For My Dear Invalid Mother

Comments (2)

Back to My Roots Rock

I just downloaded the new Springsteen album from iTunes. It’s awesome! Must have tracks: “Magic,” “You’ll Be Comin’ Down,” “Last to Die,” and “Long Walk Home.”

Comments (1)

Meet the Candidates: Rudolph William Louis Giuliani (Update)

Okay, I was wrong. A week ago last Sunday I wrote this about Rudy Giuliani:

Giuliani’s single biggest weakness right now is his support for the occupation in Iraq and his continued support for neo-imperialist wars. This is almost certainly calculated to draw as many fundamentalists and industrialists to the primary polls as possible, but it’s a bit like shortening a baseball bat so you can swing it faster. By taking a position opposed by a good two-thirds of voters, he might as well give up now.

While anyone still supporting the occupation of Iraq is nearly as boneheaded as a Pachycephalosaurus, his main weakness right now is the fact that he is certifiably insane. While Giuliani was speaking about (read: lying about) the Democratic candidates’ foreign policies, he said: “Hillary and Obama are kind of debating whether to invite [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Osama bin Laden] to the inauguration or the inaugural ball.” Uh-huh.

To review, we have a paranoid-delusional Baptist minister, a “dumb as hell” actor, a senator with clear signs of senile dementia, and a simply idiotic serial monogamist running for the Republican nomination. So, Mitt, it’s up to you to make it a perfecta: might I suggest schizophrenia? Who knows, maybe receiving campaign advice straight from God will help.

Comments (2)

Let’s Play the Forest Fire Blame Game!

Politicians in California and the federal Government have already begun their bickering over who is responsible for the poor response to the fires in southern California, with Ruben Grijalva, the head of California’s Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, blaming the Marines and the federal Forest Service’s poor leadership for grounding two dozen water dropping helicopters. To tell the truth, I’m not all that interested in this fight, since I already know where to put the blame.
Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (2)

Just Say No (To Drug Laws)

Turns out that punishment doesn’t decrease the number of people smoking marijuana. My source? No, not Cannabis Culture. Actually, the British Crime Survey (the equivalent of FBI crime statistics) released today found that the number of 16- to 24-year olds using marijuana has fallen 7 percent in the last decade, even though it was downgraded from a class B illegal drug (up to 5 years in prison) to a class C drug (up to 2 years) in 2004. In fact, since it was downgraded, it has fallen each year. Aside from being an ostrich-sized egg in the face of PM Brown, who’s taken up Reagan’s mantle, spreading urban myths about “super-weed” and trying to put marijuana back on the B list, it’s a bit of a blow to American drug policy, especially the “lock kids up ’til they have gray hair” part. Which is, of course, the only part of American drug policy.

Comments (1)

How to Identify Different Types of Pseudoscience From Very Far Away

You’re traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of diseased imagination. That’s the signpost up ahead— your next stop, the Pseudoscience Zone! (Intense apologies to Rod Sterling.)
Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (2)

Meet the Candidates: Rudolph William Louis Giuliani

You may recall that, way back in February, I started a series on the presidential candidates. I’m afraid, dear hearts, that there’s only two more (Giuliani and Fred Thomson). Not because I’m leaving (deity-of-your-choice forbid!), but because Hilary Clinton is so far ahead of her competitors that the primary campaign might as well be over. But don’t worry, this one’s a doozy. Let’s meet Rudolph William Louis Giuliani, the election-postponing, national-security-endangering, flip-flopping, ball-dropping, child-abusing-priest-protecting, 9-11 exploiting, philanthropist-money-stealing, freedom-hating, waterboarding, Parkinson’s-patient-abusing, phony-phone-call-taking, free-speech-muzzling sonuvabitch with more ties to the mob than Mitt Romney has follicles.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (2)

I’m Back (Re-Redux)

This is, if I haven’t lost count, the third time I’ve had to take an extended hiatus from blogging, and the second time for a surgery. I now have screws, pins, and pieces a dead guy’s hip in my back. So, once again, I apologize for my body’s noncooperation.

Yesterday, I woke up to the news that Al Gore had won the Nobel Prize. Since I can’t add anything to his speech and Stockholm’s decision other than “Yay!”, “Take that, Bush!”, and “Damn, I wish he’d run!”, this post is not about him. Instead, I’m ranting about something a little less time-sensitive.

Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment

I Do Love My State

I have been sans internet (and worse, sans news) for the last several weeks, so I’m sorry for the sudden disappearance of sane, conservative-taunting, bleeding heart commentary you’ve come to expect from me.

With that out of the way, I have this little bit of news I heard last night listening to my local Air America/Nova M/Mother Jones radio station. Oregon is now the seventh state to protect student journalists in high school and college from censorship, even from their parents. If a student-run paper is censored by the administration, they can now sue for relief (a provision that would allow for recovery of attorney fees was stricken from the bill, unfortunately). A small victory, yes, but a sweet one.

Comments (3)

She Invented. She Invented. She Invented.

There’s a lively discussion at Feministing over whether Google’s algorithm is sexist (it isn’t, everyone else is) and whether D&D fans are all misogynist teenage boys (all the ones I’ve known are). Turns out that if you search for “she invented” on Google you get as a recommendation “he invented.” Now, as a self-identifying geek, I’m fairly sure that it’s because people search more often for “he invented” than “she invented” more than for any other reason (certainly not because Google has some secret anti-woman-scientist agenda). But, I also think that’s sad. So, here are a few “she invented”s for you and Google.

  • Hedy Lamar. She invented radio control for torpedoes that used frequency hopping.
  • Madame C. J. Walker. She invented a special soap and brush used for straightening hair.
  • Maria Telkes. She invented a solar heated house, a solar oven, and a distiller for life rafts.
  • Hypatia. She invented the astrolabe and hydrometer, and was murdered by monks who believed math and science to be immoral.
  • Ada Lovelace. She invented the binary system used in modern computers, and developed the programming code used in Charles Babbage’s computer.
  • Mary Walton. She invented one of the first systems for scrubbing pollution out of exhaust (essentially an enormous bong).
  • Beulah Louise Henry. She invented, among other things, a vacuum ice cream freezer, a typewriter that made four copies of whatever was typed on it, and the first bobbinless sewing machine.
  • Gertrude B. Elion. She invented many different medicines, including Purinethol, the first leukemia treatment; Imuran, an immuno-supressent used in organ transplants; the antibiotic Septra; and Zovirax, a treatment for viral herpes.
  • Erna Schneider Hoover. She invented a computerized telephone switching system that eliminated system overload.
  • Stephanie Kwoek. She invented Kevlar.
  • Katharine Blodgett. She invented, among other things, invisible glass, poison gas absorbents, the color gauge (an amazingly accurate ruler inspired by soap bubbles), and a method for deicing aircraft. She was also the first woman to get a Ph.D. from Cambridge.
  • Mary Anderson. She invented the windshield wiper.
  • Helen Blanchard. She invented several different sewing machines (including the first zigzag sewer) and different types of surgical needles.

And if you want to see more things that “she invented” go to this partial list of patents awarded to women in the US.

BTW, I’m going to be contacting Google, asking them to fix their algorithm so that it doesn’t suggest “he” for “she.” If you want to do the same, their contact info is:

Google Inc.
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043
phone: (650) 253-0000
fax: (650) 253-000

I’ve yet to find a support e-mail address, but if I find one, I’ll update this page.

Update: Due to the large numbers of searches for “she invented,” on Google, “she invented” no longer triggers a recommendation for “he invented.” I’ve been out of touch, but it doesn’t look like Google made any changes to their algorithm. Score one for the wisdom of the masses.

Comments (2)

Why We Have Hate Crime Laws

I just read this wonderful article by Michael Dorf on FindLaw about Bush’s threat to veto the proposed hate crimes bill. He points out that, while it is possible to argue against hate crime laws in general on the basis of constitutionality, Bush’s real motive is more likely homophobia. Well, that’s a little obvious, but it needed to be said.

Anyway, I was listening to Thom Hartmann on Friday, and he and his callers were talking about the veto and why we need hate crime laws in the first place. Thom said that the reason we have harsher punishments for crimes motivated by hatred towards a certain group is because it is intended to spread fear. (Which, BTW, is not prohibited by the First Ammendment; see Virginia vs. Black. Fuck off, libertarians.)

True, but the main reason we must have federal hate crime laws is because local law enforcement (especially in conservative areas, where hate crimes are more likely to take place) tends to turn a blind eye to crimes against blacks, gays, transexuals, etc. Hate crime laws allows the federal government to step in and investigate a crime when the local authorities fail to do so.

