Voodoo science

Digg had a great article on detecting voodoo science that ought to be required reading for anyone in the press reporting on science or technical stories, as well as anyone dealing with the Discovery Institute.

And the Teacher of the Year award goes to... (nobody at this school)

Father John Tinnelly said his son was forced to stand in the back of
the classroom and not allowed to sit because he was wearing the yellow
star.... "He was crying," Tinnelly said. "I said, 'What are you crying about?' He said, 'Daddy, I was a Jew today.'"

Jesus, what fucking retard came up with that idea?

Hyphenated Americana

My friend Pen has an entry from the other day about which I felt obliged to remark, quoting Lou Dobbs (who, like many other pundits, is kind of a douchebag), who was in turn quoting Teddy Roosevelt:

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

and more:
"There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.... There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else."

[note: the full quote was longer, but I didn't want to reproduce Pen's entire entry and the substance of the sentiment is unchanged.] Nice fiery rhetoric, isn't it? Makes you kind of get all jumbly with patriotism. Problem is that its bullshit.

First of all, the context of the quote was during a period when there was still a broad influx of Europeans immigrating to the US and in the midst of WWI. There is an understandably nationalist tilt to it. But it also makes clear one prevailing thought, which both Dobbs and Patrick argue persists today: if you don't assimilate, you're not just not an American--you're anti-American. But assimilate into what? What is this American culture which they are supposed to assimilate into?

Diversity has always been one of this country's greatest strengths. People from all walks of life can be found here, and bring to the table all kinds of experiences that make us what we are. To imply that those experiences--and wanting to preserve their significance to oneself and one's family--makes one somehow less of an American is itself one of the most unAmerican of thoughts. Even more sinister than this is the implication for those born in the US. Mexican-Americans, Chinese-Americans, African-Americans--they are none of them any less American than the born-on-the-4th-of-July, dyed-in-the-wool patriot who bleeds red, white, and blue. Should their patriotism be any less well regarded because their families didn't come to this country on the Mayflower, or because their cultural heritage is strong enough that it has survived through generations? Not just no, but hell no.

And what of those of us who are not "hyphenated Americans" but feel no less alienated by those who spout this nonsense and this "culture" they claim is America? Are we somehow less American because we refuse to subvert our individualism, because we hold dear to those things that set us apart from the blob that is this "American culture" we're all supposed to assimilate into? Again--not no, but hell no.

Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. It is because we love our country that we march on our Capitols, protest in the streets, and argue in the press, Congress, and before the Supreme Court. It is because we love America that we refuse to allow the title "American" to be defined by those that say that only the assimilated and the conformist can be a good American. It is because we love America that we fight to preserve that most American of values which has always made America great: freedom--freedom to be who we want to be, to be part of both our past and our future, to continue to contribute all that we have to offer to every facet of life in this country.

America has always been a diverse mishmash of cultures both old and new. Maybe its time Lou Dobbs did some assimilating of his own.

Neglected husbands of the world, unite!

I can't say I'd handle this problem the same way, but I can definitely sympathize. A Michigan man has started a website to complain loudly to the world about the lack of attention he gets from his wife. I'm betting the effect probably isn't what he was looking for from her (her response? "He'll live.") but he certainly isn't the first guy to deal with this. From his site:

All I want my wife to do is stop spoiling our children and allowing
them to wreck our love life! Husbands have feelings too!
Husbandonstrike.com is home of the National Association of Desperate
Husbands, and I'm not only the CEO and Director, but I'm also a card
carrying member!

Married women, hear me now. I can't tell you how many times I've heard women complaining that their husbands don't want to pay any attention to them after they've had a couple of kids and put on a few pounds. If you asked me, I'd say the woman ought to consider herself lucky she got a husband that really wants her instead of some jackass who'd rather go find some college co-ed to play with. Not having kids my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt, but for what its worth, your life as a married couple shouldn't end with the birth of your children. You're still adults in an adult relationship, and if you want to make that relationship last, you have to treat it as such. Hire a babysitter for a weekend and go to a hotel for a nice getaway weekend. Have your (gulp!) mother-in-law come sit or something. Hell, send your kids packing to a friends house for a sleepover. Whatever it takes--do it. the way I see it, if it was worth getting her knocked up (or getting knocked up!) you ought to at least try to preserve it!

Of course, that's really probably not what's going on here. Most likely she's the one who isn't interested in keeping their relationship anymore. Maybe he's let himself go, or she's just without passion for him or whatever. I have, on occasion, found myself in those relationships where the sex has left the building, and without exception, those long, long, long "breaks" in your sex life herald the beginning of the end. There's not usually any blame to hand out--sometimes it just doesn't work, and that's the way life is. If you're a decent person you still care very much about your partner, even if you don't want to jump their bones every chance you get. All the same, my advice to this guy is to A) get into marriage counseling soon, and B) get a good divorce lawyer and do his best to make it an amicable split. The irony is that in doing so, he may very well save the relationship he's prepared to let go of altogether.

Equal-time for Dr. Buchanan

After my last post Amy suggested I take a look at a site on origin theory put up by Dr. David Buchanan, one of her former professors. I did, and found it to be a fairly well-rounded collection of links from all sides of the debate. I can't say I agree with all of the information found or linked to from that site, but it is a pretty good resource if you're wondering what the hell I keep ranting about. His "Answers to questions about evolution" page does a particularly good job of clearing up a lot of the misinformation and misconceptions that are out there.

I will say he gives the Discovery Institute and Michael Behe in particular a lot more credit than I do, but I'll chalk that one up to a less charitable inclination on my part, or perhaps more faith in human nature on his. At any rate, its worth a read, especially if you're a Christian trying to figure out how to reconcile your religious beliefs with science you think conflicts with them. Its unfortunate there aren't more scientists like him getting exposure in mainstream media outlets instead of jackasses like DI and Behe.

Finally--an evangelical who GETS IT

Newsweek's running an otherwise-unremarkable article on the evolution debate on college campuses in their college rag Current. It really just makes a few comments on the dilemma presented to strict creationist students when they leave the sheltered confines of a Christian high school to join the real world where we conduct research instead of consulting bronze-age mythology for the answers. (ok, not exactly a fair-and-impartial summary, i'll grant you, but its my website, so bugger off...)

One quote did jump out at me:

Buchanan himself is an evangelical Christian and believes that it is
important to discuss origin theories that contradict evolution, because
“in science, we are always looking at alternatives.” He
cautions, however, that the current incarnation of intelligent design
theory has not reached the viability necessary to be taught in a
college science class.

Yes! Finally someone who gets it! Intelligent design advocates are constantly accusing the legitimate science community of kow-towing to evolutionary theory as though its some kind of ideology and refusing to consider alternate points of view on the idea of the origins of the world--an accusation invariably followed with their own presentation of ID as an alternate scientific theory. Here we finally see someone who understands that the scientific community as a community (barring the odd geek/nerd who refuses to consider such things) does and has always entertained the notion of alternatives and/or restatements of existing theories, when they're backed by legitimate and rational discourse and presentation of evidence. The ID community, however, has done neither. Instead of pursuing science they're simply trying to attack it by waging a PR assault against it--a tactic that is unfortunately effective as most people neither have the background to challenge or evaluate their assertions nor the inclination to do so, since ID is preaching what they want to believe anyway.

To Dr. Buchanan I say "Bravo".

Things That Chap My Ass No. 106: Jealous guys with slutty girlfriends

About once or twice a month, I find myself compelled to go to Walmart for something, either by the constraints of shopping at 3am, or because their prescriptions or some other item I desperately need are the cheapest and I can't really afford to be an idealist at this point in my career as a perennial college student. Almost invariably its a stress-inducing event for me, as I'm forced to deal with a number of things I take great pains to avoid in my daily life, such as asses large enough to require a "wide-load" banner stopped in the middle of the only aisle between me and where I need to be while the owner of said ass corrals the herd of loud and ill-behaved ragamuffins which are invariably in tow and treating the shelving units like some kind of new-fangled jungle gym. Also high on my list of things to avoid are the self-checkout lines we all know and love so dearly.

Now we can add one more to the list: the infamous Jealous Guy. You know who I'm talking about. The one whose path seems to keep criss-crossing with yours as you wend your way through the grocery aisles. He's easy to spot: every time you pass by him and his girlfriend he makes a point of making eye contact to glare at you for looking at his girlfriend. He may even make it a point to get in your way so you're forced to acknowledge his dirty looks. Well, here's my message to the Jealous Guys of the world:

"Look pal, I really can't help it if your girlfriend was standing in front of the only kind of frozen pizza I like back there on the freezer aisle. Its not my fault her frosty nipples were patently obvious at the time--you were on the freezer aisle, after all. Which brings up another point: if you hate guys looking at your girlfriend so much, how about asking her not to dress like a hooker? Don't get me wrong. I love the fishnet-and-pleather look, especially when she's foregone such trappings of modern society as underwear and bras, although I think most guys would agree its much easier to pull off when her belly roll isn't popping out from under her tube-top (kudos on bringing that one back, by the way.) You might also give some thought to not dating a slut if the thought of her giving ten-dollar handjobs in the Whataburger parking lot really bothers you that much. That is what's bothering you, right? I mean, I really can't think of many other reasons to be worried about the occasional stray look when you're standing right there! Obviously you've got me mistaken for one of her regulars.

"Take it easy, buddy. She's not my type. Believe me. That one's all you."

May his noodly appendage bless you and keep you... "R-amen"

USA Today has an article on the pending release of The Gospel of the Flying Spahghetti Monster, a "holy book" for a parody "religion" (that I have claimed allegiance to on more than one occasion) that rose out of a satirical letter to the Kansas School Board during the debate that went on following their order that Kansas students be given exposure to intelligent design as an alternative to evolution. (I've blogged about this particular event before and no doubt will do so again.)

Its not really a remarkable article--very little that comes out of the USAToday is--but one quote struck me:

"It's too bad that they'll get attention for this sort of drivel when we have a robust scientific research program that the media doesn't seem to want to write much about," Discovery Institute spokesman Robert Crowther said in an e-mail interview.

Um, no, Robert, you don't. There's nothing scientific about postulating supernatural explanations for natural phenomena. Your so-called "robust scientific research program" has failed to produce a single legitimate, peer-reviewed scientific paper that does anything more than attack evolutionary theory with misinformation and misinterpretation. The fact that anyone knows anything at all about your work is almost entirely due to your constant, incessant (and might I add, annoying!) public relations campaign waged in the popular press outlets.

If you're upset that no one in the scientific community takes you seriously, then start practicing science instead of chicanery. You're nothing more than proverbial snake-oil salesmen, little yappy dogs nipping at the heels of legitimate scientists. You misrepresent evolutionary theory to the world at large, knowing full well that the majority of people outside the scientific community are unable to rationally evaluate your claims. You present the world with a strawman theory and tell them, "You can't believe in God and this at the same time!" when in fact nothing can be further from the truth, as many if not most scientists can personally attest.

You're charlatans and scam artists, the scientific equivalent of circuit-riding revival preachers, and its high time the country sees you for what you are.

What do you do when your Administration is incompetent? Arrest the compentent, of course.

The sheriff of Forrest Co. MS, which is where I grew up, is being hauled up on federal charges of interference in a federal operation for commandeering two ice trucks that were sitting idly by while FEMA officials sat around completely impotent with their thumbs up their collective asses.

[update: it has been pointed out that FEMA sat around with their thumbs up their collective ASS, not assES. Point well-taken. -ed.]

I've met Mr. McGee on several occasions. He's a friend of my father, and a good man. In the days following Katrina, the federal response was so abysmal that he really had no choice in the matter. What boggles my mind is that this adminstration, which prides itself on taking decisive action (despite the fact that their actions are rarely decisive and almost always wrong), is pursuing this matter even though Sheriff McGee's response was clearly appropriate and timely. He clearly attempted to pursue the matter through the proper channels, futile though that was, and finally had no choice but to take the action he did.

This is yet another example of the incompetence of this administration. How much of this are we as a country going to take before we say enough is enough?

Sometimes I hate being right all the time...

I knew it. Something inside myself was screaming, "This is just WRONG on so many levels" the other night when I was watching Idol. I was trying this whole "open-minded" thing out, and boy, was that a mistake!

I remember thinking to myself that Chris Daughtry sounded a lot like Ed Kowalczyk, the frontman for Live. I guess it was because he was singing a Johnny Cash cover that I was temporarily blinded. I started wondering what other covers had been done of it so I started digging through my collection and found Live's own cover of I Walk the Line, which doesn't just sound similar to Daughtry's version--it is Daughtry's version. Or rather, Daughtry's version was Live's. Man, I KNEW I'd heard that somewhere before.

Even that wouldn't have been so bad--it would have still left him at the top of the heap, or at least near it, except not as creative as he was making himself out to be. But no. He had his chance to give credit where credit was due, and he totally passed it off as his own. He can sing, all right, and he'll probably end up fronting some band that becomes one of Clearchannel's favorites. But he's totally lost my respect.

I'd give the judges more shit about it, but since I bought it myself for a day or so I guess that wouldn't really be fair. Although I will say that Simon at least should have had an inkling of where it came from. And I wish I'd done my homework before someone else beat me to the punch, although MSNBC still hasn't picked up on it.

So I reckon I'm back to watching Scrubs on Tuesdays now...

George Washington just called... He wants his beer back.

Bullshit.

Executive summary: TABC has been rounding people up for PI's in Irving, even going so far as to arrest patrons of hotel bars who were registered at the hotel. Choice quote: "Going to a bar is not an opportunity to go get drunk," TABC Capt. David Alexander said. "It's to have a good time
but not to get drunk."

Fuckadoodledoo. Going to a bar is for whatever I fucking well want it to be. Bars are not public places. They're private establishments and I can be drunk in them if I want to be. If I want to go to a bar and get completely obliterated, who the fuck is David fucking Alexander to tell me I can't? You want to curb drunk driving? Great idea--try arresting drunk drivers.

to those who don't think we're moving closer to a police state every single fucking day--take a deep breath. really really deep. You hear that little trickly sound? Smell that slightly stale uriny smell? That's Mr. David Alexander pissing on your civil rights.

My dirty little secret

I'm going to catch a lot of flak for this. I mean a lot. Not all of it is undeserved--I've handed out quite a bit of shit for this one, So I'll take my medicine like a man. Bring it on.

I'm watching American Idol. By myself.

It all started courtesy of Jason and Tedrah (thanks a lot guys! bastards...). They forced me to watch it last week, and while most of it was a painful experience it was made less so by the inordinate number of mind-altering beverages I'd had by that point.

Now I find myself watching it for four reason:
1) making fun of all the really bad performances is fun. Even if i'm only talking to the dogs.
2) Katherine McPhee. sweet jesus she's hot. I don't really care what she sounds like.
3) Paris bennett. She ain't real bright, but she can sing like its going out of style. Its rare to see talent like that at her age. My one bitch is this: Paris, you're 17. Dress like it. You may have a voice like Etta James, but Marilyn Monroe you are not.

Finally, my favorite:
4) Chris Daughtry. Seriously. Dude, what are you wasting your time on Idol for? Nothing good can come of it. People go to Idol when they can't sing but still manage to perform, or can sing but haven't got an ounce of creative talent. I'll say it again: What the fuck are you wasting your time on this show for?

I think I'm going to start doing a podcast or something along with the show. There's just too much fodder there. Take young Bucky for instance. Every time i see him on stage I'm reminded of this art history professor I had once. This guy had a fascination with several paintings (I think they were early Victorian, but don't quote me on that.) Anyway, he kept pointing out that the reason the subjects always had their legs spread out was because of the raging case of syphillis they had. Now, I can't really speak to the veracity of that statement. But every time I see Bucky up there, all i notice is that the guy never puts his legs together! So from now on I'll be referring to Bucky as Syphillis Boy. Syphillis Boy can sing ok, although its obvious he's mostly imitating other rockers. Mostly he's just Syphillis Boy though.

Starfucking, part deux

If you read Katy's blog you'll have already heard this story, but I figured I needed to brag about it on my own too, just for the sake of self-respect.

So Katy calls me up and wants me to come out and meet her and Josh and a few friends, and since I'd already reserved Friday night for being lame, I went out to meet her and her entourage at a little bar called One2One or something like that.... Kind of place nobody ever really goes when its not SXSW as far as I can tell. I've never walked by there and seen more than two or three couples in there normally.

Anyway, I got there just as one chap was finishing up a set that sounded a little like James Speer's stuff, and then this girl gets up there and after a few minutes piddling around starts
belting out some tunes while playing the keyboard. She had a really impressive voice, and the band backing her wasn't too bad either. Then she introduces some special guest by name, but I didn't catch it--just as well since out of the corner near the entrance and hidden by a wall
of friends there was this chap who looked really familiar, but nahhh, surely that's not.... Fuck me running it IS! John freakin Popper, harmonica virtuoso. Katy and I just kind of looked at each other sort of amazed and dumbfounded and with an expression I'm sure would count as "drooling" in any language.

I wasn't positive it was him until he turned around (he had his back to us for most of the set) and I got a good look at him, and damn if it wasn't! Katy went and fawned over him for a few minutes, then I started talking to this guy about another band we'd both seen, She Wants Revenge, when Popper walks up behind me and some girl stops him to take a picture right next
to me... So for 15 seconds I was standing shoulder to shoulder with greatness--awesome :)

Then, and I'm not 100% about this one because I don't know what he looks like, but I'm pretty sure Gary Jules came up and did his cover of Mad World from the Donnie Darko soundtrack. I know he was in town for SXSW so its not outside the realm of possibility.

And at the She Wants Revenge show I'm fairly certain that Napoleon Dynamite stepped on my foot.

And of course my camera batteries are dead this entire time so I couldn't even take pictures.

(Oh, and I met Kinky Friedman friday night too! All around a good weekend for us starfuckers.)

France forcing Apple Co. to make itunes compatible with all mp3 players

With all due respect to the French people that I like--ok, person--this is a completely wrong-headed law. I sympathize with the aims of the law, wholeheartedly. There's nothing that pains me more than the game of trying to make sure I can play my digital music on whatever device I happen to own in a given week, and I'm basically rolling the dice that the current format I'm using (mp3) will be forward compatible with future players. Historically this has been the case, but there's nothing to say that the RIAA Congress won't pass a law in the future that requires DRM on all copyrighted content, or requiring that players only play DRM'd content.

But as a software developer, my eyes roll anytime I start hearing about a government wanting to get involved with software. This is an area that moves so fast that legislation can't possibly keep up--in some cases, what's "state of the art" may change in the time it takes a bill to even make it out of committee, much less be amended, debated, passed, then updated. The last major debacle I can think of off the top of my head was the DMCA, a copyright protection law that essentially puts all rights in the hands of the RIAA and MPAA cartels, obliterating the concept of fair use for consumers in the process. What these companies are getting away with is unconscionable, and yet every day we get closer and closer to a world in which you are nickel-and-dimed for every piece of information you come across every day. Like going to the library? Forget about it--in 20 or 30 years, they'll be museums, a reminder of a more communist past where people not only read, but could do so FOR FREE!

France's consumers would be much better served by the initiation of an inquiry into the monopolistic practices of the media cartels.

read more | digg story

SXSW wrap-up

Once upon a time, I'm sure the words "spring break" actually meant taking it easy, relaxing during a well-deserved break with nary a care in the world. I'm pretty sure its safe to say those days are long gone.

I've got a lot of good stories to post in the near future, assuming I can find the time to actually sit down and write about them. I met a lot of cool people, a few fantastic musicians, got to hear some great bands, and got to enjoy the company of some friends without feeling like I had to squeeze everyone into a weekend. All of which isn't to say that relaxing isn't work! My feet have never been so beat up as they were last week--pounding the pavement trying to get into one show after another really takes it out of you. Especially when I go against everything my personality tells me and decide to wear shoes that look cool and are about as suited for walking as a podiatric Iron Maiden.

Lesson 1 for next year: pick ONE SHOW you want to see in a four hour block, get there when the first band goes on, and enjoy hearing some new music along with your favorite band. Forget about trying to use SXSW as some kind of interactive jukebox where you can see ALL of your favorite bands, even those from long ago and far away. My first couple of days I went that route, planning on catching a different band every hour at a different bar. Not only were my feet killing me, the closest I got to viewing a show was leaning over a fence at Red Eyed Fly to peer at She Wants Revenge playing in the ampitheater. Hardly what I'd call a five-star experience (although I did meet a few other cool people with the same idea!)

Lesson 2: You can get into the official shows (the ones that require a wristband and/or badge) if you follow Rule #1. The day shows however, which were the saving grace of SXSW up until this year, largely the product of underground organization and rebellion against the corporatization of SXSW, have been taken over by the corporate whores. Not all of them--there are still plenty of shows from the true Austin scene to be found, free of charge with great local and regional music. There's a few crappy ones thrown together at the last minute by bands that seem like they formed for the sole purpose of playing that show. But a lot of the great ones--those that have the headliners from the official shows that you thought you'd catch in a more intimate setting--have been taken over, turned into invite-only affairs you pretty much have to be a reporter or industry-type to get into.

I've got plenty more Rules To Live By, rants, and stories to tell later...

The new Google Desktop

Fair warning, this will probably not be of much interest to anyone who isn't planted in front of their computer all day, or more likely, in front of several different computers which never have the document you need because its on one of the OTHER computers.

Google's new version of its desktop search engine has a couple of nifty features. The first one allows you to search across all of your desktops for a document, not just the one you're sitting in front of. What takes that from a who-cares feature to a whoa! feature is that you can also download the searched document to the computer you're on through google's servers. Upshot--you'll never have to worry about whether your flash drive corrupted the file or not. Downside: MAJOR privacy issues--google keeps a copy of any recently modified file for 30 days on its servers in order to provide this service. Coupled with the fact that a federal judge is leaning towards requiring google to comply with a search order from the Justice Department, this spells trouble, especially in the midst of an administration that considers free speech to be a national security violation. Politics aside though, its a neat feature.

The thing I most like though is their sidebar interface. In a nutshell, this is just a panel that docks along the side of your screen and has a bunch of modules in it that are customizable. Some modules just provide an interface for searching, some will show you news items, and my favorite is just a scratch pad for hanging on to bits of text. In previous versions, it was an ok feature--useful, but not quite effortless. It still got in the way of me performing the tasks I wanted to perform, although less obtrusively than most competitors.

Now Google's really dressed it up. The module panels can detach from the sidebar and float wherever you want them--much more convenient for my purposes as I can stick it on some part of the screen I'm not really using. You can set them to stay on top of whatever your working on, which is great for easy access, but its kind of in the way of what you're working on, right? Well, google's got you fixed up there as well. By hitting the shift key twice, you can hide or unhide all the floating panels, giving you an almost effortless way of accessing them while still keeping them out of the way. Its not quite as pretty as Konfabulator, but its pretty damn nifty all the same, and much lighter on resources. The other killer feature here is that by double-pressing the control key, a small box pops up in the middle of your screen that you can type a query into and have it search the web or your desktop, and as you type, it both suggests phrases you might be looking for, and shows you the first several results for whatever you've typed so far.

Its little details like these that make google such a powerhouse of a company. They Just Get It.

Real heroes

In the hierarchy of heroes, there's the peons of the universe like Ralph Hinkley (aka The Greatest American Hero). Then there's your lesser-known types like Hellboy and Archangel. You've got your medium-powered badasses, usually just an average joe with some skills and a lot of heart, like Nick Fury and Captain America. Then there's your elitists--those who've been chosen, born with special powers, or born with resources far beyond the common man, like the XMen, Aquaman, and Batman. Beating them all out is of course, Superman.

Then there's this guy. I hope I'm half the man he is someday.

Wow. Just... Wow.

I can't believe this one hasn't gotten more coverage. (If you don't RTFA, be sure and stick with this until the end or you'll miss the punchline)

One of Bush's inner cadre of advisors, Claude Allen, resigned last month, citing a desire to spend more time with his family, according to the White House. This isn't just some low level staffer we're talking about--Allen was one of his chief domestic policy yes menadvisors, paid at the same level as Rove, and responsible pushing everything on Bush's social agenda from abstinence only education to blocking stem cell research. Originally nominated for a lifetime appointment on the federal bench, he's an extremely socially conservative individual we can thank our lucky stars was blocked from the bench. (Ever notice how lifetime appointments fit right in with STD's as "the gift that keeps on giving?" I kid, of course--judicial independence is an important pillar of democracy.)

He's also a good example of Bush's idea of compassionate conservatism. During his confirmation hearings he was asked about a remark he made in 1984 about a candidate's vulnerability arising from his links to "queers", which he explained by saying he meant queer in the "odd, out of the ordinary, unusual" kind of way--not the I-hate-fags kind of way. (I have to hand it to the guy's memory--i'm not sure I'd recall anything that far back, especially not the use of a term in its classical sense in the midst of a political climate that had everyone else using it to blame gays for the then-unexplained Gay Cancer we now know as AIDS.) Much later, as Virginia's Secretary of Health and Human Resources, he blocked Medicare money from going to an indigent rape victim who wanted to obtain an abortion. Most recently he was one of Bush's point men on Katrina, which makes the following story all the more interesting.

Now, he's got other priorities... like staying out of jail. Allen was arrested last week on charges of theft. Now, you're going to have to bear with me for a second here, because this part might be confusing. Step one of the alleged scam was to buy some item from the store and take it home. Step 2: go back to the store, receipt in hand, and pick up another of the same item. Step 3: take it to the return counter to receive a refund. I gotta hand it to you, pal--nice little routine you got going for you there. Except that part where you pay with credit cards. Credit cards that have your name on them. Seems like someone with all of your credentials would have thought a little further ahead than that.

On being a star fucker

I'm probably going to catch a lot of flack for this from my guy friends, but what the hell... I'm in Austin this week for spring break and to catch some SXSW free shows, and I'm starting the week of by meeting the a pair of my blogging heroes, the Blurbo-doocery.

Heather (aka dooce) has got a veritable mob of adoring fans out there, most of whom are in Halcyon right now it seems. I met her and Jon early before the crowd really got here, but i didn't get a chance to get a picture or anything yet. They're both incredibly warm and nice people, and to wait through the line of individuals wanting to just get a chance to shake their hand, they've got to be patient as hell. They seem to be kind of taken aback by the fuss, although I'm sure they knew it was coming.

Heather's blog is different from those I usually read because its not really about anything in particular, except their life and family. They've got an adorable 2-year old and dog, and its really interesting for me to read about a family that isn't dysfunctional as hell. Heather's got a really unique perspective on life and her writing style is articulate and indisputably funny. I wish I could write half as well or prolificly as she does.

Contrary to what you might expect, its not an estrogen-laden chickfest (although I'll admit, most of her fans are women). I highly recommend adding it to your daily read.

Now THIS is freakin' COOL

A new company lets you view a web page and chat with others viewing the same page through their system. Its totally in your browser--no external programs to install. This is one of the cooler things i've seen in awhile. All you need to do is add http://gabbly.com in front of the url, like this: http://gabbly.com/www.karmajunkie.com

Click that to get a look at it!


read more | digg story

Censure Bush?

Russ Feingold was on ABC's This Morning today to talk about his motion to censure Bush that he'll be introducing on the floor of the Senate tomorrow. While i'd love to see Bush impeached (and thrown under the jail) I think its ultimately a doomed effort that could probably be fairly described as political grandstanding.

Don't get me wrong--I think there's a more than legitimate case for censure. Bush has crossed the line of what is legal so many times as to make Nixon look positively law-abiding. But in this climate, during an election year, I think its going to have the opposite effect of what I'd like to see (i.e., further fragmenting of the republican party). yeah, I'm partisan. I don't like the Republican party. (That doesn't make me wrong, though.)

Feingold made a point of saying he hasn't thought about his run for the Presidency, which I thought was kind of disingenous. There are a lot of things you could have introduced a censure motion for before now. There's a reason this is being done during an election year. I'll be interested to see what the response in the Senate is. Maybe the world will surprise me and there will be overwhelming support for the measure.

On Being Taken for a Stroll Down the Garden Path

I was talking to a friend in the lab yesterday while we were waiting on a couple of experiments to finish and the conversation turned to politics and science, which in this climate means religion and science, since Bush is seemingly incapable of making a decision (in general but especially with respect to his education and science agenda) without referring to his trusty Magic 8 Ball, and we got to talking about the Intelligent Design debate.

There's a lot of things that bug me about this idea, but probably not the ones you think. Its not the idea that there's some omniscient designer out there twiddling the strings and ultimately guiding the process that we call evolution. I'm scientifically agnostic as there's no evidence one way or the other, but personally atheist, as I've never seen anything that would lead me to believe in a higher power. I won't usually fault someone for believing that, however, unless they make an argument based on that belief that's so idiotic I have to say something--which is what ID'ers do on a daily basis.

Here's the thing that gets me about ID: they spend all their time trying to tear down the idea of evolution, despite mountains of evidence for it, and lacking a single piece of valid evidence for their own point of view, and try to tell the world that you can't believe in God and in evolution at the same time. God and evolution are not mutually exclusive, people!!! There's nothing in the theory of evolution that denies the existence of God at all. Yeah, there's this idea called "random mutation" that is the ultimate driver of mutation and speciation, but how damn stupid do you have to be to fail to see that if there's this omniscient power out there that he could just as easily be the "random" in "random mutation"? Back when I still believed in God this was exactly what I believed. Most scientists who are religious believe this as well.

ID'ers, on the other hand, truly are creationists in disguise. They spend all their time and energy trying to create the illusion that there are "holes" in evolution, that there is some kind of long-running controversey among scientists regarding it, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. Every time I hear someone say "Teach the controversy" I want to pull my hair out--there is no controversy among scientists about evolution! Nobody in the science community is arguing over whether macroevolution or microevolution occurred. Sure, we debate over the finer details--whether this family of animals evolved from one kind of ancestor or another, or whether archeabacteria are the forerunners of eukaryotes or a separate line divergent from the kingdom Bacteria, or whether introns exist in bacterial chromosomes. That's a far cry from debating over whether evolution itself is a flawed theory.

Are there gaps in the fossil record? Sure--its not like there's some big fossil library buried somewhere that has a copy of every organism that ever existed. We have to find these things. But find them we do, and this is an important point: the theory of evolution makes many predictions, some of which are testable in the lab and some that aren't. How do we know those that aren't testable in the lab are correct? Because we eventually find the fossils that prove them. Its like being a detective at a murder scene. You've got a dead body with a bullet hole right between the eyes and a big hole in the back of the head. You don't have to have been present at the crime to go ahead and make two educated guesses: there's a bullet in a wall somewhere behind where the guy was shot, and there's a gun somewhere that shot the bullet.

Hopefully among the four or five people that read this blog I'm preaching to the choir.

As goes Nashville, so goes the South...

Faith Hill and Tim McGraw may have just made it onto my list of acceptable country music.

Rights we never had: male reproductive rights

This is something I've been bitching about ever since it occurred to me that I might one day get a girl pregnant. Mostly its just something for me to bitch about when I've had too much to drink, much like the nature of sports. Apparently now someone is bitching for real.

Executive summary: geeks knocks up a girl (i'm still getting over the "geek gets girl to fuck him" part), after having been told by the girl she couldn't have kids (Fellas, how many times have we heard that one?), and doesn't want to pay child support. Leaving aside for a moment the "stupid tax" this guy ought to have to pay, and the fact that his genes really don't belong in the pool in the first place, should a guy have a right to absolve himself of the legal obligations, given that women (for now at least) have the option of terminating the pregnancy or giving the baby up for adoption?

In the article there's a quote that admits that this is mainly a symbolic suit that will likely be thrown out of court. And in all seriousness, this is a totally shitty way to handle it. But the question is still there: why do women get to hold all the cards here? The rhetoric I always got from the Church (yes, i did once go) was that "You make the choice when you have sex, not after," and the article points out the options available to men--condoms and sterilization. That still doesn't answer the question of why a woman has the right to be the sole maker of a decision that will affect not only her own life but that of the biological father. Especially in today's world in which women actually have more options than men on birth control (there are no reversible sterilization procedures like taking birth control pills or implanting an IUD for men), I have to say that the equity argument does have some validity that ought to be discussed.

Finally, however, there is a dark side to this debate: what about when the man wants the woman to keep the baby, but she doesn't want to? Cases like this have already made it through the courts with the results being largely that the fathers get no say in stopping an abortion--nor, I believe, should they. But its not really equitable that they're forced to become a parent against their will either, especially not when a woman can stop that train before it leaves the station.

I don't know how this one is ultimately going to be resolved, and for once, I'm not sure how I think it ought to be. I do know that while I generally trust someone I'm sleeping with, I don't just take their word for it that they're on the Pill. Safe sex is safe sex, gentlemen.

this is a libel suit waiting to happen...

Y'all ain't gonna believe this, fellas--the womenfolk's fightin' back! No longer content to sit back and put up with the scurrilous, womanizing ways of men, a woman named Tasha Cavelle Joseph created a site called www.DontDateHimGirl.com, an online database of adulterous and philandering men garnered from reports by women all over the country. If ever there was a niche website, this is it, though I don't doubt it will grow in popularity quickly. The site highlights a "Cheater of the Day" and lets women search for cheaters based on name, city, or keywords, as well as add a man to the database. The search facility has me wondering: searching by name I get, but why would someone need to search by city or keywords?

I have several problems with this site and sites like it, however. [Author's disclaimer: I cheated on a girl once, 11 years ago, my senior year of high school, by kissing another girl at a party. In my defense, we'd only started dating a few weeks earlier after making out at another party. And as I later found out, she'd "started dating" four other guys at that party--so much for monogamy!]

First, I have a philosophical problem with putting a person in the stocks, so to speak, when they haven't even been presented with the opportunity to tell their side of the story. "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"--thankfully its not so commonplace as to be routine, but more than one person has been accused of infidelity out of jealousy, spite and malice. (and ladies, before you get indignant, I'm well aware of the fact that men are just as guilty as women of this sin.)

Secondly, this is hardly equal-opportunity; where is the site for women who cheat? According to a 1998 CNN poll, those polled were only marginally more likely to know men who cheated (69%) versus women (60%), which is not necessarily indicative of the numbers of men versus women cheating. What was interesting about the same poll, however, was that men were about equally likely to have their opinions of a cheating spouse unchanged: 43% for men cheating, and 41% for women. Women, however, were far harsher towards men than women: 70% of those polled said their opinion of a cheating man would change, versus 39% of women. There is obviously a double standard here which this site has seized upon as a business opportunity.

I don't think anyone would really condone infidelity, even if they wouldn't condemn it either. However, I think that sites like this really underscore the need for women and men alike to exercise a modicum of judgment and caution about entering any new relationship. My advice to men and women alike is to be upfront about where your relationship is going whenever you start dating someone. If two people haven't said outright, "I am not seeing anyone else," don't assume that just because you see each other more than you see your pets that both parties are being monogamous.

The next front in the war on terror? Free speech.

Still think the Patriot Act and the NSA wiretapping program isn't a big deal?

Think again.

When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. -Sinclair Lewis

Gotta love 24...

Father Dan: Irrefutable Facts About Jack Bauer
My favorites:

2) When Kim Bauer lost her virginity, Jack Bauer found it and put it back.

and...

7) If you're holding a gun to Jack Bauer's head, don't count to three before you shoot. Count to 10. That way, you get to live 7 seconds longer.

More huffing and puffing by the Republicans

Glenn Greenwald has an excellent, thorough article on the almost mind-boggling attempts by Bill Frist to block hearings by the Senate Intelligence Committee on the NSA eavesdropping program. The executive summary: the SIC is the only committee structured deliberately to ensure non-partisan oversight of the US's intelligence gathering activities, and Bill Frist wants to change that because the Committee will not rubberstamp the Bush Administration's patently illegal wiretapping program.

Traditional media has totally dropped the ball on this. The Congressional Republicans are losing credibility faster than an ex-president at a hooker convention, and regular journalists are either oblivious to this or worse, are deliberately ignoring it. So much for the liberal media.

Use the Schwarz, Luke...

This is just too damn funny.

What's worse is that when i was about 12 years old, i would have thought it
the coolest thing since the Transformers picked up and moved back to
Cybertron and they killed off that wussy Duke on GI Joe, leaving
Scarlet free for the taking...

Man, its no wonder i didn't have many friends growing up.

ok, i'm going to go mourn my lost youth now...

For once, Mississippi isn't going to be last...

Mississippi legislature moves toward abortion ban.

It was only a matter of time. I will definitely have more to say on this issue later.

from Shining Path to Middle Path...

An interesting enough topic that I thought it was worth posting a reply as a blog entry:

Pen: "Ha...that just means conservatives figure it out a whole lot quicker. Keep chasing that utopian dream buddy. Let me know when you get hit with the reality train."

#1, I haven't been a socialist for years. I do, however, think that socialist democracies that incorporate enough of a capitalist bent will tend to have an overall higher rate of "citizen satisfaction", a totally made up word that you can think of as the number of people who don't hate life and don't have to worry about their basic needs. I think that comes at a cost that most americans aren't willing to pay, even if the cost is only theoretical to them. for example, in the hypothetical, well-organized social democracy, there are going to be very few people, if any, who are just dirt-poor. You'll be able to meet your basic needs, have access to healthcare and education. The cost is that nobody's ever going to be filthy rich either, the healthcare will probably be rationed, and in general will not be as advanced as possible, and you probably won't get to pick which school you go to. There will be some inefficiency in the economy of course, though far less than what we are taught from the earliest time we are able to recognize "Commie" as an epithet. [note: For the sake of clarity, Communism is one form of a socialist economy, but hardly the sole implementation. The two terms are absolutely not synonymous, despite widespread belief to the contrary. There have been socialist governments on both the right and left end of the political spectrum.]

For many if not most americans, this would still be a great deal; despite the wide prevalence of the American Dream, few americans will ever become filthy rich, or even just really rich, if they weren't born into it, and almost 20% of Americans have no access to healthcare aside from emergency room visits. That being said, I'm not convinced such a society is possible in the US because of its existing economy, sheer size, and relatively weak federal government (for all the bitching and moaning we do about how we hate Big Government, the US federal government has relatively few powers compared to other democracies.)

#2--the truth invariably lies between two disparate points of view. If the young socialist eventually moves right on the political spectrum, it is because the truth of the matter is in the center--not the far right. What's troubling is that it is only rarely that conservatives, and Republicans in particular, are willing to move towards the oft-vilified left.

As much as he is demonized by the right, Clinton was able to accomplish more, and to the benefit of a much larger and diverse group of constituents, than the Bush administration ever dreamed of, chiefly because he governed from the center and did not allow his presidency to become a slave to ideology.

Just the way Bush likes it...

Study: One in 1,000 Know First Amendment