So I am listening to the Diane Rehm show, and Larry Sabato is talking, because this is what he does. Talk. Well I mean really he is some director of some election or public policy thing at the University of Virginia.
And he is a hack. Like in here are the two things he says:
1. He very often is 98% accurate in his election predictions!
(Author's note: You will achieve a similarly accurate result if you just pick the incumbent to win. [Political] science!)
2. He will ooze on the teevee and call the race for you if you give him a big pile of money. Thanks to John Cook at Gawker
(Author's note: Jesus Christ is this guy rich)
So to sum up: Larry Sabato will make blindingly obvious remarks and will say what you want him to say for cash.
But to what he is saying now! This is more or less a live-blog.
- Virginia is a state that sometimes picks Democrats and sometimes picks Republicans.
- We can't extrapolate too much from these races.
- People don't have the same turnout for off-year elections!
God he sucks. He just said a bunch of things that you know from having a half functional brain.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Tom Friedman: I Know A Guy
Oh hi blog!
Here I will refute Tom Friedman's latest Op-Ed, point by point, because he is an insufferable cosmically stupid man.
Last summer I attended a talk by Michelle Rhee, the dynamic chancellor of public schools in Washington. Just before the session began, a man came up, introduced himself as Todd Martin and whispered to me that what Rhee was about to speak about — our struggling public schools — was actually a critical, but unspoken, reason for the Great Recession.
Tom Friedman: I know a guy. Sometimes when I'm in Washington (DC or the state - whichever!) mystery men come up to me and divulge information about what's going on that nobody else knows. That is why I, Tom Friedman, have an op-ed in the New York Times. Also, how about the construction of that second sentence, huh?
There’s something to that. While the subprime mortgage mess involved a huge ethical breakdown on Wall Street, it coincided with an education breakdown on Main Street — precisely when technology and open borders were enabling so many more people to compete with Americans for middle-class jobs.
The subprime mortgages had little to do with an ethical breakdown, and had a hell of a lot more to do with a bubble-fueled economy, that, as a result, is drive by periods of increasing volatility. Nobody was talking about ethics when the housing bubble was being inflated, Tom. I mean, I hope you're not seriously suggesting that it was some shadowy unscrupulous bankers that had a sudden realization that if they just started acting unethically then everybody would be rich. But I think you may be suggesting just that.
And then, what's the logical fallacy where you just take two events and you say, "here, these are two things that happened at the same time. They are related." I don't remember either, but it doesn't make any sense.
Also, by "open borders" what he really means to say is "labor is dirt cheap outside of the US and so is transportation costs. Let's move production there." Or you can go with the flowery bullshit of open borders; your choice. But that doesn't even answer the question of WHY people are able to compete for formerly American middle class jobs. Well, because you don't need to be terribly educated or specialized to do most jobs because of technology! It's true! Let's hope this realization doesn't come back to bite him in the... oh Tom, you're in for a rough one.
In our subprime era, we thought we could have the American dream — a house and yard — with nothing down. This version of the American dream was delivered not by improving education, productivity and savings, but by Wall Street alchemy and borrowed money from Asia.
Well, that and shadow banking arms of legitimate financial corporations told us we could have that dream, too, to be fair. Otherwise, he's right with this paragraph. Still has nothing to do with education though.
A year ago, it all exploded. Now that we are picking up the pieces, we need to understand that it is not only our financial system that needs a reboot and an upgrade, but also our public school system. Otherwise, the jobless recovery won’t be just a passing phase, but our future.
This is what I like to call: Ignoring History's Minor Inconveniences (trademark forthcoming)
1960s: It all exploded with a credit crunch
1970s: It all exploded due to oil prices and stagflation
1980s: It all exploded due to Leveraged Buyouts and other corporate raiders
1990s: It all exploded with the Savings and Loan scandals
1990s: (twofer!) It all exploded when people realized pets.com was not actually worth 800 billion dollars
2000s: It all exploded due to a mortgage meltdown
AND
1960s-2000s: American education, by certain metrics in certain populations, is losing ground, comparatively.
Again I stress: the two sides of the "AND" have not a whit to do with each other. Our public schools have been in desperate need of revamps and overhauls and some less profoundly stupid ideas like tying public school funding to property taxes. You've read Jonathan Kozol, right? Good.
“Our education failure is the largest contributing factor to the decline of the American worker’s global competitiveness, particularly at the middle and bottom ranges,” argued Martin, a former global executive with PepsiCo and Kraft Europe and now an international investor. “This loss of competitiveness has weakened the American worker’s production of wealth, precisely when technology brought global competition much closer to home. So over a decade, American workers have maintained their standard of living by borrowing and overconsuming vis-à-vis their real income. When the Great Recession wiped out all the credit and asset bubbles that made that overconsumption possible, it left too many American workers not only deeper in debt than ever, but out of a job and lacking the skills to compete globally.”
