Holes In Thoughts

I can't sleep.

2008-08-15T03:04:00.002-07:00

Rachel is visiting her family to meet our first nephew, her brother Isaac's son Elijah. I'm excited for them, and Rachel is beyond words.

She and I are, still, very close. That sounds strange from a married man talking about his wife, but we really do still have many of the hallmarks of a relationship still in the "honeymoon phase" - four years into the marriage. We sometimes chide each other for being codependent (and frankly it's a fair cop); I wouldn't eat without her and I don't know what her finances would look like without me. We still balance well, and that's largely because we're still good at communicating, even when we're angry (at each other or just in general).

I've heard from many sources that the first wall is at seven years, but I'm comforted, in a way, knowing that even when she's only gone for a day and a half, sleeping isn't something that's likely before complete exhaustion.

Listening to God

2008-08-14T04:56:00.003-07:00

The school I work for has an ad up for Ode Magazine, which I'd never heard of before now. I knew I would probably like it because of its tagline: "for intelligent optimists." But a good tagline does not a good magazine make, and I started reading.

I was hooked by the first article: "Because God Whispers." It's about people who try to get a little bit (or a lot) of silence into their days in busy Western life and in particular the author's experiences with silence in Bali (if only we could all rely on our Balinese meditative experiences). But I like what I read here because this article can apply as well to a Buddhist as it could to me (a Catholic). It is a part of what I consider to be prayer. Key point in the article:

"Of course it’s scary to be confronted with all those voices in your head. It’s unpleasant to hear voices of pain, despair or depression. But the point is it’s far scarier not to hear these voices. Silence may be scary, but a lack of silence is much scarier. Those who don’t seek occasional silence to make contact with their deeper core, higher self, pure soul, Buddha nature or whatever you want to call it, become detached from God.

As a yogi friend said, “To hear the voice of God, you must be silent.”

I asked why.

He looked at me as if the answer were obvious. “Because God whispers.”

Things are getting more complicated

2008-08-13T11:49:00.003-07:00

On one hand, the Culture Wars are escalating: In Tennessee, a man who hates liberals (and is pushed over the edge by not getting food stamps, which is as liberal a program as one can imagine) goes into a church which accepts homosexuals with the intention of killing as many people as possible. Another man attempts to assassinate the Arkansas Democratic party chair. Quasi-Christians (people who are very loud about being Christian and have a habit of undermining their faith through action) are actually praying for rain on Obama's speech in Denver.

On the other, the lines are blurring: There are liberals with guns, log cabin Republicans, and Dan Savage tells liberal dads to stop being "such a liberal puss[ies]" that are more worried about being politically correct than what is right, when confronted with bigots.

I had hoped that the battles of the Boomer generation were going to fizzle out, but it looks like they'll go out with a bang. At least this presidential election will not be 100% referendum about Vietnam.

Irony watch

2008-08-12T10:03:00.001-07:00

From Andrew Sullivan's post about exaggerating The Surge:

"The neocons aren't stupid. They always advance the arguments that help sustain the case for more American control everywhere, indefinitely."

I'm pretty sure that first sentence contradicts the second.

New chair, desk, blog

2008-08-02T21:58:00.004-07:00

I bought my first desk chair from Office Depot today. My previous chair was old, ugly, free, and not very good for my back. The new one is bright red, has lumbar support, and tilts back. I didn't install the arms because I'll be playing guitar while sitting on it.

I know I was blogging at the time, but I don't think I covered the fact that I threw out my back at all. Oh yeah - it's because it was extremely painful to sit in my chair! What a nice way to wrap that together.

Anyway, because I couldn't move for several weeks, I'm building a new desk that actually functions ergonomically and moves the noisy hot air blower under my desk (i.e., my computer) to somewhere that it has a chance of not overheating every time I play Team Fortress 2. It will probably take me the better part of a month to do it, but there you go.

