Gwnewch y pethau bychain

Tag: current events Page 7 of 11

Random musings

First of all, this meme has been amusing me, but for somewhat personal reasons. Long long ago, we had officially sanctioned clans on JediMUD. At the time they were implemented, I was still a low-ranking member of the administration, and i warned them all it would end in tears. I was sadly proven correct, and one of the first acts I undertook when I became a member of the administration team a few months later was to have them all desanctioned. Jedi’s official position became “You can create whatever affiliates you want between yourself and other players, but the administration will not recognize any of those affiliates as official nor extend any special treatment towards them.” I still think this is a reasonable policy.

Anyway, flash-forward a few years, when Dina and I were hanging out mortside and complaining that no one ever did anything for the sheer fun of it. So we founded Clan Quixotic. The only requirement to join was the willingness to, at the drop of a hat, band together to, say, go kill every dragon in the game, just for the heck of it. After Dina finished the papers she had to write for her Masters degree, we celebrated by making a list of the ten hardest mobs to kill in the game at that time, and setting out to kill them all in ascending order of difficulty. We were that kind of group.

Ah the good old days. I think it’s about time to wipe the dust of my mort’s armor and clock back to Minus Time for some hack and slash.


A lot of people have been writing a lot of good stuff about electronic voting machines and their disturbing lack of audit trails. This week, PBS’s Robert Cringley weighs in with a thoughtful analysis. Go read it, it’s good stuff.


One of my favourite comic strips right now is Jef Mallett’s Frazz. Today’s strip is a good example why:

A letter from my Congressman

Several days ago, I sent a e-mail to my congressman, Rep. Johnny Isaacson (R-GA), via the Human Rights Campaign, protesting the proposed constitutional amendment restricting the definition of marriage. I just received his response:

Dear Rob:

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.J. Res. 56, proposing an amendment
to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage. I
appreciate your thoughts on this issue and the opportunity to respond.

This resolution, introduced by Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (CO-4) on May 25,
2003, would amend the Constitution to declare that marriage in the United
States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. It would
also prohibit the Constitution or any State constitution, or State or
Federal law, from being construed to require that marital status or its
legal incidents be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups. I have
signed on as a cosponsor of this resolution.

Please feel free to visit my website at www.house.gov/isakson for more
information on issues that may be of importance to you, as well as to sign
up for my monthly email update. Thank you again for contacting me, and I
hope you will not hesitate to call on me in the future if I can be of
assistance to you.

Notice that the proposed amendment not only attempts to restrict the definition of marriage, but also forbids any federal or state law to create any construction that confers similar rights under another name (At least, that’s how I read the penultimate sentence of the second paragraph).

My reply to Rep. Isaacson:

Why? What interest is served in disenfranshising millions of people who want to create stable, family oriented lives for themselves who happen to share the same gender? What interest is served in adding an amendment to the Constitution of the United States that restricts liberty rather than expanding it?

Same-sex marriages pose no threat whatsoever to the sanctity or vailidity of exisiting opposite sex marriages, and I defy anyone who thinks they do to explain to me why they are not a bigot.

I eagerly await a non-form letter response to this issue.

My view on same-sex marriage is fairly straightforward. I see no difference between a same-sex couple and an opposite sex couple. Both relationships are equally valid in my eyes, and therefore I see no compelling reason why a same-sex couple who wants to create a family through marriage should not be allowed to. I applauded the recent Massachusetts Supreme Court decision holding that the state has no compelling interest in restricting who can get married and ordering the legislature of that state to do something about that. And I really think that in 20 years, or 40 at the latest, this will all seem as obvious to us as the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s appears to us now. Meanwhile, it is important to make sure you let your representatives know that our gay and lesbian citizens deserve all the same rights under the law as our heterosexual citizens. No more. No less.

You can find the address of your congressman at http://www.house.gov/ and http://www.senate.gov/, or you can find them via the Human Rights Campaign website.

Wow…

Just got pointed at this by Atrios. Like him, I wouldn’t likely vote for Dennis Kucinich, but kudos to them for seeing this ad, buying it, and putting it up for people to see.

http://www.kucinich.us/dk.html

from rec.humor.funny

Up in Heaven, Alexander the Great, Frederick the Great and Napoleon are looking down on events in Iraq. Alexander says, “Wow, if I had just one of Bush’s armored divisions, I would definitely have conquered India.”

Frederick the Great states, “Surely if I only had a few squadrons of Bush’s air force I would have won the Seven Years War decisively in a matter of weeks.”

There is a long pause as three continue to watch events. Then Napoleon speaks, “And if I only had that Fox News, no one would have ever known that I lost the Russia campaign.”

[Courtesy Mark Hoolihan and the Hoolinet (www.hoolinet.com)
Copyright 2003 Boniface Bugle Productions. All Rights Absurd.]

More short-takes

It’s National Orgasm Month

So give one to the persons you love today!