Wait, I thought he went to a talk by Rhee? When is Rhee going to make an appearance?
1. Worker's global competitiveness, due to needing less education, expertise, or specialization, all comes down to where production can be made most cheaply. This is often not in the US. Middle and bottom ranges, especially. Fine, everybody get's a masters degree in Freakonomics: it will still be cheaper to manufacture car parts in Mexico.
2. We borrowed and consumed on houses we thought were worth what banks said they were worth. Which, OK, we should have known better. But consumer debt and the instability of finance has driven the American economy now for 50 years. President Obama said credit is the lifeblood of the economy, completely unironically, and nobody batted an eye. In other words, this isn't anything new.
3. The fact that real income is tied into the inherent instability of the world of finance means that indeed we need more education. Not Friedman's techno-utopian bullshit idea, but an education on how to stop this disgusting world of finance.
This problem will be reversed only when the decline in worker competitiveness reverses — when we create enough new jobs and educated workers that are worth, say, $40-an-hour compared with the global alternatives. If we don’t, there’s no telling how “jobless” this recovery will be.
Every recovery since the 70s is jobless. The whole point of having the Fed intervene as the lender of last resort is to restabilize the economy, not make jobs. So again, Tom talks about two events that have little to do with each other. A simple flow chart:
Should we create new jobs? ------> Yes --------> OK let's figure out what to produce
Is this a jobless recovery? ------> Of course, what a stupid question, we were talking about how to make jobs just now, so kindly butt out.
A Washington lawyer friend recently told me about layoffs at his firm. I asked him who was getting axed. He said it was interesting: lawyers who were used to just showing up and having work handed to them were the first to go because with the bursting of the credit bubble, that flow of work just isn’t there. But those who have the ability to imagine new services, new opportunities and new ways to recruit work were being retained. They are the new untouchables.
Tom Friedman: still has friends. Still waiting to hear from Rhee, too.
1. Well this is exciting. People who go to work to do work get fired. People who figure out new ways to pad billable hours to get a bunch more money for the law firm: this is apparently Tom Friedman's bright future.
2. New service, new opportunities: these are what drove i-bankers to invent CDOs, CDSs, and other sorts of exotic derivative securities. What could possibly go wrong there?
3. Making a colonial India reference, I see. Tom isn't good with these kinds of things. These people are the new caste of society that people won't deal with.... why, wait, I take it back, that's the smartest thing Friedman has ever said! I can't wait to spit on a banker!
That is the key to understanding our full education challenge today. Those who are waiting for this recession to end so someone can again hand them work could have a long wait. Those with the imagination to make themselves untouchables — to invent smarter ways to do old jobs, energy-saving ways to provide new services, new ways to attract old customers or new ways to combine existing technologies — will thrive. Therefore, we not only need a higher percentage of our kids graduating from high school and college — more education — but we need more of them with the right education.
At this point, I've given up on hearing from Rhee. It just wasn't meant to be.
Also, here is this hilariously stupid paragraph in a nutshell: Are you unemployed? Put on your creative thinking cap and become a person that can't be fired from the job you don't have! What do you mean there are no jobs? INNOVATE, SON! Also, thanks for the examples, Tom! This whole assortment of words boils down to: Reach for the stars! Do businessy sounding buzzwords! Creatovate!
I just made that word up! I'm UNTOUCHABLE! Elliot Ness motherfucker! Wait, no, the other kind?
As the Harvard University labor expert Lawrence Katz explains it: “If you think about the labor market today, the top half of the college market, those with the high-end analytical and problem-solving skills who can compete on the world market or game the financial system or deal with new government regulations, have done great. But the bottom half of the top, those engineers and programmers working on more routine tasks and not actively engaged in developing new ideas or recombining existing technologies or thinking about what new customers want, have done poorly. They’ve been much more exposed to global competitors that make them easily substitutable.”
The top half of the top half and the bottom half of the top half oh for God's sake Katz, some expert you are!
So maybe you're a person who is with me until now. And good. But we may part ways here, because I'm gonna go full-Marxist. The whole point of production is to minimize time and space (they are probably the same thing). You also want to flatten the level of education and expertise needed to do any given thing. So we are in a paradox now. We do what Katz wants and find ways to propel the capital machine, which will then further lead to the de-skilling of jobs. Then we'll come back and have this same talk again with an even bleaker outlook. That's how the system works, and the proposed solution seems to be saying to speed it up. It's mindboggling!
Those at the high end of the bottom half — high school grads in construction or manufacturing — have been clobbered by global competition and immigration, added Katz. “But those who have some interpersonal skills — the salesperson who can deal with customers face to face or the home contractor who can help you redesign your kitchen without going to an architect — have done well.”
This... is the same paragraph as above, except with shoe salespeople. Whatever.
