And I wrote some poetry. Well, one poem. And it's really short. And it doesn't have a title. But I was feeling really melancholy at work today, so below the jump lies sappy-weird-poem-time. Beware!
First post in a looooong time. My apologies - I thought summer would mean lots of free time and motivation to write, but clearly I have done no such thing. Anyway, enjoy a more serious post as I shake loose the mental and comedy cobwebs.
But Blogger was down all yesterday, and the post that I so meticulously wrote for you all has disappeared. I know that it doesn't explain why yesterday would have been my first post in nearly a week, but I do have an excuse for yesterday.
Also, FINALS.
But they're over now, and posting should resume with some regularity now that summer has officially begun.
Also, FINALS.
But they're over now, and posting should resume with some regularity now that summer has officially begun.
The following post is in Arabic!
No, this isn't about the movie.
Osama bin Laden is dead! President Obama stated that U.S. forces killed the founder of Al-Qaeda during a firefight - apparently Mr. bin Laden was hiding in a mansion near the capital of Pakistan.
Wait. Say that again? Hiding in a mansion? Near the capital?
I guess we know why Pakistan was so adamant about CIA operatives and American drones leaving their country. It's because they aren't doing what we have paid them millions of dollars to do! After all, the most wanted man in the world was chilling out in a grand estate right under their noses - their efforts to counteract terrorism and locate Osama were clearly less than vigorous.
But, I suppose it was a good political move by Obama to mention their help. The last thing we need now is increased tension.
You can read more about it here, and watch Obama's address about the event on Hulu.
Wait. Say that again? Hiding in a mansion? Near the capital?
I guess we know why Pakistan was so adamant about CIA operatives and American drones leaving their country. It's because they aren't doing what we have paid them millions of dollars to do! After all, the most wanted man in the world was chilling out in a grand estate right under their noses - their efforts to counteract terrorism and locate Osama were clearly less than vigorous.
But, I suppose it was a good political move by Obama to mention their help. The last thing we need now is increased tension.
You can read more about it here, and watch Obama's address about the event on Hulu.
The following post is in Arabic!
Back again! Continuing the saga of human rights coverage for my Ethics and Human Rights course, and trying to remain objective.
Also, I apologize in advance for all the links.
So! Recent events in Uganda regarding gay rights:
A few weeks ago, a Ugandan man living in the United States named Joseph Bokombe was arrested by U.S. immigration officials because of an expired visa. Bokombe, a gay man, obviously feared returning home and elected to stay in the United States past the expiration date of his cultural exchange visa. If he is deported, it is likely he will share the same fate as David Kato (whose story I detailed in my other human rights post). In fact, he probably won't even make it past the airport - he will be immediately detained, and then eventually murdered.
Members of his community banded together and have been collecting petitions in order to secure his continued residence in the United States, and they will eventually submit them to a judge. If you would like to sign the petition, it can be found here.
Even more recent are the renewed cries to pass the 2009 Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill before the end of the Parliament session in May, which have been defended by the anti-gay Ugandan preacher Rev. Martin Ssempa. A strong New York Times article (which is well quoted here for people without an account) details how citizens have been coerced or bribed into supporting this movement. The delay already placed on the bill is mostly due to Western criticism and anger, which presents an opportunity, should the West decide to take it. Again, there is another petition available, and it takes only a second to fill out.
Perhaps the most shocking (to me anyway) recent act coming from the Ugandan elite is a letter, published by the Ugandan Ambassador to the President of the European Parliament, which states that David Kato should share responsibility for his brutal murder. You can read the letter here, but it is simultaneously infuriating and depressing. So, you know, only visit if you're already dead inside.
Also, I apologize in advance for all the links.
So! Recent events in Uganda regarding gay rights:
A few weeks ago, a Ugandan man living in the United States named Joseph Bokombe was arrested by U.S. immigration officials because of an expired visa. Bokombe, a gay man, obviously feared returning home and elected to stay in the United States past the expiration date of his cultural exchange visa. If he is deported, it is likely he will share the same fate as David Kato (whose story I detailed in my other human rights post). In fact, he probably won't even make it past the airport - he will be immediately detained, and then eventually murdered.
Members of his community banded together and have been collecting petitions in order to secure his continued residence in the United States, and they will eventually submit them to a judge. If you would like to sign the petition, it can be found here.
Even more recent are the renewed cries to pass the 2009 Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill before the end of the Parliament session in May, which have been defended by the anti-gay Ugandan preacher Rev. Martin Ssempa. A strong New York Times article (which is well quoted here for people without an account) details how citizens have been coerced or bribed into supporting this movement. The delay already placed on the bill is mostly due to Western criticism and anger, which presents an opportunity, should the West decide to take it. Again, there is another petition available, and it takes only a second to fill out.
Perhaps the most shocking (to me anyway) recent act coming from the Ugandan elite is a letter, published by the Ugandan Ambassador to the President of the European Parliament, which states that David Kato should share responsibility for his brutal murder. You can read the letter here, but it is simultaneously infuriating and depressing. So, you know, only visit if you're already dead inside.
I have already discussed the sudden and brutal attack on our nation's unions and teachers. Before, it was a moral argument held up by strong beliefs in the rights of our working citizens. Now, however, it is personal.
I recently discovered that in my home state of Ohio, Governor Kasich has proposed a budget he calls the "Robin Hood Bill". It is, in fact, a total mockery of any sort of values the mythic Robin Hood possessed. While Robin Hood stole money from greedy nobleman (who had, in truth, stolen their riches from the poor), Governor Kasich is advocating taking money away from our public schools in order to share it around, communist style. In fact, our school (which is funded 95% by our community tax dollars) will lose $54 million dollars over the next ten years! That's nearly 20% of our budget. That's nearly 40 teachers lost, every year.
Our high school is the best public school in the state of Ohio. There's a reason for that, mainly a strong blend of academic success, athletic ability, and excellent musicianship. If the Governor's bill passes, our school will quickly become mediocre. I don't want that for my community (or my sister, who is still attending high school). So, I have written a letter to the Representatives of my state, and posted it on facebook. Maybe I'll post it here as well. We'll see if anything comes of it.
I encourage those of you from Ohio to do the same! And even if you aren't from the greatest state in the USA, make sure to pay attention to what is happening to your old high schools - your experiences during high school make up a large part of who you are today, and you don't want the most positive aspects of your primary education forcibly removed by the crusade to end debt in the most damaging way possible!