Comments (1)

Quick Hit: My Dream Cabinet

Okay, like I said, updates have been sporadic lately; aside from finals, I’m in a back brace (enormous pain in the butt). So, in lieu of a weighty tome, allow me to jump way ahead of even the most speculative pundits, and propose a partial cabinet for the Democratic administration beginning in 2009 (I’m assuming a Clinton/Obama ticket):

  • Secretary of State | Bill Richardson (but, by the way, out here in the real West, people know that handguns are used only to kill people)
  • Secretary of Defense | Wesley Clark
  • Attorney General | John Edwards
  • Secretary of the Interior | Bobby Kennedy Jr.
  • Secretary of Health and Human Services | John Kitzhaber (and not just because he’s from Oregon)
  • Secretary of Education | Paul Evans (a little known Oregon State Senate candidate and professor from here in Salem)
  • Secretary of Veteran Affairs | John Kerry or Max Cleland
  • White House Chief of Staff | Mike Gravel

This leaves:

  • Secretary of Labor
  • Secretary of Agriculture
  • Secretary of Commerce
  • Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
  • Secretary of Transportation
  • Secretary of the Treasury
  • Secretary of Energy

which I’m not sure about yet.

(And, yes, I deliberately left out the Secretary of Homeland Security. That’s another, very long post.)

Comments (3)

Time to Taunt the Paleocons Again

I just saw that my secret detractor Filmer has posted about me again (I’m flattered!). So, I’ll go against my own rule and return the favor. I’ll also clear a few things up:

  • I’m no fuckin’ centrist. I’m a bleeding heart, tree hugging, Birkenstock wearing liberal. And I hate centrists almost as much as conservatives; I would assign to them a far worse fate than Dante.
  • You are a troll.
    • You flamed me. (By the way, “PC water carrier” was the worst you could come up with?) Troll points: +1.
    • You capitalized “founding fathers” on the blog of a guy who bloody hates the founding fathers. Troll points: +1.
    • You assume that I’m an isolationist without reading any of my posts marked “World.” Troll Points: +2.
    • You used American Renaissance and Council of Conservative Citizens as sources. Troll Points: +6.

    Which gives you a total of 10 troll points. Five is enough to be considered a full blown troll. Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (8)

Note to Self

Never track-back to a nutter blog again. My readership spiked after I linked to the Conservative Times, but I got this lovely “rebuttal”:

“Finally, you lose the right to accuse anyone of racism when you define conservatism as “the survival and enhancement of a particular people and its institutionalized cultural expressions.””

First of all, conservatives should not accuse people of racism because racism is a neo-Marxist term used to enforce politically correct right think. I don’t think anyone affiliated with Conservative Times called anyone a racist. They suggested that La Raza (Meaning The Race. A little ironic don’t you think?) is anti-White and anti-West. Nor did they say that La Raza is a terrorist organization. Although the quotes from the founder of La Raza are quite interesting. I did not write the post, but I think the Al Qaeda reference was comparing them on the basis of them being anti-West.

What problem do you have with the definition of conservatism? How would you define it? I believe the definition is a translation of the quote from Cicero that is above it.

You are a good little PC water carrier, BTW. Declaring that people “lose the right” to comment when they deviate from the liberal party line.

My commentary after the break

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (9)

La Raza=al Qaeda?

This is really confusing, and more than a little offensive. There’s an article in the Conservative Times that compares La Raza to al Qaeda, among other offensive drivel:

Barack Hussein Obama will join La Raza in honoring traitors Sen. Lindsey Graham, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, and Roger Cardinal Mahony. La Raza is perhaps one of the most, if not the most, anti-white, anti-West organizations on American soil. It certainly would rank up there with the Black Panthers and Al Qaeda.

Why exactly is Graham still in office? Are South Carolina voters really so ignorant? This Senator, from one of the most conservative states in the union, is catering to Mexican terrorists, and yet he is still running unchallenged in the 2008 primary?

First of all, the National Council of La Raza is not a terrorist group, no matter what those fat racists Limbaugh and O’Reilly think. Second, read the constitution before you accuse someone of treason: even I am careful with that (no, Bush is probably not a traitor). Finally, you lose the right to accuse anyone of racism when you define conservatism as “the survival and enhancement of a particular people and its institutionalized cultural expressions.”

a la Wonkette 

Comments (1)

Older Posts »