Long Time, No Post

Well. It's been a while. My last post was over two months ago. Sure, I could list off excuses, but hell, nobody cares. I've just been busy; that's life. So a couple things that came to mind:

It is ok to wish harm to someone if you feel your reasons are just enough. After a crazy lady flew by me on 33, weaving through traffic, I thought Jeez, she could really hurt someone driving like that. It wasn't actually that clean or concerned, but we'll keep it like it is. After the few minutes of deliberation in line at Subway, I concluded that it's ok to hope she gets injured in an accident, hoping she may t hen realize the dangers of driving like she does and she'll pose less of a risk to others. :-D Where's my halo?

A note on some of the not-so-good, not-so-bad, just really, really annoying parts of having Tourette's Syndrome:
A. Having a pen in your mouth while driving because you needed to write something on your hand at the last/next red light, and you twitch your head around and the pen flies off into the back of the car. Now you lose.

B. Chewing. Any questions, ask to look at my cheek and/or lip at any given time.

C. Clumsy + involuntary motor tics = many things, but particularly spilling water on one's
shirt. That can be good, though, in some circumstances. ;)


Has anyone tried suing the RIAA for privacy invasion? I don't know much about IP addresses and how they track people and whatnot, but hell, if you're being sued for $25,000, you might as well try and sue back. It's the American judicial system! Can't do it anywhere else!



And finally a couple notes/thoughts on Strickland's State of the State Address, of which I only heard the first half-hour, then I got bored and went inside.
-Regarding education, he plans to eliminate vouchers. Ignorant as I am, I've heard from a couple credible sources that vouchers are beneficial. For those unknowing, a voucher is a chunk of money from the state that a student can take with him/her to a different school, should he/she wish to leave, but it has specifically to do with charter and private schools. That's all I know.

-I want to make it plain and clear: there is no such thing as "clean coal" any more than there is a free China. Now you know my position on social oppression. In fact, thought I am a supporter of Barack Obama, I'm debating withdrawing my support because of his pathetically weak stance on the environment. "Clean" or "liquid" coal is in many cases far worse than oil. Obama supports clean coal usage. He also supports ethanol and E85. Keeping it brief and trying not to rank, E85 is, like clean coal, a propaganda tool by corporations to appear evi-friendly. If you want to cut dependence on foreign oil, sure, go for the ethanol. If you give a damn about the environment, take the ethanol and shove it. Edwards, however, has a very pro-environmentalism stance. It's intriguing.

-A quote Strickland used from Edison: "Opportunity is missed by most because it's dressed in overalls and looks like work." I just like that.

-He mentions health care for those below poverty and those under 21, which I like, yadda yadda, and now I've bored myself. How sad.

I'm not really saying anything that's worth being said, so I'm going to go enjoy some Salmon.

What? Louder, please.

I just have to comment on the hilarity of the dedication to tradition in politics. To this day, matters are voted upon by saying "aye" or "no" at the appropriate time and the Speaker at the time decides who won. It's pretty much standard proceedure for someone to object and demand an electronic vote, which they always do, but it's still funny to observe those passionate issues such as the stem cell bill today where the congresspersons yell surprisingly loud 'NO!' rather than a simple declaration, as is usual. Of course, the Speaker, in my observation, calls it in whatever manner he is in favor, and it's put to electronic vote. Maybe our most effective politicians would be those with plenty of strong experience in a student section, like myself. Heck, we can yell for, depending on the sport, up to 90 minutes straight at the top of our voice. ;) Something I'm very proud of.

Ah, C-SPAN, you bring to light our most embarrassing realities of governmental proceedure.

Empty Promises and Soon, Empty Fishing Boats

While the approval ratings dwindle, the rest of America has already woken up accepted the painful reality: we elected a monkey. From a purely environmental standpoint, a "monkey" is a terrible comparison; monkeys make up a very necessary part of many ecosystems and generally benefit the region. Ours is more like that monkey in the black and white film washing a cat in a sink: rather entertaining, but truthfully good for nothing.

Think Progressive has even compliled a list of of the "president's" previous rhetorical promises for cleaner energy and independence from oil. This year the Financial Times said that Bush will be giving a State of the Union address (Jan. 23) centered around energy. Al Hubbard, constucting this new energy policy, foresees “headlines above the fold that will knock your socks off in terms of our commitment to energy independence.” For some reason, I'm yet to get out the champagne.

Additionally, Bush recently opened a large area in Alaska's Bristol Bay up to drilling. Bristol Bay is one of the most important fishing areas in the world, home to salmon, cod, red king crab, halibut, and herring. What's worse, the site where they intend to dig is right on top of the feeding grounds of one of the most endangered whales in the world: the North Pacific Right Whale. This basically puts this administration in a nutshell: selfish interests without the slightest care for consequences. Senator Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, worked in 2003 to convince Congress to lift a moratorium on drilling there and succeeded, which goes to show that even the state's own Congressman doesn't give a damn about protecting one of the states strongest industries and their oldest tradition.

What a happy day.

Words of Iraqi Children

From CNN.com, Carl Perry writes:

It was just an idea – talk to kids. Find out what they think of the war. When you interview adults here in Iraq – you often get a filtered view of reality. On the other hand, kids can’t lie. They will always tell you the truth – and really, it’s the truth we’re interested in.

So, one morning I set out in the neighborhood looking for kids to talk to. With me, the over talented cameraman Dominic Swann – neither of us had a clue if anyone would talk to us. Our fixer kept smoking – shaking his head, letting us know that this in all likelyhood would be a failed mission. Of course, it’s Baghdad so our other options were try this, or sit in the office and wait for the violence and live shots to begin.