EDIT: This quote brought to you by my music instructor, Mr. Kline:
"Remember when teachers, public employees, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?
Yeah, me neither."
I recently discovered that in my home state of Ohio, Governor Kasich has proposed a budget he calls the "Robin Hood Bill". It is, in fact, a total mockery of any sort of values the mythic Robin Hood possessed. While Robin Hood stole money from greedy nobleman (who had, in truth, stolen their riches from the poor), Governor Kasich is advocating taking money away from our public schools in order to share it around, communist style. In fact, our school (which is funded 95% by our community tax dollars) will lose $54 million dollars over the next ten years! That's nearly 20% of our budget. That's nearly 40 teachers lost, every year.
Our high school is the best public school in the state of Ohio. There's a reason for that, mainly a strong blend of academic success, athletic ability, and excellent musicianship. If the Governor's bill passes, our school will quickly become mediocre. I don't want that for my community (or my sister, who is still attending high school). So, I have written a letter to the Representatives of my state, and posted it on facebook. Maybe I'll post it here as well. We'll see if anything comes of it.
I encourage those of you from Ohio to do the same! And even if you aren't from the greatest state in the USA, make sure to pay attention to what is happening to your old high schools - your experiences during high school make up a large part of who you are today, and you don't want the most positive aspects of your primary education forcibly removed by the crusade to end debt in the most damaging way possible!
EDIT: This quote brought to you by my music instructor, Mr. Kline:
"Remember when teachers, public employees, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?
Yeah, me neither."
I have recently been finding that the United States Government just does what it wants.
Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of big government and the increased protectionthat it brings, but the issue of big/small government and state power is not really relevant here.
I'm talking about blatantly unconstitutional overstepping of clear legal bounds, made by the President, by Congress, and also by State Legislatures. Here's a list:
- Governors in Wisconsin and Ohio strip workers of their rights
- Congress' attempts to repeal healthcare laws deny equal protection
- Obama's decision to intervene in Libya without asking Congress
- Congress forces an animal off the endangered species list
- Congressmen vote before being sworn in - one even chaired the Rules Committee without being a member
- The Patriot Act exists
Although it is sometimes difficult to decide whether or not these things are "necessary" or "should" occur, the fact of the matter is that they are all illegal. And frankly, I'm a little tired of the government not following protocol.
Have any other blatant violations of precedent or the Constitution? Submit them! I'll add them in, and you'll look like a legal superhero (which is bound to help you out with the ladies).
Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of big government and the increased protectionthat it brings, but the issue of big/small government and state power is not really relevant here.
I'm talking about blatantly unconstitutional overstepping of clear legal bounds, made by the President, by Congress, and also by State Legislatures. Here's a list:
- Governors in Wisconsin and Ohio strip workers of their rights
- Congress' attempts to repeal healthcare laws deny equal protection
- Obama's decision to intervene in Libya without asking Congress
- Congress forces an animal off the endangered species list
- Congressmen vote before being sworn in - one even chaired the Rules Committee without being a member
- The Patriot Act exists
Although it is sometimes difficult to decide whether or not these things are "necessary" or "should" occur, the fact of the matter is that they are all illegal. And frankly, I'm a little tired of the government not following protocol.
Have any other blatant violations of precedent or the Constitution? Submit them! I'll add them in, and you'll look like a legal superhero (which is bound to help you out with the ladies).
The following post is in Arabic!
My next post was supposed to be Arabic-related, but I reacted so strongly to these videos that I had to share them. I would always love comments on these posts, if anyone has opinions!
The Iowan House of Representatives has recently been debating adding an amendment to the Iowan Constitution ending civil unions (same-sex marriages). To discuss the issue, there was a public hearing at the Iowan House in which members of the community, representatives, and officials could speak either for or against the restriction.
First, I saw this young man present his case:
Ah, that was nice. It's like a breath of fresh air, restoring my faith in humanity. He appealed to reason, gave personal evidence, and threw in some pro-Iowan down-home sentiment. Anyone notice the restructured MLK quote at the very end? Content of my character, very nice.
So, feeling reassured in the logic and pathos of the boy's argument, I clicked upon the opposition. I was just trying to be informed of a potential argument supporting the resolution. Well, this is what I got:
Wow. I don't believe one iota of his "argument" came from anywhere besides the Bible. I was practically shaking while watching it. His accent, his quotes, his "reasoning" - all of it grated on my common sense, my notions of equality, my knowledge and belief of the separation of church (or Bible-thumping extremists) and state.
Thankully, the bill died in the legislature. Let's hope people continue to use their heads and their hearts to uphold civil rights. As long as they aren't using this guy, there's hope for humanity.
As a note: I am usually against reading youtube comments, as they are more likely to give ulcers than anything else, but I would like to briefly clarify a few things.
1) The American constitution was not founded on Christian morals. The founding fathers were dieists, and were actually more appreciative of religions like Islam than Christianity.
2) The separation of Church and State was created in order to limit the scope of the Church's influence in order to protect liberties like, oh, I don't know, marriage.
The Iowan House of Representatives has recently been debating adding an amendment to the Iowan Constitution ending civil unions (same-sex marriages). To discuss the issue, there was a public hearing at the Iowan House in which members of the community, representatives, and officials could speak either for or against the restriction.
First, I saw this young man present his case:
Ah, that was nice. It's like a breath of fresh air, restoring my faith in humanity. He appealed to reason, gave personal evidence, and threw in some pro-Iowan down-home sentiment. Anyone notice the restructured MLK quote at the very end? Content of my character, very nice.
So, feeling reassured in the logic and pathos of the boy's argument, I clicked upon the opposition. I was just trying to be informed of a potential argument supporting the resolution. Well, this is what I got:
Wow. I don't believe one iota of his "argument" came from anywhere besides the Bible. I was practically shaking while watching it. His accent, his quotes, his "reasoning" - all of it grated on my common sense, my notions of equality, my knowledge and belief of the separation of church (or Bible-thumping extremists) and state.
Thankully, the bill died in the legislature. Let's hope people continue to use their heads and their hearts to uphold civil rights. As long as they aren't using this guy, there's hope for humanity.