Just being an average accountant, lawyer, contractor or assembly-line worker is not the ticket it used to be. As Daniel Pink, the author of “A Whole New Mind,” puts it: In a world in which more and more average work can be done by a computer, robot or talented foreigner faster, cheaper “and just as well,” vanilla doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s all about what chocolate sauce, whipped cream and cherry you can put on top. So our schools have a doubly hard task now — not just improving reading, writing and arithmetic but entrepreneurship, innovation and creativity.
Oh yeah, there's a long rich history of people waiting to be selected for the sweet life of an assembly-line worker. No wait there's a long rich history of labor unions with their collective power, getting a quality of life standard that affirmed the dignity of that labor and so assembly-line workers could be rightfully proud of what they did and have a good material life!
But at the end of the day, you just have to be ice cream. Also, with the vanilla thing, he has introduced a sexual connotation into this metaphor. A quick metaphor sidebar recap:
Untouchables: G-Men or anti-Brahmins?
Vanilla: your work flavor. Also possibly your sexual prowess
Ice cream: how to sell yourself to get a job
Bottom line: We’re not going back to the good old days without fixing our schools as well as our banks.
THERE NEVER WERE ANY GOOD OLD DAYS.
Here I will refute Tom Friedman's latest Op-Ed, point by point, because he is an insufferable cosmically stupid man.
Last summer I attended a talk by Michelle Rhee, the dynamic chancellor of public schools in Washington. Just before the session began, a man came up, introduced himself as Todd Martin and whispered to me that what Rhee was about to speak about — our struggling public schools — was actually a critical, but unspoken, reason for the Great Recession.
Tom Friedman: I know a guy. Sometimes when I'm in Washington (DC or the state - whichever!) mystery men come up to me and divulge information about what's going on that nobody else knows. That is why I, Tom Friedman, have an op-ed in the New York Times. Also, how about the construction of that second sentence, huh?
There’s something to that. While the subprime mortgage mess involved a huge ethical breakdown on Wall Street, it coincided with an education breakdown on Main Street — precisely when technology and open borders were enabling so many more people to compete with Americans for middle-class jobs.
The subprime mortgages had little to do with an ethical breakdown, and had a hell of a lot more to do with a bubble-fueled economy, that, as a result, is drive by periods of increasing volatility. Nobody was talking about ethics when the housing bubble was being inflated, Tom. I mean, I hope you're not seriously suggesting that it was some shadowy unscrupulous bankers that had a sudden realization that if they just started acting unethically then everybody would be rich. But I think you may be suggesting just that.
And then, what's the logical fallacy where you just take two events and you say, "here, these are two things that happened at the same time. They are related." I don't remember either, but it doesn't make any sense.
Also, by "open borders" what he really means to say is "labor is dirt cheap outside of the US and so is transportation costs. Let's move production there." Or you can go with the flowery bullshit of open borders; your choice. But that doesn't even answer the question of WHY people are able to compete for formerly American middle class jobs. Well, because you don't need to be terribly educated or specialized to do most jobs because of technology! It's true! Let's hope this realization doesn't come back to bite him in the... oh Tom, you're in for a rough one.
In our subprime era, we thought we could have the American dream — a house and yard — with nothing down. This version of the American dream was delivered not by improving education, productivity and savings, but by Wall Street alchemy and borrowed money from Asia.
Well, that and shadow banking arms of legitimate financial corporations told us we could have that dream, too, to be fair. Otherwise, he's right with this paragraph. Still has nothing to do with education though.
A year ago, it all exploded. Now that we are picking up the pieces, we need to understand that it is not only our financial system that needs a reboot and an upgrade, but also our public school system. Otherwise, the jobless recovery won’t be just a passing phase, but our future.
This is what I like to call: Ignoring History's Minor Inconveniences (trademark forthcoming)
1960s: It all exploded with a credit crunch
1970s: It all exploded due to oil prices and stagflation
1980s: It all exploded due to Leveraged Buyouts and other corporate raiders
1990s: It all exploded with the Savings and Loan scandals
1990s: (twofer!) It all exploded when people realized pets.com was not actually worth 800 billion dollars
2000s: It all exploded due to a mortgage meltdown
AND
1960s-2000s: American education, by certain metrics in certain populations, is losing ground, comparatively.
Again I stress: the two sides of the "AND" have not a whit to do with each other. Our public schools have been in desperate need of revamps and overhauls and some less profoundly stupid ideas like tying public school funding to property taxes. You've read Jonathan Kozol, right? Good.
