explorer)
This is best viewed in Firefox.
IE cuts off some of the text. Blogspot uses complex style sheets for photos and IE sucks.
As promised. We finally found the CF adapters and now that I am able to store photos on John's server, I can post more than one image at a time and can do it easilly...
Annie and John enjoying naptime.
And my crummy attempt at red-eye reduction.
It looks weird, but so what
Kora's last day at our old place. We got Annie about 1 month before Monica and Jim got Kora and they grew up together. Kora is a very sweet, very large Malmute/Rottweiler mix. She's not so bright though so we used to make George and Lenny jokes about them. Yes, she's wearing angel wings. Annie won't tolerate such nonsense. Annie misses her buddy.
Christmas in June. Due to various travel schedules we weren't able to see John's family for Christmas. We finally got around to it in June. John's dad Jeff, stepmom Donna and stepsister Sharon. I jokingly refer to John's dad as Bizzaro Bear (in reference to Superman). He himself a large, hairy, white dude but ideologically opposite of Great White Bear.
As promised. I can't remember who said it on GWBs site about the American people needing to pull their heads out of their large bowl of stupid flakes, but here it is. Not my best work, and I'm sure someone with a professional graphics background could do much better, but it's just for fun.
Eat up America!
A really good picture of John. I like this one a lot.
I, on the other hand, take horrible photos and rarely share them publicly.
I am not photogenic.
Cat Toy Heaven (or hell?).
As anyone with pets knows, the area under and behind the sofa is a vortex of lost toys.
The new kitchen. I cannot believe that I found space for all of this crap!
This kitchen is significantly smaller than the one we had.
Similar mazes of furniture and boxes in the living room
and bedroom
The growling lumps inside the boxspring. The cats ripped holes in the liner.
One lump was growling at the other.
Cillic and AuntieHeathen, in from St. Louis. Poor Heather got flooded with the flash. I tried to decrease the brightness but it didn't work. It's a good picture anyway.
As I said earlier, I don't photograph well. This one isn't terrible, but it's not great either.
Cillic and Dorsey. This guy is a trip.
IE cuts off some of the text. Blogspot uses complex style sheets for photos and IE sucks.
As promised. We finally found the CF adapters and now that I am able to store photos on John's server, I can post more than one image at a time and can do it easilly...
Random Photos:
Annie and John enjoying naptime.And my crummy attempt at red-eye reduction.
It looks weird, but so what
Kora's last day at our old place. We got Annie about 1 month before Monica and Jim got Kora and they grew up together. Kora is a very sweet, very large Malmute/Rottweiler mix. She's not so bright though so we used to make George and Lenny jokes about them. Yes, she's wearing angel wings. Annie won't tolerate such nonsense. Annie misses her buddy.Christmas in June. Due to various travel schedules we weren't able to see John's family for Christmas. We finally got around to it in June. John's dad Jeff, stepmom Donna and stepsister Sharon. I jokingly refer to John's dad as Bizzaro Bear (in reference to Superman). He himself a large, hairy, white dude but ideologically opposite of Great White Bear.As promised. I can't remember who said it on GWBs site about the American people needing to pull their heads out of their large bowl of stupid flakes, but here it is. Not my best work, and I'm sure someone with a professional graphics background could do much better, but it's just for fun.Eat up America!
A really good picture of John. I like this one a lot.I, on the other hand, take horrible photos and rarely share them publicly.
I am not photogenic.
Annie at the Dog Beach:
I put these in order so as to tell the story of the extremely large dog who stole her toy. We did get it back, he wasn't mean and gave it up pretty willingly. He was a cutie:
Moving Photos:
Cat Toy Heaven (or hell?).As anyone with pets knows, the area under and behind the sofa is a vortex of lost toys.
The new kitchen. I cannot believe that I found space for all of this crap!This kitchen is significantly smaller than the one we had.
Similar mazes of furniture and boxes in the living roomand bedroomThe growling lumps inside the boxspring. The cats ripped holes in the liner.One lump was growling at the other.
The much needed night out to Neo:
We stopped at Lincoln Park Gyro before heading on to neo, and even though I knew it was rude, I snapped a picture of a guy passed out in his food. This photo has since disappeared. We did make sure he was breathing. What can you do, he was in a Sox jersey and the crosstown-classic was that day, you know where he'd been.
Cillic and AuntieHeathen, in from St. Louis. Poor Heather got flooded with the flash. I tried to decrease the brightness but it didn't work. It's a good picture anyway.As I said earlier, I don't photograph well. This one isn't terrible, but it's not great either.Cillic and Dorsey. This guy is a trip.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)