Oh yeah, and the blog. Haven't blogged in a while. I decided I was becoming another noisy political pundit and not only is that niche pretty well-covered, it doesn't satisfy my 'writing for the ages' rule, which is that in twenty years I want to find these posts interestingly biographical. This is a public blog, but that's not really the point. The point is that I have lots of interesting, funny, and quirky thoughts and experiences that my poor memory lets slip. I would like to retain them and this is how I'm doing it.

Of course, when I find an unusually interesting political or sociological story, I will post it, because that is part of who I am. But again, the point is to write down some of my more interesting ideas for future reference, not to post current events from other blogs, interesting though they may be.

The first Team Interrobang scrim

2008-08-01T22:55:00.000-07:00

As a member of Team Interrobang, I participated in our first-ever scrimmage match. I have never, in my life, participated in anything like this. My talents in Team Fortress 2 are better than mediocre, depending on the day and how familiar I am with the map. I had no doubts about the abilities of my teammates - they had kicked my ass pretty bad on more than a few occasions - but having no experience seeing others in this situation, I had no idea how good or bad we really were.

Turns out my fears were unfounded. Though our opponent - L@W - is relatively new, we crushed them in a match in the 2Fort map 3 to 1, and successfully attacked in Gold Rush (we never got a chance to defend, but defending is in my opinion easier than attacking on that map). In a humorous twist, one of my favorite team members, a feisty chick named Mommy, was playing against her husband, a member of L@W who until recently on our team. He uh, rage-quit after we won Gold Rush...

Maybe it's a good thing I haven't convinced my lovely, hyper-competitive wife to play the game.

After the match, I had scheduled time to go climbing at Rocks & Ropes with Nyssa (who, bless her, pushed back our climb 45 minutes to accommodate the match). Last week I climbed: 4+*, 7, 6*, 7, (* signifies self-belay). That 9+ was a new record for me, and let me tell you those self-belays can be a real challenge, since you can't rest on your belay at all.

Tonight, I did a 7, 9, 8, and 7, so for the first time I've done 9s in consecutive climbs.

For the uninitiated: anybody who's healthy can do a 4 or 5; a 6 is fairly challenging to a beginner, and a 7 is something people can't generally do without some practice or being in good shape (or both). 8 is where you have to be in good shape, have strong hands, and a little practice. 9 is where things start getting crazy. The gym has 10s and 11s that are, um, insane. Those climbs require you to use handholds no bigger than a silver dollar (and not much thicker...) to go up a vertical wall.

Now the irony: Being super pumped up after playing a video game inspired my to break a small record in my fitness regimen.

Evil Doomsday Device #1: Strong Gun

2008-07-02T13:26:00.004-07:00

Here's an idea for any evil scientists out there. Invent a device that can negate the nuclear Strong Force. If they ever come up with anti-gravity, I figure it's an easy step to come up with anti-strong or anti-light (anti-electromagnetic) forces.

Of course, if you were to negate the Strong Force, any protons in the area will fly apart, effectively creating a (fission) nuclear explosion in proportion to the number of atoms in the area.

Most bombs get a small percentage of the pound-or-so of really heavy atoms to actually split (which is what causes the boom), so if you managed to get a 100% fission, my guess is that you'd get something like Nagasaki if you targeted an object too small to see with a microscope. You could probably erase L.A. if you eliminated the Strong Force in one of the nails in the Hollywood sign.

But I'm guessing, really, so I'm going to make some calls to some physicist friends to find out...

Continuing.

2008-06-23T23:16:00.002-07:00

I stopped blogging for a while because I realized I was usually just freaking out about politics, which is neither wholly engrossing nor remotely indicative of what I'm usually doing every day.

So I'm going to try again.

Two 110-hour work weeks.

2008-06-09T08:32:00.003-07:00

The worker bee sits
Wings wilted after working
Sitting on his flow'r

Why I stopped blogging

2008-05-28T02:16:00.002-07:00

This is why.