“Our education failure is the largest contributing factor to the decline of the American worker’s global competitiveness, particularly at the middle and bottom ranges,” argued Martin, a former global executive with PepsiCo and Kraft Europe and now an international investor. “This loss of competitiveness has weakened the American worker’s production of wealth, precisely when technology brought global competition much closer to home. So over a decade, American workers have maintained their standard of living by borrowing and overconsuming vis-à-vis their real income. When the Great Recession wiped out all the credit and asset bubbles that made that overconsumption possible, it left too many American workers not only deeper in debt than ever, but out of a job and lacking the skills to compete globally.”
Wait, I thought he went to a talk by Rhee? When is Rhee going to make an appearance?
1. Worker's global competitiveness, due to needing less education, expertise, or specialization, all comes down to where production can be made most cheaply. This is often not in the US. Middle and bottom ranges, especially. Fine, everybody get's a masters degree in Freakonomics: it will still be cheaper to manufacture car parts in Mexico.
2. We borrowed and consumed on houses we thought were worth what banks said they were worth. Which, OK, we should have known better. But consumer debt and the instability of finance has driven the American economy now for 50 years. President Obama said credit is the lifeblood of the economy, completely unironically, and nobody batted an eye. In other words, this isn't anything new.
3. The fact that real income is tied into the inherent instability of the world of finance means that indeed we need more education. Not Friedman's techno-utopian bullshit idea, but an education on how to stop this disgusting world of finance.
This problem will be reversed only when the decline in worker competitiveness reverses — when we create enough new jobs and educated workers that are worth, say, $40-an-hour compared with the global alternatives. If we don’t, there’s no telling how “jobless” this recovery will be.
Every recovery since the 70s is jobless. The whole point of having the Fed intervene as the lender of last resort is to restabilize the economy, not make jobs. So again, Tom talks about two events that have little to do with each other. A simple flow chart:
Should we create new jobs? ------> Yes --------> OK let's figure out what to produce
Is this a jobless recovery? ------> Of course, what a stupid question, we were talking about how to make jobs just now, so kindly butt out.
A Washington lawyer friend recently told me about layoffs at his firm. I asked him who was getting axed. He said it was interesting: lawyers who were used to just showing up and having work handed to them were the first to go because with the bursting of the credit bubble, that flow of work just isn’t there. But those who have the ability to imagine new services, new opportunities and new ways to recruit work were being retained. They are the new untouchables.
Tom Friedman: still has friends. Still waiting to hear from Rhee, too.
1. Well this is exciting. People who go to work to do work get fired. People who figure out new ways to pad billable hours to get a bunch more money for the law firm: this is apparently Tom Friedman's bright future.
2. New service, new opportunities: these are what drove i-bankers to invent CDOs, CDSs, and other sorts of exotic derivative securities. What could possibly go wrong there?
3. Making a colonial India reference, I see. Tom isn't good with these kinds of things. These people are the new caste of society that people won't deal with.... why, wait, I take it back, that's the smartest thing Friedman has ever said! I can't wait to spit on a banker!
That is the key to understanding our full education challenge today. Those who are waiting for this recession to end so someone can again hand them work could have a long wait. Those with the imagination to make themselves untouchables — to invent smarter ways to do old jobs, energy-saving ways to provide new services, new ways to attract old customers or new ways to combine existing technologies — will thrive. Therefore, we not only need a higher percentage of our kids graduating from high school and college — more education — but we need more of them with the right education.
At this point, I've given up on hearing from Rhee. It just wasn't meant to be.
Also, here is this hilariously stupid paragraph in a nutshell: Are you unemployed? Put on your creative thinking cap and become a person that can't be fired from the job you don't have! What do you mean there are no jobs? INNOVATE, SON! Also, thanks for the examples, Tom! This whole assortment of words boils down to: Reach for the stars! Do businessy sounding buzzwords! Creatovate!
I just made that word up! I'm UNTOUCHABLE! Elliot Ness motherfucker! Wait, no, the other kind?
As the Harvard University labor expert Lawrence Katz explains it: “If you think about the labor market today, the top half of the college market, those with the high-end analytical and problem-solving skills who can compete on the world market or game the financial system or deal with new government regulations, have done great. But the bottom half of the top, those engineers and programmers working on more routine tasks and not actively engaged in developing new ideas or recombining existing technologies or thinking about what new customers want, have done poorly. They’ve been much more exposed to global competitors that make them easily substitutable.”
The top half of the top half and the bottom half of the top half oh for God's sake Katz, some expert you are!
So maybe you're a person who is with me until now. And good. But we may part ways here, because I'm gonna go full-Marxist. The whole point of production is to minimize time and space (they are probably the same thing). You also want to flatten the level of education and expertise needed to do any given thing. So we are in a paradox now. We do what Katz wants and find ways to propel the capital machine, which will then further lead to the de-skilling of jobs. Then we'll come back and have this same talk again with an even bleaker outlook. That's how the system works, and the proposed solution seems to be saying to speed it up. It's mindboggling!