As a note: I am usually against reading youtube comments, as they are more likely to give ulcers than anything else, but I would like to briefly clarify a few things.
1) The American constitution was not founded on Christian morals. The founding fathers were dieists, and were actually more appreciative of religions like Islam than Christianity.
2) The separation of Church and State was created in order to limit the scope of the Church's influence in order to protect liberties like, oh, I don't know, marriage.
From here on out the blog gets bilingual :)
For my Arabic class we have to blog briefly about various topics discussed in class and in the textbook. There won't be that many posts in Arabic, and they won't contain anything really essential, as I am less than fluent, but if you would like to read them in English I can provide it. (Or just use google translate because I am lazy.)
Anyway, this is just a notice of wonky new alphabets on the horizon.
For my Arabic class we have to blog briefly about various topics discussed in class and in the textbook. There won't be that many posts in Arabic, and they won't contain anything really essential, as I am less than fluent, but if you would like to read them in English I can provide it. (Or just use google translate because I am lazy.)
Anyway, this is just a notice of wonky new alphabets on the horizon.
Elephants are amazing creatures. They are one of my favorite animals, and I can't wait until they make lap versions of them, like they've done with Giraffes (http://www.petitelapgiraffe.com/). Honestly, it's one thing to jokingly say that elephants never forget, but it's another to really understand the intricacies of their society and their cognitive capabilities.
Elephants live in a structured society headed by a matriarch and made up of tight-knit family groups. Of course, the family unit isn't everything - elephants interact with other families and sub-populations. Elephant brains are extremely large and are highly developed emotionally, able to feel grief, altruism, joy, compassion, and self-awareness. In addition, they are one of the few animals to exhibit mothering and allomothering (in which males also care for children). Elephants can also communicate with something similar to a language. Their infamous trumpeting is more akin to a cry of excitement (or rage, or fear), but the sub-sonic rumblings they emit can communicate various messages for distances of over 6 miles! They can discuss directions to a nearby watering hole, inform others of the weather, or to find potential mates.
They sound pretty much like humans, don't they? That's why they really get angry when those pink fleshy things murder their relatives. And, just like we can't tell elephants apart, we fleshy things all look the same.
So, if elephants, who grieve deeply and can recognize the bones and bodies of their dead brethren, decide to exact revenge, they do so seemingly indiscriminately. While the loss of potentially innocent human life and valuable crop land is a tragedy in these rampages, we could do well to learn from them.
It's simple cause and effect.
A: We are killing elephants
B: Elephants get upset and angry
C: Elephants attack us and destroy the food supply of many African farmers
D: Solution?
According to CEO of GoDaddy.com, Bob Parsons, the solution is kill more elephants.
Somehow, that doesn't sound like an effective end to the problem...
Instead of building more effective defenses against elephants, or perhaps (getting crazy here, I know) stopping the murder of an endangered species much stronger than ourselves, Bob Parsons has argued that his solution is exactly what Africa needs. I'm not sure how you all feel about this, but I would like to hear your comments! How do you think we can keep crops that Africans desperately need safe without needlessly killing magnificent, highly intelligentpeople elephants?
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/04/01/godaddy.peta.protest/index.html?hpt=T2
Also, years and years of the Discovery Channel as a child :)
Elephants live in a structured society headed by a matriarch and made up of tight-knit family groups. Of course, the family unit isn't everything - elephants interact with other families and sub-populations. Elephant brains are extremely large and are highly developed emotionally, able to feel grief, altruism, joy, compassion, and self-awareness. In addition, they are one of the few animals to exhibit mothering and allomothering (in which males also care for children). Elephants can also communicate with something similar to a language. Their infamous trumpeting is more akin to a cry of excitement (or rage, or fear), but the sub-sonic rumblings they emit can communicate various messages for distances of over 6 miles! They can discuss directions to a nearby watering hole, inform others of the weather, or to find potential mates.
They sound pretty much like humans, don't they? That's why they really get angry when those pink fleshy things murder their relatives. And, just like we can't tell elephants apart, we fleshy things all look the same.
So, if elephants, who grieve deeply and can recognize the bones and bodies of their dead brethren, decide to exact revenge, they do so seemingly indiscriminately. While the loss of potentially innocent human life and valuable crop land is a tragedy in these rampages, we could do well to learn from them.
It's simple cause and effect.
A: We are killing elephants
B: Elephants get upset and angry
C: Elephants attack us and destroy the food supply of many African farmers
D: Solution?
According to CEO of GoDaddy.com, Bob Parsons, the solution is kill more elephants.
Somehow, that doesn't sound like an effective end to the problem...
Instead of building more effective defenses against elephants, or perhaps (getting crazy here, I know) stopping the murder of an endangered species much stronger than ourselves, Bob Parsons has argued that his solution is exactly what Africa needs. I'm not sure how you all feel about this, but I would like to hear your comments! How do you think we can keep crops that Africans desperately need safe without needlessly killing magnificent, highly intelligent
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/04/01/godaddy.peta.protest/index.html?hpt=T2
Also, years and years of the Discovery Channel as a child :)
At University I'm taking an Ethics and Human Rights class, and all the students are supposed to dutifully follow a human rights issue over the course of the semester.
So, naturally, I'm starting now.
I think part of my hesitation stemmed from the daunting number of possibilities, but in the end I settled on LBGT rights in Uganda. Hopefully, these posts will be more serious than my usual fare, and include more fact than (incredulous) analysis.
I was particularly moved by news of gay-activist David Kato's death in January of this year. It's difficult, when the struggle people face deals with resources, or money, or politics, to give up the ancient tribal notion of security and give in to sympathy (to paraphrase Richard Rorty). The security problem with sexuality is more elusive to my logical mind, but I suppose that isn't the point here.
Uganda has a history of anti-gay sentiment and legislation, and in 2009 the Anti-Homosexuality Bill was introduced by MP David Bahati. It criminalized same-sex relationships and punished repeat offenders and HIV-positive people engaging in same-sex activities with death (termed "aggravated homosexuality"). In addition, those citizens who knew of any homosexual activity were required to report it or face years of jail time. The government has likened homosexuality to prostitution, and is interested in doling out life sentences for the "crime". Very recently, Uganda's minister of ethics and integrity stated, "Homosexuals can forget about human rights".