For a voting test

2008-05-26T12:46:00.003-07:00

I've had it. Right up to here, I've had it with the willfully politically ignorant. I understand people are busy. I don't expect people to understand the nuances of the U.S. medical care system. I don't expect dissertations on the pros and cons of economic models. I expect basic competence.

Am I mad? You bet. Smear campaigns have a long history, but when people can rationalize that Barack Obama is a Muslim and has a crazy Christian pastor -- those people need to stay at home on election day. Of course, there are dumbasses in both political parties.

In an ideal world, I would expect every single American to generally understand a lot of basic, basic ideas that have real-world effects - even if they don't know the term. For example, pick [A] or [B]: The price of a gallon of gas went up last summer, because a lot of people [A: bought more gas to go on road trips] [B: stayed at home and didn't drive as much as the rest of the year].

A very, very basic knowledge of the laws of supply and demand - and for that matter, logic - would tell you the correct answer.

Every single American should understand:

The very barest outline of American history (i.e., 1776, 1812, the Civil War, 1917, 1941, Vietnam).
How tax deductions work with a normal 1040.

Is this elitism? Am I looking down my nose at the "working-class" people? You bet. But I'm working class, too.

There's a strain of anti-intellectualism in the U.S., and I suppose it's rooted in our history of being the independent-minded that can't be told what to do. But when pride in being able to do what you like - pride in freedom - becomes an excuse to wear stupidity like a badge of honor, it's just an excuse.

Tim Russet and I think alike

2008-05-20T18:49:00.002-07:00

Tim Russert was just on MSNBC's coverage of the KY/OR primaries. In it, he said that he always wondered if it were possible for a return the the debate style of Golwater/Johnson: to fly around the country (in the same jet, no less), having unmoderated debates around the country in small town halls.

He thinks it's possible with McCain-Obama, and I'm as giddy at the idea of an elevated debate as the pundits are. I still think that ultimately most pundits (and all good ones) really relish the idea of a substantive debate because that's what gets them interested in the first place.

I can hope, can't I?

Blood still cries from the ground

2008-05-20T17:54:00.002-07:00

Victor Jara's murderer has been convicted, though not with his compatriots.

And in the world, a heart of darkness, a fire zone
Where poets speak their heart, then bleed for it
Jara sang, his song a weapon in the hands of love
You know his blood still cries from the ground

It runs like a river, runs to the sea
It runs like a river to the sea

- U2, One Tree Hill

NRO: Even Dumber than Advertised

2008-05-20T11:53:00.004-07:00

I wonder why National Review listed this headline - "Black Statement Conflicts With Record" - with stories about the Obama campaign. It's about McCain's campaign. And it's about Charlie Black. Sometimes you really can't parody.

h/t: Andrew Sullivan

Insert Punchline Here

2008-05-19T21:22:00.002-07:00

It's just too easy: Miller and Busch beers are making camouflage cans aimed at hunters.

Anybody see something wrong with getting more beer into the hands of the people with guns? Rachel also notes that they might not be able to find their beer after the first 6-pack...

Bloggerheads

2008-05-18T20:24:00.004-07:00

There's a fascinating discussion about the role of religion and Christianity in U.S. politics on Bloggingheads.

There's a lot of interesting ideas put out there, but the one I liked best is that, apparently, you can prove almost anything by quoting most Founding Fathers, because they disagreed on almost everything. The idea, then, isn't to take their words as sacrosanct (which would be foolish anyway, 230+ years removed), but to look at how they came to their conclusions.

The source of their idea of the separation of Church & State came from the fact that before the U.S., the Church was sponsored by the State. Ministers and churches and the like were funded by taxes. The Founders' enthusiasm for the free market worked into this as well: the best preachers, the most effective religious institutions, and the best communities (which at least at the time coalesced around the Church) would flourish. A state-sponsored church isn't as robust because it's not as accountable.