Those at the high end of the bottom half — high school grads in construction or manufacturing — have been clobbered by global competition and immigration, added Katz. “But those who have some interpersonal skills — the salesperson who can deal with customers face to face or the home contractor who can help you redesign your kitchen without going to an architect — have done well.”
This... is the same paragraph as above, except with shoe salespeople. Whatever.
Just being an average accountant, lawyer, contractor or assembly-line worker is not the ticket it used to be. As Daniel Pink, the author of “A Whole New Mind,” puts it: In a world in which more and more average work can be done by a computer, robot or talented foreigner faster, cheaper “and just as well,” vanilla doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s all about what chocolate sauce, whipped cream and cherry you can put on top. So our schools have a doubly hard task now — not just improving reading, writing and arithmetic but entrepreneurship, innovation and creativity.
Oh yeah, there's a long rich history of people waiting to be selected for the sweet life of an assembly-line worker. No wait there's a long rich history of labor unions with their collective power, getting a quality of life standard that affirmed the dignity of that labor and so assembly-line workers could be rightfully proud of what they did and have a good material life!
But at the end of the day, you just have to be ice cream. Also, with the vanilla thing, he has introduced a sexual connotation into this metaphor. A quick metaphor sidebar recap:
Untouchables: G-Men or anti-Brahmins?
Vanilla: your work flavor. Also possibly your sexual prowess
Ice cream: how to sell yourself to get a job
Bottom line: We’re not going back to the good old days without fixing our schools as well as our banks.
THERE NEVER WERE ANY GOOD OLD DAYS.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
hip-hop succumbs to gay agenda
You read it, ladies and gents....
Due to the endless pressure of the gay agenda, as homosexuals try to taint our moral fiber with their filth, they have attacked one of the cornerstones of our society: hip hop music.
Hip-hop has gone gay. At least what i've been hearing. Granted the traditional definition of hip-hop has changed significantly... but let me state my case here:
Firstly, what do I mean by 'gay'? Well, i'm not saying its a bad thing, but generally, gay music has its own sound: slightly cheesy, overemotional techno. Would you hear it in a gay club (without significant remixing)? If you answered yes, its 'gay'. And proud of it.
Exhibit A: Rihanna's 'Don't Stop the Music'. Okay, I actually heard this in gay club. It's techno, everyone. And it has MJ in it. It is pretty fierce, girlfriend.
Exhibit B: Chris Brown's 'Forever'. It beats out Rihanna for the sound I'm talking about You may not have heard this one yet, so lets give it a listen:
Lastly, I would like to present you with exhibit C: Wiz Khalifa's 'Say Yeah'
That right there is the most absolutely fabulous rap song to hit the scene since diddy played the Diana Ross sample 'i'm coming out' in the background of 'Mo money mo problems'
Seriously. "Better off alone" in a rap song?
Homosexual Agenda: 1
Moral Fiber of Hip Hop: 0
Yes, I said moral fiber of hip hop. Because it makes about as much sense as 'moral fiber of America'. How delightfully ironic.
Due to the endless pressure of the gay agenda, as homosexuals try to taint our moral fiber with their filth, they have attacked one of the cornerstones of our society: hip hop music.
Hip-hop has gone gay. At least what i've been hearing. Granted the traditional definition of hip-hop has changed significantly... but let me state my case here:
Firstly, what do I mean by 'gay'? Well, i'm not saying its a bad thing, but generally, gay music has its own sound: slightly cheesy, overemotional techno. Would you hear it in a gay club (without significant remixing)? If you answered yes, its 'gay'. And proud of it.
Exhibit A: Rihanna's 'Don't Stop the Music'. Okay, I actually heard this in gay club. It's techno, everyone. And it has MJ in it. It is pretty fierce, girlfriend.
Exhibit B: Chris Brown's 'Forever'. It beats out Rihanna for the sound I'm talking about You may not have heard this one yet, so lets give it a listen:
Lastly, I would like to present you with exhibit C: Wiz Khalifa's 'Say Yeah'
That right there is the most absolutely fabulous rap song to hit the scene since diddy played the Diana Ross sample 'i'm coming out' in the background of 'Mo money mo problems'
Seriously. "Better off alone" in a rap song?
Homosexual Agenda: 1
Moral Fiber of Hip Hop: 0
Yes, I said moral fiber of hip hop. Because it makes about as much sense as 'moral fiber of America'. How delightfully ironic.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
When it rains...
Well, in DC, when it rains, it pours, then it mists, then it sprinkles, then it is cloudy for a month. But at least the weather coincides with our current state of global affairs. Allow the diagram below to aid you in your perception of our situation globally:
What is this you say? Well, its a fan. Unfortunately, due to the current food crisis, there is no fecal matter available to hit the fan. Therefore, we just have a fan. To stretch the metaphor, perhaps the coming years are going to 'blow' (as fans do create wind).