Where did this sentiment come from? As Carl Stychin mentions in his essay on Same-Sex Sexualities and Globalization of Human Rights, many Africans feel that homosexuality is a horrid Western import. They feel that same-sex sexuality is not held by any "authentic" Africans. This was only exacerbated by the influx of American evangelicals, all giving talks about the "evil institution" of homosexuality, how to turn gays straight, and the impending death of the sanctity of marriage. While these preachers maintain they had no intention of inciting the kind of bills or violence we now see, I'm not really sure what they thought would happen.
This sort of growing anti-gay fervor has been battled by the native (and authentic!) population of gay activists involved in the group Sexual Minorities Uganda, founded in 2004. They have worked to increase awareness, fight against legislation, and work for inclusion.
However, this hasn't been a fight without loss and setbacks. David Kato, considered a founder of the gay-rights movement in Uganda, was "outed" nationally by a tabloid titled "Rolling Stone" (not affiliated with the American version), which called for his execution. Kato was beaten to death in January; a great loss for the community.
Nevertheless, the fight continues on, and Kato's death has prompted Western countries such as the United States to threaten to withhold aid if Uganda doesn't alter its stance on homosexuality. We have yet to see any legislative results, but I will be following the story in Uganda more closely, and will hopefully have more progress to report soon.
Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html?_r=2
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/27/uganda-gay-rights-activist-murder
So, naturally, I'm starting now.
I think part of my hesitation stemmed from the daunting number of possibilities, but in the end I settled on LBGT rights in Uganda. Hopefully, these posts will be more serious than my usual fare, and include more fact than (incredulous) analysis.
I was particularly moved by news of gay-activist David Kato's death in January of this year. It's difficult, when the struggle people face deals with resources, or money, or politics, to give up the ancient tribal notion of security and give in to sympathy (to paraphrase Richard Rorty). The security problem with sexuality is more elusive to my logical mind, but I suppose that isn't the point here.
Uganda has a history of anti-gay sentiment and legislation, and in 2009 the Anti-Homosexuality Bill was introduced by MP David Bahati. It criminalized same-sex relationships and punished repeat offenders and HIV-positive people engaging in same-sex activities with death (termed "aggravated homosexuality"). In addition, those citizens who knew of any homosexual activity were required to report it or face years of jail time. The government has likened homosexuality to prostitution, and is interested in doling out life sentences for the "crime". Very recently, Uganda's minister of ethics and integrity stated, "Homosexuals can forget about human rights".
Where did this sentiment come from? As Carl Stychin mentions in his essay on Same-Sex Sexualities and Globalization of Human Rights, many Africans feel that homosexuality is a horrid Western import. They feel that same-sex sexuality is not held by any "authentic" Africans. This was only exacerbated by the influx of American evangelicals, all giving talks about the "evil institution" of homosexuality, how to turn gays straight, and the impending death of the sanctity of marriage. While these preachers maintain they had no intention of inciting the kind of bills or violence we now see, I'm not really sure what they thought would happen.
This sort of growing anti-gay fervor has been battled by the native (and authentic!) population of gay activists involved in the group Sexual Minorities Uganda, founded in 2004. They have worked to increase awareness, fight against legislation, and work for inclusion.
However, this hasn't been a fight without loss and setbacks. David Kato, considered a founder of the gay-rights movement in Uganda, was "outed" nationally by a tabloid titled "Rolling Stone" (not affiliated with the American version), which called for his execution. Kato was beaten to death in January; a great loss for the community.
Nevertheless, the fight continues on, and Kato's death has prompted Western countries such as the United States to threaten to withhold aid if Uganda doesn't alter its stance on homosexuality. We have yet to see any legislative results, but I will be following the story in Uganda more closely, and will hopefully have more progress to report soon.
Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html?_r=2
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/27/uganda-gay-rights-activist-murder
It's been two weeks. I'm sorry. I'm also supposed to be following human rights issues, but this particular struggle has left me depressed, upset, feeling lost...I don't know. There's this swirling in my gut that flares up every time I think about it.
You know, in 1980, in a speech against Communism, President Reagan stated "[Our moral values] remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."
Reagan said that. Reagan!
And now we have legislation passed that effectively castrates unions and places an even higher burden on our already underpaid, underappreciated civil servants. It was bad enough that Governor Walker threatened to fire 1,500 government workers, exploited a loophole, and had the senate vote without any of the democrats present. What's worse is that across the nation, other Republicans are saying they stand strong beside him. Why? The Unions agreed to lower wages, fewer benefits - all concessions made for Walker's budget crusade - why did Walker insist on debilitating them in a completely different bill?
Fox News may pretend that teachers live in the lap of luxury, but everyone who has ever been to school should know better. Teachers get up early, teach all day, deal with troublesome and misbehaved children, coach sports, oversee clubs, go home, grade papers, formulate lesson plans, and painstakingly go over homework. Anyone who pretends teachers peace out at 2:30 and do nothing at night, on the weekends, or during the summer is simply delusional.
This whole debacle perfectly demonstrates one reason why we can't fix the school system. Teachers have an extremely important job; they educate the next generation of Americans. We need them to be passionate, excited, and good at their jobs. What we should be doing is paying them on a level that approaches doctors and treating their profession as an honorable, desirable career. There's a brain-drain occurring within our own country. Just think about it - the smartest kids don't go into education, that would be a "waste" of their abilities. They become doctors, lawyers, businessmen. The way to fix this certainly isn't reduction of pay, benefits, and collective bargaining rights! We can't continue to devalue one of the most important jobs for the future of America, otherwise we'll all end up like Texas.
You know, in 1980, in a speech against Communism, President Reagan stated "[Our moral values] remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."
Reagan said that. Reagan!
And now we have legislation passed that effectively castrates unions and places an even higher burden on our already underpaid, underappreciated civil servants. It was bad enough that Governor Walker threatened to fire 1,500 government workers, exploited a loophole, and had the senate vote without any of the democrats present. What's worse is that across the nation, other Republicans are saying they stand strong beside him. Why? The Unions agreed to lower wages, fewer benefits - all concessions made for Walker's budget crusade - why did Walker insist on debilitating them in a completely different bill?
Fox News may pretend that teachers live in the lap of luxury, but everyone who has ever been to school should know better. Teachers get up early, teach all day, deal with troublesome and misbehaved children, coach sports, oversee clubs, go home, grade papers, formulate lesson plans, and painstakingly go over homework. Anyone who pretends teachers peace out at 2:30 and do nothing at night, on the weekends, or during the summer is simply delusional.
This whole debacle perfectly demonstrates one reason why we can't fix the school system. Teachers have an extremely important job; they educate the next generation of Americans. We need them to be passionate, excited, and good at their jobs. What we should be doing is paying them on a level that approaches doctors and treating their profession as an honorable, desirable career. There's a brain-drain occurring within our own country. Just think about it - the smartest kids don't go into education, that would be a "waste" of their abilities. They become doctors, lawyers, businessmen. The way to fix this certainly isn't reduction of pay, benefits, and collective bargaining rights! We can't continue to devalue one of the most important jobs for the future of America, otherwise we'll all end up like Texas.
I've had four tests in four days. I have a lot to say, just no time to compose it.
Post coming soon, hopefully by Thursday evening!
Post coming soon, hopefully by Thursday evening!
I'm feeling a little down tonight. I think I'll bring you all down with me:
Carl Sagan was amazing. RIP, my friend.
A New York Times article asked, "Are there any adults in charge of the House?"
My question: Are there any adults in the House at all?
I mean, I like to think that people elected to the House of Representatives are educated, experienced, and worldly. At the very least, I believed that they would have a big-picture outlook accompanying their domestic policy ideologies. Apparently, I was mistaken.
The Republican Party understandably wants to live up to its freshly picked slogan as the Party of Fiscal Responsibility, but these cuts are juvenile and poorly supported, and this House reminds me more and more of that home-schooled hillbilly everybody whispered about - but not too loudly, because he's probably packing (which may soon be possible nearly everywhere in Indiana).
Seriously - just look at some of these proposals:
More than 500 amendments were filed, mostly from Republicans trying to cut still more out of - or end - programs they dislike. One would stop paying dues to the United Nations. Others would cut all financing for the health care reform law, or Planned Parenthood, or any foreign aid to a country that regularly disagrees with the United States at the United Nations.
What? Do these people have no idea how domestic politics work? Or international politics, for that matter! Representative Kristi Noem (R, South Dakota) blatantly stated, "A lot of us freshmen don't have a whole lot of knowledge about how Washington, D.C., is operated...And, frankly, we don't really care."
What? You can't just not care, or remain ignorant about the political system! Sure, you may dislike it, you may not participate in it, you may try to change it, but you have to KNOW IT. If you're going to wage war on Washington, even The Art of War says "know thyself, know thy enemy".
But these aren't the old, complicit members of Day Care the House, right? These new freshmen are always forward thinking, right?
Or not. Let's think about some of the consequences, both here and abroad. Republicans want to slash extremely important government programs or government sponsored endeavors. Internally, that means less investment in cancer research, fewer civil servants such as police and firefighters, fewer public schools, far fewer teachers, no reliable sex education or contraception, and fewer federal meat inspections! Externally, we would be aggravating already tense relations with other nations and possibly completely dismantling the political balance by impulsively cutting off countries as if we are their affluent parents. This isn't that episode of Friends, it's international politics.
The worst part is, none of this will pass in the Senate, let alone get ratified by the President. In short, all these Republican tantrums have been an exercise in futility. And a demonstration of political and intellectual immaturity.
They should post a sign:
Babysitter Wanted - Must Be Able to Handle Unruly
Global Warming exists.
It does.
It does.
I'm sure nobody had any idea that the Iraq War was unfounded before this, but it's official: Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi (codenamed Curveball, because them foreigners got those dang hard-ta-pronounce names) completely fabricated evidence of WMD's in Iraq.
Shocker!
As the New York Times article points out, even before the 2003 Invasion, Janabi's claims were considered untrustworthy, but suspicions were ignored by the Bush Administration and top C.I.A. officials.
SO. No more beating around the bush. Or his excuses. (See what I did there?) It's all very obvious. The United States invaded Iraq because we are oil-hungry, self-righteous, democratic peace theory-mongers.
It's not to say that Hussein wasn't a horrible dictator, and that the Iraqi people were better off under his tyrannic rule, but it's very clear that security threats and "liberation" weren't the true causes of our interference. Just look at Rwanda, or Darfur, or Egypt, or any other country ruled by harsh dictatorial law.
Why didn't the United States intervene during the Rwandan genocide? Because Rwanda has nothing of interest to us. Darfur? War, slavery, exploitation, and mass murder for years. Has the US sent in troops to erect democracy? No. 30 year rule in Egypt, dictators in Yemen and Bahrain, crazies running Iran, trying to build nukes, and America hasn't done anything.
Iraq must feel so special.
Shocker!
As the New York Times article points out, even before the 2003 Invasion, Janabi's claims were considered untrustworthy, but suspicions were ignored by the Bush Administration and top C.I.A. officials.
SO. No more beating around the bush. Or his excuses. (See what I did there?) It's all very obvious. The United States invaded Iraq because we are oil-hungry, self-righteous, democratic peace theory-mongers.
It's not to say that Hussein wasn't a horrible dictator, and that the Iraqi people were better off under his tyrannic rule, but it's very clear that security threats and "liberation" weren't the true causes of our interference. Just look at Rwanda, or Darfur, or Egypt, or any other country ruled by harsh dictatorial law.
Why didn't the United States intervene during the Rwandan genocide? Because Rwanda has nothing of interest to us. Darfur? War, slavery, exploitation, and mass murder for years. Has the US sent in troops to erect democracy? No. 30 year rule in Egypt, dictators in Yemen and Bahrain, crazies running Iran, trying to build nukes, and America hasn't done anything.
Iraq must feel so special.
Sometimes, I love being wrong. Mubarak is gone, his VP is no longer the President, and the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is running the country until elections can be set up.
This is so exciting! History in the making, and we are all witnesses.
CNN has a live feed. Watch it!
http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3&hpt=T1
This is so exciting! History in the making, and we are all witnesses.
CNN has a live feed. Watch it!
http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3&hpt=T1
I guess Mubarak is dumber than I thought. Earlier today, Mubarak stated that he would not bow down to foreign powers, and he is transferring the Presidency to the Vice-President in order to keep chaos from erupting.
Ok. When your presence in power causes revolt and general chaos, and you go on the air saying that you won't leave because you don't want chaos, you're just a douche.