Of course, the irony to this is that despite the fact that it's the "Religious Right" that pushes for closer ties between Church and State, this argument by the Founders against the regulation and support of religion by the government functions on the classic Republican small-government, low-interference line. As I said, there was disagreement about where to draw the line (and obviously, there still is), but it's an interesting notion that unfortunately is largely forgotten.

Except by you. Now you know it. Good job.

One last thought on Bush's comment...

2008-05-18T12:28:00.003-07:00

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

Why the hell would I want to take diplomatic advice from George W. Bush??

Deriving hope

2008-05-17T11:39:00.000-07:00

Imitation is the highest form of ________.

There's a reason that Obama's competitors keep trying to steal his messages: they know it resonates with everyone it touches.

Some people are pretty determined to make sure it doesn't touch them, of course - ranging from the able-minded cynics to the self-delusional people who insist he's A MUSLIM (the horror).

We want to believe that the idea that America can fix America is possible. The idea is as formidable as America at its best because it IS America at its best.

This is my body; take this all of you - except that guy.

2008-05-16T14:48:00.003-07:00

I'm a Catholic. I have to find Church in myself, because I have trouble finding a church that actually espouses the kind of Gospel that Jesus taught. Instead, I find judgment and, frankly, low-level hatred. I hear so much of it in the news: whom to hate. In particular, I hear a lot about how gays and lesbians are an abomination before God, and about how the Sacrament of Marriage is so, so sacred.

There are Seven Sacraments: Baptism, Eucharist, Reconciliation, Confirmation, Marriage, Holy Orders, and Anointing of the Sick. Baptism is a sort of initiation rite, as is Confirmation. Marriage is an understanding of the spiritual joining of a man and woman (as opposed to marriage, the legal term). Holy Orders is the process of becoming a priest, and Anointing of the Sick is a ritual of healing appropriate not only for physical but also for mental and spiritual sickness.

I'd say that Reconciliation and the Eucharist are the most important in normal Catholic's lives. The Eucharist is (basically) Communion (which is all about Jesus' resurrection), and Reconciliation is the forgiveness of sins. Without those two, you don't really have Christianity.

One of the Sacraments is under attack and it isn't Marriage. It's the Eucharist.

As an Obama supporter, long-time pro-life advocate and all-around Mega-Catholic Doug Kmiec had this happen to him in church:

I have been declared “self-excommunicated,” and recently at a Mass before a dinner speech to Catholic business leaders, a very angry college chaplain excoriated my Obama-heresy from the pulpit at length and then denied my receipt of communion.

You gotta understand - this heretic of a chaplain judged a man unfit for one of the Sacraments, which are a Catholic's lifeline to God.

This country wasn't founded on religion. Quite the opposite. The Founding Fathers understood the poison that religion can bring into people's lives when it's politicized. They took great lengths to ensure it didn't become part of government, and explicitly said so. Here, for example, is the text of the Treaty of Tripoli (1797), which was signed unanimously by the Senate:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

This makes the ravings of abominations like Rod Parsley even more offensive to their religion, and the conscience, as well as to the United States.

One of these days, I hope, Christians are going to figure out that leading by example, and actually helping people, is far more useful and in-line with God's teachings than picket lines and excoriating people with whom they don't agree. Imagine if the Church had spent the time and trouble that they had spent condemning abortion, and used it instead to actually help the young women considering abortion.

One can hope.

On Hamas and negotiations

2008-05-16T11:31:00.007-07:00

"We need the United States to lead rough-minded diplomacy, this includes direct engagement with Iran, similar to the meeting we conducted with the Soviets at the height of the Cold War"

- Barack Obama, 15 February, 2008

Aaand our boy George's rejoinder:

"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," Bush said at Israel's 60th anniversary celebration in Jerusalem. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

- George W. Bush, 15 May, 2008

Ah, the difference between "appeasement and "engagement." Obama never said, "appeasement," and you can bet your life that Reagan "engaged" Russia. There were four Gorbachev/Reagan face-to-face summits around the world. Those meetings directly resulted in the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. Reagan is deified for this role in closing the Cold War peacefully, but his methods are, it seems, forgotten.