But in all seriousness. According to one news article, the current food crisis is a 'silent tsunami'. On that note:
1. It would be far more clever if it were a 'tsilent tsunami'.
2. Why are we still calling things tsunamis? The worst natural disaster in our time happened only a few short years ago, and we are going to call something totally unrelated and largely the fault of manmade problems a 'silent tsunami'?
3. Does a tsunami make noise to begin with? Perhaps it sounds like children's laughter.
Things like that really irk me. Just say "worst. food. crisis. ever.". At least it wouldn't intermingle unrelated disasters. Anything but tsunami. Its like comparing everything to Hitler. Just doesn't carry any weight anymore.
So the economy is going to get worse, the food crisis will grow, and we will still use our corn to make ethanol for our cars. I don't mind if some child dies in another continent, so long as I can drive to work in the morning.
WELCOME BACK!
I was gone for awhile! With RK too busy blogging about his beloved twins and defending his thesis, and me too busy working in the real world... wait a second....
Here is my real explanation: Yes, I have been busy. But I have also lacked in motivation. I'm not going to halfassedly blog for yall, so here I am back in blazing colors. Of the rainbow.
What have I been spending my time doing?
Becoming a Nats fan.
Who?
The worst team in baseball.
With RK as my witness, I officially dumped my Braves (in a good season) in favor of my (new) hometown Washington Nationals. I've never been a get on the wagon when times are good type of guy, so it seems fitting they have the worst record in baseball.
Steps to becoming a Nats fan:
1. Wave your hat around as the scoreboard says 'wave those caps'. Lame.
2. Watch the nats lose.
3. Get a nats dog. Realize that nats dogs arent very good. Get a ben's chili bowl chili dog, all the way. Bliss. Get an italian sausage. Have a pocket of blistering hot oil hide within the greasy crevices of the meat, only to explode onto your lukewarm and tender tongue. Wash down with a beer. An overpriced beer sold to you by a 16 year old girl who gave you 4 beers and didnt check for ID.
4. Realize why you love baseball all over again, and want to go to the games all the time now.
It's easy to be a fan of any team. You just have to love the sport. And hope maybe youll meet joe mauer one day.
What is this you say? Well, its a fan. Unfortunately, due to the current food crisis, there is no fecal matter available to hit the fan. Therefore, we just have a fan. To stretch the metaphor, perhaps the coming years are going to 'blow' (as fans do create wind).
But in all seriousness. According to one news article, the current food crisis is a 'silent tsunami'. On that note:
1. It would be far more clever if it were a 'tsilent tsunami'.
2. Why are we still calling things tsunamis? The worst natural disaster in our time happened only a few short years ago, and we are going to call something totally unrelated and largely the fault of manmade problems a 'silent tsunami'?
3. Does a tsunami make noise to begin with? Perhaps it sounds like children's laughter.
Things like that really irk me. Just say "worst. food. crisis. ever.". At least it wouldn't intermingle unrelated disasters. Anything but tsunami. Its like comparing everything to Hitler. Just doesn't carry any weight anymore.
So the economy is going to get worse, the food crisis will grow, and we will still use our corn to make ethanol for our cars. I don't mind if some child dies in another continent, so long as I can drive to work in the morning.
WELCOME BACK!
I was gone for awhile! With RK too busy blogging about his beloved twins and defending his thesis, and me too busy working in the real world... wait a second....
Here is my real explanation: Yes, I have been busy. But I have also lacked in motivation. I'm not going to halfassedly blog for yall, so here I am back in blazing colors. Of the rainbow.
What have I been spending my time doing?
Becoming a Nats fan.
Who?
The worst team in baseball.
With RK as my witness, I officially dumped my Braves (in a good season) in favor of my (new) hometown Washington Nationals. I've never been a get on the wagon when times are good type of guy, so it seems fitting they have the worst record in baseball.
Steps to becoming a Nats fan:
1. Wave your hat around as the scoreboard says 'wave those caps'. Lame.
2. Watch the nats lose.
3. Get a nats dog. Realize that nats dogs arent very good. Get a ben's chili bowl chili dog, all the way. Bliss. Get an italian sausage. Have a pocket of blistering hot oil hide within the greasy crevices of the meat, only to explode onto your lukewarm and tender tongue. Wash down with a beer. An overpriced beer sold to you by a 16 year old girl who gave you 4 beers and didnt check for ID.
4. Realize why you love baseball all over again, and want to go to the games all the time now.
It's easy to be a fan of any team. You just have to love the sport. And hope maybe youll meet joe mauer one day.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
90%
Ninety percent. Well, by some estimates. Others say anywhere between ninety-two, ninety-five, and on up to ninety-six. What is it that I am talking about?
Why former Italian leader and tycoon Silvio Berlusconi? My question to you is why not?