It took over three hours of talking to people before we found a 16 year old boy who was willing to tell us his thoughts. His first one, “Saddam was better than the Americans.” We’re off to a great start – I thought. “Any hope for Iraq” I asked. “None,” he said.

“This is going to be a very uplifting piece” our stringer said immediately. Such is Iraq.

Kids in Iraq are wonderful. They run the same routine anytime they see a foreigner. First they send a scout. He appears from no where – checks out the situation, then disappears. Depending on his report to the others, flocks of kids start to arrive. In this case, there were at least a dozen.

One became the leader. He pointed out everything that had changed – the trash, the blast walls – the western security. He told us he wished he could play football without fearing for his life.

I asked one final question to the group that had arrived. “How many of you have lost family members in this war? Everyone raised their hand.

“Welcome to Iraq,” said my stringer.

From Net to Chains

For those who don't know, the freedom of the internet is at risk. A hotword lately has been "net neutrality," though few know what it means. In a bad summary, net neutrality is the protection of the internet from corporations that want privledge in its use. Congress currently has a bill (H.R. 5252 / S. 2686) the would eliminate the internet's protection. The Daily Show explained it best, I think.

When you get on the internet, you send "packets" of information out and receive "packets" back. This is how you get your pictures, graphics, text, all the good stuff you enjoy so much. Net neutrality ensures your packets and Verizon's packets are treated equally. Without net neutrality, the corporations that pay the most money get privledge, and your packets... well, they may get there eventually, they may not. Of course, if you paid more money, then those corporations would like you better. Then your packets have a better chance of getting where they're going. Maybe a site isn't so nice to Comcast, so maybe no packets end up getting to of coming from that site. Oops. Oh well.

Now that's really a rather gross explanation. For a better one, check the link in my Links Collumn to the right of the page; they provide a much better explanation.
Anyway, I just felt like putting something to do with the subject up here.

And Then There Was Hope...

A re-post from a favorite blog of mine: It's Getting Hot In Here.

Stéphane Dion has just been elected the new Federal Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada. (Equal to leader of “Democrats” in the U.S.)

Dion was the previous Minister of the Environment for Canada before the Conservative government came into power in February. Dion was also the previous President of the United Nations (U.N.) Conference of the Parties and Meeting of the Parties (COP/MOP) on climate change. He lead Canada and influenced many countries in the world to make last year’s U.N. Climate Change Conference in Montreal, Canada, an INCREDIBLE success.

In his victory speech tonight he noted that the number one goal in Canada right now should be sustainability. Thank you Dion. And thank you everyone who voted. Dion is one of the few politicians whom I have been genuinely inspired by. He also is a dedicated supporter to the youth movement, stating at the U.N. last year that ‘the youth may just be the most important constituency here at this conference.’

This new position also makes Dion the Leader of the Opposition, as the Liberal party is the opposition in Parliament. With his dedication to the most important issues, I can only see Canada’s future getting brighter.

By Zoe Caron

The Terrible N-Word

So, I suppose I should mention that this opinion is coming from a middle-class, suburban white kid, attending a small country school with little exposure to black culture. Nevertheless, I'll throw out my 2 cents.
With the recent outburst of Michael Richards, there has been a call by black community leaders and figures for a voluntary stopping of the usage of the infamous "n-word." They say it's just offensive, there's no reason for its use or existence. Using the word is "unacceptable." This annoys me. I am by no means discriminatory towards any race, creed, sexual orientation, etc., and that's something you'll just have to take my word on. But the idea of eradicating a word from existence by command is absurd. Listening to and NPR article on the evolution of language, it was mentioned that language changes form and rules on its own, and without some sort of authoritarian rule, no person or group can demand change in a language; it happens on its own. To me, however, referring to any word as "unacceptable" strikes a very negative chord. I'm reminded of a very enjoyable post by Keith Olbermann regarding Bush's remark on a certain train of thought (I recommend everyone give the article a good read.) I believe this way of thinking applies to words as well. Words are the only communicable representation of thought. Limiting language implies limited thought, as strongly implied in Orwell's 1984.
Now, true, this particular word could probably be effaced without much loss of freedom of thought. However, lines must be drawn, and in my opinion the line exists at the very beginning. No words can ever, EVER be forced out of existence, whether that word has a beautiful, positive meaning or a terrible negative connotation. Expression can never be cut down.
If one is looking merely to reduce the power of racism by destroying the power of this racist word, then calling for an all-out stopping of its use is doing the exact opposite! A good quote to remember: "Fear of a word only increases fear of the thing itself." No wise thinker said this one; it was in a Harry Potter book. Why do curse words retain their power of expression? It's due to their lack of use! It words like "fuck" or "shit" are used on a regular basis, do you think those words imply the same level of passion? No, they are simply used as normal words with normal implication; they do not express the same extreme emotion as they once did. The same idea works in reverse. If you know someone who never uses foul language, when they curse you are astonished, but you recognize his/her level or frustration, right? Of course you do. If people want to reduce the power of this "n-word" then by God just say it. Encourage everyone to say it. Push it to the level of frequency that it becomes an everyday word. In many places it is already, but the commonness of the word must traverse racial lines; white people can say it too. Everyone should be allowed to use this word, and often. What would happen then? If anyone tries to use it as an insult, a negative epithet, would anyone care? Would it get the slightest response of anger? No, it wouldn't. It's now the norm. To remove a word's meaning, you must remove its taboo.
So, really, why all the fuss? My comment on any argument founded on the use of this word: Get over it.