It hardly needs to be said that people in Egypt are even more irate than before. The Vice President and the President are nearly one and the same. If this isn't resolved soon, violence will almost certainly come into play. The Military might even stage a Guardian coup (in which the military takes over, then transitions power to a civilian-elected official). That's all dangerous, though, especially when the opposition is saying that only the Military can save the country. Grow up and get out already!
It's just getting ridiculous.
Ok. When your presence in power causes revolt and general chaos, and you go on the air saying that you won't leave because you don't want chaos, you're just a douche.
It hardly needs to be said that people in Egypt are even more irate than before. The Vice President and the President are nearly one and the same. If this isn't resolved soon, violence will almost certainly come into play. The Military might even stage a Guardian coup (in which the military takes over, then transitions power to a civilian-elected official). That's all dangerous, though, especially when the opposition is saying that only the Military can save the country. Grow up and get out already!
It's just getting ridiculous.
Hey again! So, in my next post I was going to mention how little I had to say about Egypt, but after going to my International Relations class today I have an announcement:
The CIA believes Hosni Mubarak will step down tonight.
Hooray! I'm so proud of all the people working their tails off in Egypt to ensure that true democracy has its day. For those people who are still nervous about the role of the military and the possibility of violent suppression of the revolution, fear not. My professor (in his own words a student of history) Allen Lynch reassured our class that the Egyptian soldiers were already far too integrated with the civilians to be able to fire upon them. There would be no control over the ordinary soldiers.
The kind of situation in which the crush of a revolt can occur requires sufficient separation between the army and the people. Just look at this picture from 1905 in which the Czarist Russian military puts down a factory strike:
See the separation? Egypt has none of that. Nor do they have extremely fashionable fur coats. So fear not, world. Mubarak goes tonight, and he goes peacefully.
The CIA believes Hosni Mubarak will step down tonight.
Hooray! I'm so proud of all the people working their tails off in Egypt to ensure that true democracy has its day. For those people who are still nervous about the role of the military and the possibility of violent suppression of the revolution, fear not. My professor (in his own words a student of history) Allen Lynch reassured our class that the Egyptian soldiers were already far too integrated with the civilians to be able to fire upon them. There would be no control over the ordinary soldiers.
The kind of situation in which the crush of a revolt can occur requires sufficient separation between the army and the people. Just look at this picture from 1905 in which the Czarist Russian military puts down a factory strike:
See the separation? Egypt has none of that. Nor do they have extremely fashionable fur coats. So fear not, world. Mubarak goes tonight, and he goes peacefully.
Yeah....I'm working on it. Seriously! I have some written! You'll probably see it tomorrow night, and then I'm going to get pretty posty because I just remembered I have a lot of things to say.
In the meantime, because I know you're all frothing at the mouth to read my posts, calm yourselves with beautiful music by Yiruma: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhN7SG-H-3k
It's called River Flows In You, and I love it. I miss classical piano in today's Ke$ha-type world. This isn't overly simple, just complex enough to remain interesting and coherent.
He has many more songs, like It's Your Day: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBfUV0y9RHA&feature=related
They're all sort of uplifting; he's like the classical piano version of Enya (who I also adore).
Anyway, post coming soon!
In the meantime, because I know you're all frothing at the mouth to read my posts, calm yourselves with beautiful music by Yiruma: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhN7SG-H-3k
It's called River Flows In You, and I love it. I miss classical piano in today's Ke$ha-type world. This isn't overly simple, just complex enough to remain interesting and coherent.
He has many more songs, like It's Your Day: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBfUV0y9RHA&feature=related
They're all sort of uplifting; he's like the classical piano version of Enya (who I also adore).
Anyway, post coming soon!
I had thought this argument defunct and buried, but talking to my friend Cameron, and watching the Colbert Report on Monday brought it back to light. Do people really still believe that giving children the MMR vaccine (for measles, mumps, and rubella) is linked to diseases like autism? Is Jenny McCarthy really more convincing than millions of doctors? I know her son has autism, but since when does that make her an expert? Just because you have a dog doesn't make you a veterinarian! Would you presume to tell millions of dog owners everywhere how to take care of their pet? And if a dog owner shouted at you about what to do for your pet, would you take their self-righteous shrieks seriously? I doubt it.
The earliest mention of the autism-vaccine link appeared in 1998, via a "study" done by the British Dr. Andrew Wakefield. He studied twelve children who, one month after receiving the MMR vaccine, developed autism. To someone who has never taken statistics, or perhaps someone without common sense, this may appear to be a convincing argument that the MMR vaccine has a causal relationship with autism. However, there are clearly issues. Twelve children? Does that sound remotely statistically significant? All of them had received the MMR vaccine (about 90% of children in Britain did, at the time). Did Dr. Wakefield find children in the other 10% to balance his study? No.
To continue his track record, in 2002 Dr. Wakefield linked the measles vaccine to autism. He looked for the virus genome in patients both with and without autism this time. Good for him. However, he made no effort to distinguish between the natural measles genome and the vaccine type measles genome, even though the capacity to do so existed. In addition, the sample wasn't done blindly (in which the researcher doesn't know if the sample comes from the control group or the test group), which probably led to false positives. One step forward, two steps back. Either way, he's still a horrible scientist.
But Jenny McCarthy didn't care. She latched onto his findings and began preaching the dangers of vaccination, starting in about 2007. She even wrote a book about it. It made no difference that multiple other scientists had done studies and written papers both denouncing Wakefield's findings and proving that no such link existed. And now hundreds of children each year aren't being vaccinated. Since then, over 600 children have died completely preventable deaths.
It was so bad that they investigated Wakefield and struck him from the medical record. In addition, Dr. Paul Offit wrote a book called "Autism's False Prophets". It's pretty good. And also accurate, which is more than can be said for most of the crap Jenny McCarthy had someone pen for her.
To sum it up; vaccinate your children, people. Children are dying of whooping cough. Whooping cough! What year is it, 1945? Vaccines have been proven effective for decades, and false advertising from Hollywoodblondes moms shouldn't be setting us back 60 years.
I used some sources for this post, even though I have infinite knowledge. If you want to educate yourself and become one iota closer to reaching my level of omni-intelligence, check out these sites! http://www.aap.org/immunization/families/autismwakefield.html
http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Jenny_McCarthy_Body_Count/Home.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7134893.ece
The earliest mention of the autism-vaccine link appeared in 1998, via a "study" done by the British Dr. Andrew Wakefield. He studied twelve children who, one month after receiving the MMR vaccine, developed autism. To someone who has never taken statistics, or perhaps someone without common sense, this may appear to be a convincing argument that the MMR vaccine has a causal relationship with autism. However, there are clearly issues. Twelve children? Does that sound remotely statistically significant? All of them had received the MMR vaccine (about 90% of children in Britain did, at the time). Did Dr. Wakefield find children in the other 10% to balance his study? No.
To continue his track record, in 2002 Dr. Wakefield linked the measles vaccine to autism. He looked for the virus genome in patients both with and without autism this time. Good for him. However, he made no effort to distinguish between the natural measles genome and the vaccine type measles genome, even though the capacity to do so existed. In addition, the sample wasn't done blindly (in which the researcher doesn't know if the sample comes from the control group or the test group), which probably led to false positives. One step forward, two steps back. Either way, he's still a horrible scientist.
But Jenny McCarthy didn't care. She latched onto his findings and began preaching the dangers of vaccination, starting in about 2007. She even wrote a book about it. It made no difference that multiple other scientists had done studies and written papers both denouncing Wakefield's findings and proving that no such link existed. And now hundreds of children each year aren't being vaccinated. Since then, over 600 children have died completely preventable deaths.
It was so bad that they investigated Wakefield and struck him from the medical record. In addition, Dr. Paul Offit wrote a book called "Autism's False Prophets". It's pretty good. And also accurate, which is more than can be said for most of the crap Jenny McCarthy had someone pen for her.
To sum it up; vaccinate your children, people. Children are dying of whooping cough. Whooping cough! What year is it, 1945? Vaccines have been proven effective for decades, and false advertising from Hollywood
I used some sources for this post, even though I have infinite knowledge. If you want to educate yourself and become one iota closer to reaching my level of omni-intelligence, check out these sites! http://www.aap.org/immunization/families/autismwakefield.html
http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Jenny_McCarthy_Body_Count/Home.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7134893.ece
So I've been somewhat lazy about getting around to posting anything. It's because I am now addicted to the game House of Dead Ninjas. Gah! So many levels!
Anyway, I'll try and post something soon. We'll see.
Anyway, I'll try and post something soon. We'll see.
Cracked.com, which I love (look at my bio peeps), wrote a wonderful article a while ago that everyone in the United States (and world) should read. Here it is: http://www.cracked.com/article_18911_5-ridiculous-things-you-probably-believe-about-islam.html
Why should you read it? Because there is significant "literature" on the internet and in print that paints an innacurate and biased view of Islam. Every religion has faults, but it's getting ridiculous people!
Kosher and Halal are the same! The dangers of Halal? Logic people. Use it. Read, learn. It will change your life.
Why should you read it? Because there is significant "literature" on the internet and in print that paints an innacurate and biased view of Islam. Every religion has faults, but it's getting ridiculous people!
Kosher and Halal are the same! The dangers of Halal? Logic people. Use it. Read, learn. It will change your life.
So here it is. The obligatory post-State of the Union rebuttal. Not really. I'm just going to give my thoughts on Obama's speech.
Whenever Obama has an audience to connect with, he performs considerably better, and Tuesday was no exception. In fact, about 90% of Americans reacted favorably to his speech. But his oratory skills are usually superb, so there isn't anything of import there.
The meat of Obama's address was interesting. Obviously, he is supposed to reassure the nation that "the state of the union is strong!" but Obama interestingly also thoroughly mentioned all the areas in which the US is lacking. He extensively discussed South Korea and China's success, to the point where I was feeling self conscious. We can't be South Korea, Mr. President! Well, maybe we could be, if another country were financing our military, leaving us with time and money to improve healthcare, education, etc....Hmmmm....
(See, the ironic part is that the US takes care of South Korea's military interests.)
But! Obama brought it back by encouraging American's that this is merely our "Sputnik moment" - if we remain innovative and diligent we can Win The Future! That sounds like a longer slogan than "Hope" or "Change", so let's just give that an acronym. Oh...WTF....that's, um, awkward.
Nevertheless, Obama got me all excited with his plans for the future, so we can win it. There's nothing America loves more than winning things. Like fattest nation! Check, meet bank. So, what are we going to do to win the latest challenge? Time machines? Spaceships to Pluto? Money tress?
Internet. And cars. And trains! Marginally faster ones.
Is it comparable to Kennedy's speech? A true Sputnik moment? No. But then again, America doesn't have the funds to win the future with Deloreans or Spaceships. So Obama is being pragmatic. I get it. It doesn't mean I'm not disappointed, but I get it.
So all these amazing future-winning ideas are bopping around, but there were a few issues in Obama's speech that didn't make an appearance. Gun control, for example, which is a salient issue post-Tucson shootings. Or global warming. If nature kills us in hot-blooded revenge, I guess it doesn't matter if 80% of the population has amazing internet connection. But, if we could all just leave on a spaceship....
All in all, a safe and strong speech. Not complete, not extremely inspiring, but it all seemed rather doable. At least the Democrats and the Republicans were sitting together! How far we've come...
Whenever Obama has an audience to connect with, he performs considerably better, and Tuesday was no exception. In fact, about 90% of Americans reacted favorably to his speech. But his oratory skills are usually superb, so there isn't anything of import there.
The meat of Obama's address was interesting. Obviously, he is supposed to reassure the nation that "the state of the union is strong!" but Obama interestingly also thoroughly mentioned all the areas in which the US is lacking. He extensively discussed South Korea and China's success, to the point where I was feeling self conscious. We can't be South Korea, Mr. President! Well, maybe we could be, if another country were financing our military, leaving us with time and money to improve healthcare, education, etc....Hmmmm....
(See, the ironic part is that the US takes care of South Korea's military interests.)
But! Obama brought it back by encouraging American's that this is merely our "Sputnik moment" - if we remain innovative and diligent we can Win The Future! That sounds like a longer slogan than "Hope" or "Change", so let's just give that an acronym. Oh...WTF....that's, um, awkward.