So, yes, 90% or so of the population is heterosexual. Congratulations! You can make babies (which is pretty cool, unless its an accident). Other than that, there isn't much difference. You are part of a hetero-normative culture, and you are free to get a bad loan on your new home, and subsequently have a foreclosure on it.
Do I have a problem with the fact that straight people exist, muddling up this already sin-filled world with their lifestyle choice? No. I actually like straight people quite a bit.
However, there comes a time in every relationship where it is time for your friends to stand up for you. That would also be known as 'support'. This is pretty much a basic premise of having friendly relationships to begin with, and while the parties, sports, and celebratory moments are awesome, one of the truest indicators of a healthy friendship are the crises. How a friend reacts during these defines them.
To the point:
You 90% out there, you overwhelming majority of humanity- you . Gays and Lesbians rely daily on your kindness and support to have healthy, safe, and stable lives. But how much of this is a 'mind-your-own-business' type of apathy? While this isn't a bad thing at all, discrimination is still very prevalent, and it is up to you, overwhelmingly, to make the difference for the 10%. I know this- as I am perceived as a straight man by many... that when I stand up against the guy or girl who uses 'gay' pejoratively, or says 'faggot' or any number of other offensive and bigoted terms... I know that this makes a difference, and it isnt the same as those who know I like men. Calling people out on bias, sexuality-based and beyond, is something that everybody should participate in. We in this country have freedom of speech- but this does NOT mean we have to respect what words have been spoken. That freedom gives you the power to stand against injustice, however small it may seem.
My roommate AP, a straight, dashingly handsome man (and single, ladies), said when I came out to him (not in a planned manner) that he was disappointed. When I asked why, he essentially said he thought it was nice to see a straight man who wasn't afraid to stick up for gay people. That is by far one of the most respectful, insightful, and awesome responses I have heard when coming out to someone.
And it says a lot about our current state of affairs. It isn't the norm to stick up for those around you. In the face of blatant discrimination, it certainly shouldn't be the norm to ignore it.
The fact remains (and always will, for something like homosexuality (gays don't necessarily make more gays) that the structure will always be predominantly heterosexual. So don't feel threatened. It isn't contagious.
I'm just asking for y'all to stick up for the ten percent that relies on you. It makes a big difference.
Why former Italian leader and tycoon Silvio Berlusconi? My question to you is why not?
So, yes, 90% or so of the population is heterosexual. Congratulations! You can make babies (which is pretty cool, unless its an accident). Other than that, there isn't much difference. You are part of a hetero-normative culture, and you are free to get a bad loan on your new home, and subsequently have a foreclosure on it.
Do I have a problem with the fact that straight people exist, muddling up this already sin-filled world with their lifestyle choice? No. I actually like straight people quite a bit.
However, there comes a time in every relationship where it is time for your friends to stand up for you. That would also be known as 'support'. This is pretty much a basic premise of having friendly relationships to begin with, and while the parties, sports, and celebratory moments are awesome, one of the truest indicators of a healthy friendship are the crises. How a friend reacts during these defines them.
To the point:
You 90% out there, you overwhelming majority of humanity- you . Gays and Lesbians rely daily on your kindness and support to have healthy, safe, and stable lives. But how much of this is a 'mind-your-own-business' type of apathy? While this isn't a bad thing at all, discrimination is still very prevalent, and it is up to you, overwhelmingly, to make the difference for the 10%. I know this- as I am perceived as a straight man by many... that when I stand up against the guy or girl who uses 'gay' pejoratively, or says 'faggot' or any number of other offensive and bigoted terms... I know that this makes a difference, and it isnt the same as those who know I like men. Calling people out on bias, sexuality-based and beyond, is something that everybody should participate in. We in this country have freedom of speech- but this does NOT mean we have to respect what words have been spoken. That freedom gives you the power to stand against injustice, however small it may seem.
My roommate AP, a straight, dashingly handsome man (and single, ladies), said when I came out to him (not in a planned manner) that he was disappointed. When I asked why, he essentially said he thought it was nice to see a straight man who wasn't afraid to stick up for gay people. That is by far one of the most respectful, insightful, and awesome responses I have heard when coming out to someone.
And it says a lot about our current state of affairs. It isn't the norm to stick up for those around you. In the face of blatant discrimination, it certainly shouldn't be the norm to ignore it.
The fact remains (and always will, for something like homosexuality (gays don't necessarily make more gays) that the structure will always be predominantly heterosexual. So don't feel threatened. It isn't contagious.
I'm just asking for y'all to stick up for the ten percent that relies on you. It makes a big difference.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Ready... FIGHT
MORTAL KOMBAAAAATTTT
Actually, we were never allowed to play explicitly violent video games, but when my brother and I would go to the arcade every now and then, we would always try our hands at Street Fighter II. Then we would hurry on down to Aunt Francesca's for a slice of her homemade pound cake, which she sold for a nickel at Teddy's Bakery. I miss those days.