But to clarify: Hitler was appeased when the British and French gave him half of Czechoslovakia and hoped he'd stop. Russia and the U.S. entered talks to end the Cold War and agreed to reduce their nuclear weapons arsenal because both recognized that MAD wasn't a good situation for either nation.

I've been looking at the rhetoric between Obama and McCain, and at this point, I don't think either one will do anything differently from each other (regarding this question of diplomacy, anyway). In a way, all I see is McCain pandering a bit to the Republicans, and Obama pandering a bit to the Democrats. Both have said they’d only talk to Iran when they recognized Israel's legitimacy, but that we’ll have to eventually talk to Hama – they might support terrorists, but they won a democratic election in the region. They are, by our own measure, the rightful leaders of that area.

We also do have really good reasons to open relationships with both of those nations. Iran is at least as influential to Iraq as we are, whether we stay or go, whether we like it or not. Moreover, they're the ones getting open ceremonial greetings in the daytime. Cheney had to come unannounced, at night, with body guards. They are also in desperate need of humanitarian aid, need help getting their own country into shape, and Iran's population isn't as radical as its leader. We both have needs that we can help each other out with. The situation is not impossible, but can be made impossible when we dismiss the possibility of finding a mutually-beneficial arrangement. Same goes for Hamas, but even more so: Hamas supports terrorism abroad, and yet runs hospitals, feeds the poor, and takes care of its people. That's how they got elected. Israel also needs to have a good sit-down. They're our staunch ally, and are definitely a stabilizing force within the region, but they can make us pretty uncomfortable when they do land-grabs, or lob missiles into family homes, and Hamas says, "See? This is why they're evil."

None of that can be solved by ignoring the problem, or threatening to bomb everybody in the region that angers us at that particular moment (which was Iran, then Iraq, then Iran again, then it was Hamas, etc.).

Now, this is all just a general outline of course – the complexities that are the Middle East have made it nearly impossible to stabilize since… forever. I don’t know

From what I know about both candidates, their top priority for Iran is to keep them from developing and acquiring nuclear weapons. I know Obama played a part in this a few years ago while working with Republicans on the anti-nuclear weapons proliferation bill. Though I don't think McCain was part of that, I think it's pretty obvious he feels the same way about it.

For Hamas, if I remember right, I've heard both say they want Hamas to recognize Israel's legitimacy (which would be an obvious first step). Obama has, more candidly, noted that Israel is causing problems as well when Israel takes the same posture towards Hamas as Hamas takes towards Israel. He's been blasted for this, but it seems pretty fair to me. Even the Israeli Jewish press (Israelis are less convinced that Israel has flawless plans than the U.S. Jewish press, which seems convinced that any criticism of Israel is out-of-bounds) has generally agreed that Obama is about as "Pro-Israel" as any U.S. politician.

Anyway, like I said, this all strikes me as political buddying-up with each candidates' political base, but I see no daylight between their stances. Still, I don't think it helps McCain at all to defend Bush, the Least Popular U.S. President of All Time, Ever (really).

Here's a really good write up I found about the difference between appeasement and diplomacy here, by someone who was/is for the war, just to show I'm not just being a Loony Lefty, here.

Update: Boy, I'm really not alone. Obama actually went on the attack to denounce the remark (which is rare, though I can't decide if that's good or bad). Nancy Pelosi called it "beneath the dignity of the office of the president and unworthy of our representation at that observance in Israel." Keith Olbermann spent more than a few segments about it. Chris Matthews laid the best damn TV-interview smackdown I've seen since Jon Stewart's Crossfire hot-wiring.