Nevertheless, Obama got me all excited with his plans for the future, so we can win it. There's nothing America loves more than winning things. Like fattest nation! Check, meet bank. So, what are we going to do to win the latest challenge? Time machines? Spaceships to Pluto? Money tress?
Internet. And cars. And trains! Marginally faster ones.
Is it comparable to Kennedy's speech? A true Sputnik moment? No. But then again, America doesn't have the funds to win the future with Deloreans or Spaceships. So Obama is being pragmatic. I get it. It doesn't mean I'm not disappointed, but I get it.
So all these amazing future-winning ideas are bopping around, but there were a few issues in Obama's speech that didn't make an appearance. Gun control, for example, which is a salient issue post-Tucson shootings. Or global warming. If nature kills us in hot-blooded revenge, I guess it doesn't matter if 80% of the population has amazing internet connection. But, if we could all just leave on a spaceship....
All in all, a safe and strong speech. Not complete, not extremely inspiring, but it all seemed rather doable. At least the Democrats and the Republicans were sitting together! How far we've come...
There's been a lot of talk recently about a book written by Amy Chua called Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, and you can read an excerpt of it here.
In response to this blatant abuse of animal attributes, Erika Christasis of CNN decided to take the high road and...no wait; She calls herself a "dolphin mother" and goes on to argue that this style of parenting is more advanced using the longest, most awkward metaphor ever invented.
Well, just so we're clear, though I am not currently a mother, I can firmly state that my totem would be the hamster, due to my tendency to viciously cannibalize my own young.
Anyway, moving on to her argument:
Chua declares that her "tiger" attitude (e.g. Forcing children to excel in specific academic and musical areas through intimidation, insults, and squashing rebellion) is what produces the math whiz or the musical prodigy. And perhaps it is. But does this produce happy, well-adjusted, innovative members of society? In addition, are these children really as perfect and obedient as their parents believe? Is there even an honest, healthy relationship between parent and child?
Most evidence says no, on all accounts.
The creation of flawless student automatons may yield excellent grades, but the society places more value on individuals who are well rounded, have many interests, and have social skills. Sports, creative outlets beyond piano and violin, relationships, sleep, individuality, happiness - all of these aspects of a child's life only serve to enrich it, and in addition promote a lasting relationship with a parent unmarred by bitterness or private rebellion.
In fact, society (including the President of China during his visit to the United States!) has recognized that the next great artist, novelist, or entrepreneur won't be emerging from these Chinese households. Even Ivy Leagues are no longer admitting to as many students who demonstrate robotic perfection - they prefer amazing individuals who were allowed to blossom.
Of course, that doesn't write off Western parenting as perfect or even the best option, but we do live in a melting pot; is it really so impossible to encourage our children to pressure themselves and strive for greatness while still maintaining healthy and active social lives and hobbies?
One of my good friends Raja actually wrote Ms. Chua an email, which is on facebook, and he received an email back! She defended herself by stating that the article I linked earlier wasn't a good depiction of the whole novel. He responded by asking whether she regrets allowing herself to be misrepresented by said article, to which she did not respond. Intriguing!
Anyway! This is definitely open for discussion, and I know people have many differing opinions on this, so let me know what you're thinking!
In response to this blatant abuse of animal attributes, Erika Christasis of CNN decided to take the high road and...no wait; She calls herself a "dolphin mother" and goes on to argue that this style of parenting is more advanced using the longest, most awkward metaphor ever invented.
Well, just so we're clear, though I am not currently a mother, I can firmly state that my totem would be the hamster, due to my tendency to viciously cannibalize my own young.
Mmmmmm.......motherhood IS delicious.
Anyway, moving on to her argument:
Chua declares that her "tiger" attitude (e.g. Forcing children to excel in specific academic and musical areas through intimidation, insults, and squashing rebellion) is what produces the math whiz or the musical prodigy. And perhaps it is. But does this produce happy, well-adjusted, innovative members of society? In addition, are these children really as perfect and obedient as their parents believe? Is there even an honest, healthy relationship between parent and child?
Most evidence says no, on all accounts.
The creation of flawless student automatons may yield excellent grades, but the society places more value on individuals who are well rounded, have many interests, and have social skills. Sports, creative outlets beyond piano and violin, relationships, sleep, individuality, happiness - all of these aspects of a child's life only serve to enrich it, and in addition promote a lasting relationship with a parent unmarred by bitterness or private rebellion.
In fact, society (including the President of China during his visit to the United States!) has recognized that the next great artist, novelist, or entrepreneur won't be emerging from these Chinese households. Even Ivy Leagues are no longer admitting to as many students who demonstrate robotic perfection - they prefer amazing individuals who were allowed to blossom.
Of course, that doesn't write off Western parenting as perfect or even the best option, but we do live in a melting pot; is it really so impossible to encourage our children to pressure themselves and strive for greatness while still maintaining healthy and active social lives and hobbies?
One of my good friends Raja actually wrote Ms. Chua an email, which is on facebook, and he received an email back! She defended herself by stating that the article I linked earlier wasn't a good depiction of the whole novel. He responded by asking whether she regrets allowing herself to be misrepresented by said article, to which she did not respond. Intriguing!
Anyway! This is definitely open for discussion, and I know people have many differing opinions on this, so let me know what you're thinking!
Ok! It's post number one, and the saga of stress relief begins! My first proclamation as a new blogger is as follows: I shall not mention Sarah Palin for the entire month of February.
Even though talking about Governor Palin might both relieve stress and improve my self-esteem, I am so thoroughly sick of hearing about a woman who adds about as much to political discourse as Kate Gosselin, so I am joining the call of Dana Milbank of the Washington Post by refusing to pump her giant, inflated head with any more hot air.
Actually, the amazing people over at Skippy (which you should all read) created a wonderful logo to start us off:
Even though talking about Governor Palin might both relieve stress and improve my self-esteem, I am so thoroughly sick of hearing about a woman who adds about as much to political discourse as Kate Gosselin, so I am joining the call of Dana Milbank of the Washington Post by refusing to pump her giant, inflated head with any more hot air.
Actually, the amazing people over at Skippy (which you should all read) created a wonderful logo to start us off:
Hopefully, more people will ignore the tingling of their comedic spidey senses and realize that if we stop devoting so much time discussing Sarah Palin's statements as if they hold any real value, perhaps she will become less important (much like Kate Gosselin).