Okay, the nostalgia is unfounded for the latter part, but I really just felt like an old man talking about going to the arcade to play 2 dimensional video games with my brother. Do arcades still exist? I am aware of the existence of a place called "Dave and Busters" which portrays itself as an adult arcade (of which I am incredibly judgmental and skeptical). This seems incredibly stupid, especially outside of something being a corporate event or a team-building exercise... why would you want to go there? Or am I just a heartless old man now who doesn't have an inner child? Can you not just have your buddies over to play video games and have a few beers for free at home? Are you honestly looking to meet someone at one of these places? Is there a large costumed rodent that serves you pizza?
So, what does this have to do with sports, sexuality, and politics, you ask?
Well, first, to sports. The always fun rivalry between UNC coach Roy Williams, and The Devil himself Mike Krzyzewski has heated up again:
Okay, not quite that many. But for an old man, he does too many.
Coach K took time out of his busy schedule of pampering referees and rigging clocks to hurl a minor insult towards UNC (regarding its injuries).
I WANT COOKIES NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Williams responded:"Regardless of what somebody else says about they have injuries too, which is a bunch of bunk, so I don't give a crap what somebody else says, but coach their own damn team, I'll coach my team -- in case anybody has heard some statements about that"
Things like this are good for sports, they just build intensity and give charisma to coaches, who are often becoming politically correct sideshows these days. If I think of any other possible coaching rivalries perhaps I will post on them.
And the other rivalry is: Michelle Obama vs Cindy McCain.
Beltway insiders AP and MW, loyal roommates of TL, pointed out Cindy's cougarlike glare to TL today. And honestly, how could you not like Michelle Obama? Well, Cindy has a great reason. In response to Michelle's comment that she was proud of the country 'for the first time in my adult life', Cindy McCain came back with the inspiring "I have, and always will be, proud of my country". Not to be mean, but if anyone can honestly say that, they would either have to have multiple personalities, an extremely sheltered upbringing coupled with homegrown ignorance, or a Rockefeller. I am proud of what this country has stood for in the past, and some of what it stands for today, but it is dangerous to have unconditional pride in anything so large and powerful... and corrupt. So, let the catfight begin, because I want to see the wax fly:
There you have it.
Actually, we were never allowed to play explicitly violent video games, but when my brother and I would go to the arcade every now and then, we would always try our hands at Street Fighter II. Then we would hurry on down to Aunt Francesca's for a slice of her homemade pound cake, which she sold for a nickel at Teddy's Bakery. I miss those days.
Okay, the nostalgia is unfounded for the latter part, but I really just felt like an old man talking about going to the arcade to play 2 dimensional video games with my brother. Do arcades still exist? I am aware of the existence of a place called "Dave and Busters" which portrays itself as an adult arcade (of which I am incredibly judgmental and skeptical). This seems incredibly stupid, especially outside of something being a corporate event or a team-building exercise... why would you want to go there? Or am I just a heartless old man now who doesn't have an inner child? Can you not just have your buddies over to play video games and have a few beers for free at home? Are you honestly looking to meet someone at one of these places? Is there a large costumed rodent that serves you pizza?
So, what does this have to do with sports, sexuality, and politics, you ask?
Well, first, to sports. The always fun rivalry between UNC coach Roy Williams, and The Devil himself Mike Krzyzewski has heated up again:
Okay, not quite that many. But for an old man, he does too many.
Coach K took time out of his busy schedule of pampering referees and rigging clocks to hurl a minor insult towards UNC (regarding its injuries).
I WANT COOKIES NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Williams responded:"Regardless of what somebody else says about they have injuries too, which is a bunch of bunk, so I don't give a crap what somebody else says, but coach their own damn team, I'll coach my team -- in case anybody has heard some statements about that"
Things like this are good for sports, they just build intensity and give charisma to coaches, who are often becoming politically correct sideshows these days. If I think of any other possible coaching rivalries perhaps I will post on them.
And the other rivalry is: Michelle Obama vs Cindy McCain.
Beltway insiders AP and MW, loyal roommates of TL, pointed out Cindy's cougarlike glare to TL today. And honestly, how could you not like Michelle Obama? Well, Cindy has a great reason. In response to Michelle's comment that she was proud of the country 'for the first time in my adult life', Cindy McCain came back with the inspiring "I have, and always will be, proud of my country". Not to be mean, but if anyone can honestly say that, they would either have to have multiple personalities, an extremely sheltered upbringing coupled with homegrown ignorance, or a Rockefeller. I am proud of what this country has stood for in the past, and some of what it stands for today, but it is dangerous to have unconditional pride in anything so large and powerful... and corrupt. So, let the catfight begin, because I want to see the wax fly:
There you have it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