West Virginia: FAIL. (Or: quote of the day)

2008-05-13T11:49:00.004-07:00

From Gawker, on a Clinton supporter's assertion (from the Financial Times article)that "Obama is a Muslim and his wife's an atheist":

Mr. Simpson, that does not even make sense. You think a secret radical Muslim would marry an atheist? Even if it was purely to piss off Christians? Sleeper agent jihadists are not known for their tolerance of Enlightenment principles!

Seriously, West Virginia, we are going to give you back to Virginia unless you can demonstrate that you can handle statehood again. And no one wants that.

West Virginia, everybody! Land of rampant racism*, morbid obesity, and it's so poor and so unemployed that there is a town named Poverty in West Virginia. I'm making fun of you, WV. Buck up and raise yourselves.

*Although, as my Dad pointed out, the other primary of the day was the home of the largest KKK rally of all time, in Kokomo, Indiana.

Why will you be voting?

2008-05-12T09:56:00.002-07:00

We need a President who (choose one):

0 Wears a flag pin
0 Will solve all my problems
0 Makes intelligent decisions

You know what I would check.

Misguided Feminism

2008-05-08T16:34:00.006-07:00

I've written on productive feminism before (1, 2), but this bears another mention. There is a cry going up to the heavens from hardcore feminist supporters who are saying they will not vote (or, incredibly, vote for McCain) out of anger about Senator Clinton's loss of the Democratic nomination:

The Obamabots are under the delusion that if Obama wins the nomination (which he hasn't yet, by the way), all of us in the Hillary camp will forget about the misogyny and come over to their side. Make nice for the sake of party unity. Forgive all the abuse.

Nope.

Several of us have tried over the past couple of months to explain why that won't happen, but the Obamabots don't seem to understand. And I know why: it's because they don't take sexism seriously. When women say we will not reward misogyny, we’re laughed off. The Obamabots just tell more jokes and hurl more insults and write more crass articles about how the little lay-dees have their little pan-tees in a twist.

While I can see why a feminist would be upset at general bias, Barack Obama was not the cause of that bias. In fact he made a point to tell her to stay in as long as she wanted to, emphasized their friendship in speeches, and never said anything to or of her that could be construed as sexist. He obviously didn't agree with all of her policy ideas, and many of her campaign tactics, but frankly that's what an election should be about anyway. So why blame him?

Moreover, he two candidates' stances on a wide variety of issues is very similar. If a feminist were to agree with Clinton's policy ideas and was not just voting for her because of her gender (which would in of itself be sexist), then he is the next-best candidate. If John McCain appoints judges to overturn Roe v. Wade as a result of a feminist boycott, well, you could press shirts with irony like that.

Not everyone who votes against Obama is a racist and not everyone who votes against Clinton is a sexist. Surely some people are! But to lump everyone together like that is counterproductive because it insults feminist allies. All of the falsely-accused will stop listening to reasonable feminists.

Finally, I wish they would consider the possibility that while there's certainly a LOT of misogyny that has been spewed, a lot of people really, honestly, just thought Obama was a better option on purely merit-based grounds.

Best blog comments, pt. 2

2008-05-05T14:39:00.003-07:00

On Slog re: the neverending Democratic primary:

I know what's going to happen tomorrow and it is this:

After work I will go to the bar, order a beer and a cheeseburger, and watch the Mariners game, because I'm so fucking bored of this primary fight and I'm saving my energy and attention for talking shit about McCain once we eventually get a nominee.

---

You're bored by this primary fight, but fucking BASEBALL doesn't bore you?
I commend you, sir.

I miss basketball that inspires this kind of punditry...

Great understatements in Photojournalism

2008-05-05T10:22:00.003-07:00

I personally wouldn't have been able to refrain from commenting on the idiot carrying this picket.

The anti-immigration people never seem to do their arguments any favors by jabbering (or painting) incoherently while foaming at the mouth all the time.

Dialog, people; not bullhorns.