Best funny line on the California election came from last night’s Daily Show, which I watched this evening thanks to my TiVo:

Jon Stewart: Steven, do you see any other trends emerging from this election?
Steve Colbert: Absolutely, Jon. In the past, our leaders tended to be veterans of World War II, or the Korean Conflict, or the Civil Rights movement. But with Jesse Ventura, and now Arnold Schwarzenegger, it’s clear that in the future our leaders will be veterans of the movie Predator.

Even if the Cubs and Red Sox do both make it into the world series, it’s still possible they will *both* lose!

And because anyone who doesn’t read it should, and because it’s so recently topical again (and again, and again), a recent favourite Ozy and Millie

California Recall

I spent a lot of time yesterday perusing various peoples reactions to the California election. Most of them were remarkably similar:

“Oh my god, I can’t believe they elected Arnold” followed by one of a series of predictable Schwarzenegger jokes. The truth of the matter is that Arnold is entirely beside the point.

Yes, the California recall election is a travesty, but not because an action-movie star won. We’ve put actors in office before. Ben Jones, the guy who played good-ole-boy mechanic “Cooter” on The Dukes of Hazzard was a Congressman. So was Sonny Bono. We sent Ronald Reagan to the White House for goodness sake. The union has survived all this and more.

The recall was a travesty precisely because it allowed a moneyed minority of discontent demagogues to hijack the electoral process. Gray Davis was an unpopular governor, to be sure. And a lot of bad stuff happened on his watch, many of which he could probably be held directly accountable for. Having said that, we already have a process for getting someone you don’t like out of office — they’re called elections, and they happen on a regular schedule. As unpopular as Davis was, I don’t think you can reasonably claim that he was either criminal or incompetent. And being unpopular shouldn’t be enough to hound someone out of office.

As for Arnie, hey, he might even do well. As Republicans go, he’s surprisingly palatable to my moderately liberal palate. He’s proffered himself to be pro-choice, pro-education, and (reasonably) pro-environment. He has to work with an overwhelming Democratic majority in the legislature. And while he won’t win any diction awards, he’s not an idiot.

I actually imagine that, while they claim to be pleased, the Republican masterminds behind the recall are secretly furious that they couldn’t get one of their frothing wingnut pinheads into the Governor’s Mansion — there was probably only one good shot in that canon, and with it they got — Arnold. A moderate movie star who is married to a Kennedy. I think I’m almost amused.

But I’m not amused at the lengths the pinheads will go to to undermine the legitimate democratic process. Maybe it’s because, unlike the neo-cons, I actually take that whole Constitution thing seriously. I hope there are enough people like me to put an end to this nonsense soon, or we can chalk up the whole Great Experiment as a failure and move on.

Paul Krugman Interview

I don’t do politics very often, and maybe I should, but sometime in my late 20s I lost my stomach for it. On the other hand, this is important stuff. As Mike Peterson pointed out once, “To see people dismiss “politics” as a topic no more compelling than golf or the latest sitcom is very frightening. It’s like someone walking across a superhighway but casually saying that they aren’t interested in automobiles so they don’t bother to look.”

So take a moment of your time and read this interview with NY Times columnist Paul Krugman which appeared in Kevin Drum’s blog CalPundit.

Don’t skip it. Cause, y’know, this is important stuff.

My mind does strange things…

So someone in a newsgroup I was reading was talking about watching the talking heads on CNN during the coverage of the blackouts, and how the Governor of New Mexico kept insisting “There oughta be a law! There oughta be a law!” and, well…..

Woof! You sure gotta climb a lot of steps to get to this office building here in New York City. But I wonder who that sad little power station is?

I’m just a grid, yes I’m only a grid
When I’m overloaded I blow my lid
Last night I failed and the whole east coast was plunged into darkness
And I couldn’t make light cause I was all out of sparkness
But I know I got repaired today
At least I hope and pray that I did
But today I am still just a grid

*GD&R*

Quote of The Day

I found this in rain_luong‘s journal. Like him, I’ve always been proud of my political leanings, and have grown quite annoyed at the tendency for “liberal” to be a dirty word in modern political discourse. While I consider myself to be a moderate pragmatist if I must be pidgeonholed, I’m not ashamed to say that when in doubt, I err towards the liberal side of the center line.

If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a forty-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights–you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable–you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family–you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn’t black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green–you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society–you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism–with the support of the American people.
–Joe Conason

Right on.

Oh, for Heaven’s sake…

I thought about writing a short rant about this myself, but John Scalzi has pretty much already said everything that needs to be said about Fred Phelps latest headline grab attempt.

I wish I could say it surprises me, but it doesn’t. Phelps and his venemous ilk are such frothing pinheads that even other homophobic religious zealots recognize he gives them a bad name. I really wish I could understand how people managed to take a religion supposedly founded on the idea of love and corrupted and perverted it so foully.

Page 7 of 11

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén