So now that I have a 9-5 I'm too important to post more frequently, so it'll probably be weekend posts from me from now on. I have a few things to share today. Here they are:
1. A coworker sent me this website that's supposed to be really funny. Check it out here.
2. It's really smoky here from the fires up north. I'm kind of afraid to go outside.
3. The rumors are abound about Madonna and Guy splitting up. I found out yesterday at work and my heart sunk. All I can hope is that they'll patch things up.
That's all from me for now. Happy Pride weekend!
6.27.2008
legal musings
The Supreme Court has been really busy lately with many interesting decisions. Here are a few stories of legal importance, including one that hasn't made it to court yet, but as an arrest, still could have far-reaching implications.
- No More 'Millionaire's Amendment'
- So, when you are murdered, your killer can get out of punishment by claiming that it's just not fair that he can't face his accuser in court
- Bang, Bang
- Is this really the way to go about HIV/AIDS prevention and awareness?
6.24.2008
guest post: obama and the iraq war
This is the debut post from Our One Republican Friend. Enjoy, and please, keep the commenting civil.
Before everyone lines up to drink the anti-war Kool-Aid that Barack Obama has been passing out since the beginning of his campaign, I thought I would point to a few indicators that maybe you should think twice before you dawn the bright blue jump suit, hold hands for a sermon about the promised peace on a spaceship behind the withdraw from Iraq and drink down that colorful promise of a speedy exit from the real world.
In the real world Iraq has improved and is improving dramatically. Let me say that again…Iraq has improved dramatically. The Iraqi army is securing its own country under the command and direction of its civilian government, and is doing it without American help. The government has been able to move its parliament toward important political progress on a variety of important initiatives. Last month was one of the most peaceful months in Iraq since the war began.
And yet…Barack Obama continues to tell anyone with a microphone about a 'third Bush term under Senator McCain,' '100 years this and 100 years that,' and 'home in 16 months' or whatever the time. Perhaps he is not reading the papers or maybe he knows that all things being equal, Americans prefer peace. Maybe he is betting that we will drink the Kool-Aid without asking too many questions; like what is going to happen in Iraq if we just up and leave immediately? or will our enemies "leave it at that" when we go?
I don't know about you but I am not ready to bet on a mystical spaceship behind a comet. I am not ready to assume that our enemies will suddenly change their minds, decide we are not so bad or call the whole thing off if we would just leave Iraq. I am not ready to drink the Kool-Aid because a first term Senator from Illinois promised me a spaceship.
Instead I will stick with a man whose strategy is working, a strategy, I might add, that he supported because he knew it was the right thing, even when it was unpopular. I will stick with the man who was fighting for our country and enduring years as a POW while Obama was learning to tie his own shoes and ride a bike without training wheels. I'll stick with another man who even democrats (and New Yorker's at that) are starting to agree will be vindicated by history.
Don't drink the Kool-Aid without some answers. Peace, but peace through strength.
6.23.2008
"don't pollute my air space, and i promise not to piss on your desk"
My friend Alan recently reminded me that our county's health department passed a resolution last year that would ban smoking in bars and gambling parlors (it is already prohibited in restaurants, effective in 2003); the ban is scheduled to go into affect July 1. Many bar owners in Kanawha County, WV are pretty upset and irritated over the ban, as well as many of the rules that go along with building outside smoking pavilions (even though they were previously warned of said rules).
With many states, counties, and cities across the country passing similar bans within the last few years, the debate over fairness of such bans is raging. Personally, I agree with public smoking bans, and believe that the moral/philosophical as well as practicality arguments for why they are unfair are not effective.
The "No" side in the Guardian's article has many flaws, not even counting the fact that his commentary includes a lot of personal attack against one pro-banner, which is never a good way to argue a point.
First, he mentions the concern for bar/restaurant workers and their rights, saying that they could always work somewhere else, should expect smoke as part of the job, and in fact, one choosing to work at a place like this should be "suited" to a smoky environment. This is a pretty ignorant argument. It is problematic to assume that anyone has a choice to work, whether at all or at a certain place. Generally, people working at bars or restaurants are doing so out of necessity, at least to an extent, due to lack of education or skills for something else or as a second job.
Second, his argument that bars and restaurants are more akin to places of hospitality and that customers are more guests and the owner more of a host seems pretty ridiculous to me. While bars are selling and offering a different setting and product than a grocery store, it is still a public, confined space that wants customers and wants those customers to buy a product and enjoy a service. If cigarette smoke is impossible to escape in said public space, it should be effectively prohibited, no matter what kind of relationship proprietor and customer have.
Third, Hitchens points out that a committee decides to implement these bans, effectively forcing all to practice no smoking like them. Why don't non-smokers just go somewhere else? he asks. Again, he is missing many a point. By allowing smoking in public and confined places, are we not then asking non-smokers to participate in inhalation of smoke? Further, asking non-smokers to simply go somewhere else to enjoy people, a drink, maybe even some dart-throwing, is effectively denying them the services and products of a bar. Pubs were not established for the sole reason of smoking inside; rather, they encompass many aspects and smoking seems to be at the bottom of the list. It makes more sense to me to ban smoking inside, allowing all to enjoy drinking and socializing, and ask the smokers to take the smoking somewhere else. He complains that these committees put "private pleasures" under scrutiny; what is this private nature he speaks of? Smoking at a bar seems pretty public to me, especially if others are forced to breathe the smoke without even putting a cigarette to their own mouths.
Lastly, the opponent of bans moves to government regulation and infringement of rights, likening it to drug laws. This "slippery slope" argument that someday they will take smoking from us all together (!!) is misinformed. He dances around the fact that drugs are illegal, thus even prohibiting use in one's own home. If he disagrees with this and wants it changed, that should be an entire other piece. Smoking in a public space is not similar to being able to smoke a joint in your own house. Let's be real; smoking in bars is bad for EVERYONE, not just yourself. Bottom line.
AP and I went to a school with a lot of smokers, but only one [real] bar downtown. When Ohio (or was it just Lorain County??) passed a smoking ban that went into affect January of my senior year, people did not stop going to the Feve. Yes, there is merit in the argument that of course people are not going to stop attending the only bar in town. Yet, if a county-wide ban goes into affect, people are not going to be able to choose the bar across town that does let you smoke there. And no, people are not going to drive to another county just to go to a bar. Seriously. If anything, smoking bans raise your customer base because smokers still want to have a drink and socialize (did people stop eating out when they banned smoking in restaurants??), but non-smokers will be more likely to come out if they don't have to breathe in toxic smoke. And those of us who have the really bad habit of social smoking can rest assured we aren't going to venture outside for that habit that isn't really a habit. So, in essence, it is good all around. Plus, think about it: those jeans you wore to the bar last night, you really can wear for four more days in a row and not smell like an ashtray.
With many states, counties, and cities across the country passing similar bans within the last few years, the debate over fairness of such bans is raging. Personally, I agree with public smoking bans, and believe that the moral/philosophical as well as practicality arguments for why they are unfair are not effective.
The "No" side in the Guardian's article has many flaws, not even counting the fact that his commentary includes a lot of personal attack against one pro-banner, which is never a good way to argue a point.
First, he mentions the concern for bar/restaurant workers and their rights, saying that they could always work somewhere else, should expect smoke as part of the job, and in fact, one choosing to work at a place like this should be "suited" to a smoky environment. This is a pretty ignorant argument. It is problematic to assume that anyone has a choice to work, whether at all or at a certain place. Generally, people working at bars or restaurants are doing so out of necessity, at least to an extent, due to lack of education or skills for something else or as a second job.
Second, his argument that bars and restaurants are more akin to places of hospitality and that customers are more guests and the owner more of a host seems pretty ridiculous to me. While bars are selling and offering a different setting and product than a grocery store, it is still a public, confined space that wants customers and wants those customers to buy a product and enjoy a service. If cigarette smoke is impossible to escape in said public space, it should be effectively prohibited, no matter what kind of relationship proprietor and customer have.
Third, Hitchens points out that a committee decides to implement these bans, effectively forcing all to practice no smoking like them. Why don't non-smokers just go somewhere else? he asks. Again, he is missing many a point. By allowing smoking in public and confined places, are we not then asking non-smokers to participate in inhalation of smoke? Further, asking non-smokers to simply go somewhere else to enjoy people, a drink, maybe even some dart-throwing, is effectively denying them the services and products of a bar. Pubs were not established for the sole reason of smoking inside; rather, they encompass many aspects and smoking seems to be at the bottom of the list. It makes more sense to me to ban smoking inside, allowing all to enjoy drinking and socializing, and ask the smokers to take the smoking somewhere else. He complains that these committees put "private pleasures" under scrutiny; what is this private nature he speaks of? Smoking at a bar seems pretty public to me, especially if others are forced to breathe the smoke without even putting a cigarette to their own mouths.
Lastly, the opponent of bans moves to government regulation and infringement of rights, likening it to drug laws. This "slippery slope" argument that someday they will take smoking from us all together (!!) is misinformed. He dances around the fact that drugs are illegal, thus even prohibiting use in one's own home. If he disagrees with this and wants it changed, that should be an entire other piece. Smoking in a public space is not similar to being able to smoke a joint in your own house. Let's be real; smoking in bars is bad for EVERYONE, not just yourself. Bottom line.
AP and I went to a school with a lot of smokers, but only one [real] bar downtown. When Ohio (or was it just Lorain County??) passed a smoking ban that went into affect January of my senior year, people did not stop going to the Feve. Yes, there is merit in the argument that of course people are not going to stop attending the only bar in town. Yet, if a county-wide ban goes into affect, people are not going to be able to choose the bar across town that does let you smoke there. And no, people are not going to drive to another county just to go to a bar. Seriously. If anything, smoking bans raise your customer base because smokers still want to have a drink and socialize (did people stop eating out when they banned smoking in restaurants??), but non-smokers will be more likely to come out if they don't have to breathe in toxic smoke. And those of us who have the really bad habit of social smoking can rest assured we aren't going to venture outside for that habit that isn't really a habit. So, in essence, it is good all around. Plus, think about it: those jeans you wore to the bar last night, you really can wear for four more days in a row and not smell like an ashtray.
6.21.2008
People Say
When I was in probably 6th grade or so I started writing down my ideas in these one page entries called, 'People Say.' I must have given them to my sister because she kept them and took them out to show me recently. I thought I would share the brilliance that was going on in my 11 year old head. For some reason I signed it as noted at the bottom. (It starts with #3 and I tried to preserve the spelling and grammar)
People Say # 3
People say religion is important. So Catholics get married and divorced 8 times. People say family values are important. So they let their kids watch South Park. People say things they want to do and believe. But untill they know, they can't really say.
People Say #4
People say they are tired when they get home from work. When really all they did was go around talking about nonsense with co-workers. I've noticed you could talk with a group of 11-year-olds or a group of people in the their forties about a stupid sitcom and the 11-year-olds would be more intellectual! Kids are like all the other superficial people in society.
People say religion is important. So Catholics get married and divorced 8 times. People say family values are important. So they let their kids watch South Park. People say things they want to do and believe. But untill they know, they can't really say.
Farla Caine
Age 11
N.Y.
Age 11
N.Y.
People Say #4
People say they are tired when they get home from work. When really all they did was go around talking about nonsense with co-workers. I've noticed you could talk with a group of 11-year-olds or a group of people in the their forties about a stupid sitcom and the 11-year-olds would be more intellectual! Kids are like all the other superficial people in society.
Farla Caines
Age 11
N.Y.
Age 11
N.Y.
6.19.2008
random links
Some more random links for those people, who like me, have nothing to do at work today.
- Seriously, how did he get elected?
- I mean, Americans can be really dumb.
- The AMA just needs to stop.
- Just gross. Has anyone actually seen this ad on tv?
- Better late than never.
- Suckahs!
photo of the day
The latest issue of Italian Vogue is about to hit European newsstands (and American ones soon after) and features all black models and stories related to black people in the arts. This is pretty cool, albeit kind of random coming from Italy of all places. Though it would be nice if all fashion magazines regularly featured many minority models (in a good way) instead this being a novel idea.
Preview some of the images before the mag comes to the states!
6.17.2008
random links
Here are a few interesting articles and posts I've been alerted to recently:
- Argentina's court way more progressive than the U.S.'s
- This is what happens when you save a cop's life
- A group focuses on charging Bush with war crimes
adjacent possibilites
A few weeks ago, I returned to Oberlin for Commencement/Reunion weekend. Though I was neither commencing (I did that a year ago) nor officially reuniting (I think that comes in about three years), I participated on a panel that I and another Charleston, WV Obie organized. The panel, Then and Now: Changing Nature of Activism, included four graduates from the '67-'69 cluster for the "then" side; the "now" side included two of us who graduated last year, one who graduated this year, and one who will graduate next year. The panel was a great success, and included a substantial audience participation component at the end during which both young and old[er] Obies asked questions and raised issues surrounding activism in an Oberlin context as well as a more general one.
One of the "then" participants was Paula Gordon, who, among other things, blogs for the Huffington Post. A few days ago, she blogged about the "then and now" nature of activism, the differences between issues of each generation, the dynamic nature of social change, and about "adjacent possibilities", the idea that change is always happening, thus forcing us to take the moral high road every chance we have. Her take was that while the "then" generation was focused on civil rights, women's rights, and Vietnam, the "now" generation is focused on one general principle: saving life on earth. This is a pretty general concept, but she goes on to voice it as the possibility and necessity of a sustainable future on earth. While this is an environmental concept that encompasses many elements of human, economic, and social rights, her post still missed some fundamentals of the panel's discussion.
Gordon states that the best news from our generation was that their accomplishments seemed easy to us. I am not sure that this was the view expressed by our side of the panel; in fact, I think the general sentiment was one of respect for their accomplishments, but also understanding that the issues and manifestations of protest have changed. If there is one thing that I learned from not only my education at Oberlin, but from the panel discussions, it is that activism is self-defined, dynamic, and completely intersectional (props to CAST!). You cannot address climate change without also addressing housing issues and socioeconomic factors. You cannot address housing issues without also addressing the economy and racial factors. You cannot discuss any of this without addressing poverty. Thus, my generation's activism is rooted in the idea that all social ills are connected, and while we may choose to individually focus on one or two specific issues of personal importance, participation in each movement does not allow one to fore go discussion of all other issues and movements. If anything, what we learned from the activism in the "then" generation was that exclusion has no place in any social movement: problems specific to women of color and lower-class women cannot by ignored by the feminist movement, LGBTQ members of the black community cannot be left out of race politics, racial and economic factors cannot be forgotten by the LGBTQ movement, and class and socioeconomic realities should go addressed in every movement for social change. If we are to extol and promote "adjacent possibilities", we must apply the principle to every chance for social change, and, man, are there enough to go around.
One of the "then" participants was Paula Gordon, who, among other things, blogs for the Huffington Post. A few days ago, she blogged about the "then and now" nature of activism, the differences between issues of each generation, the dynamic nature of social change, and about "adjacent possibilities", the idea that change is always happening, thus forcing us to take the moral high road every chance we have. Her take was that while the "then" generation was focused on civil rights, women's rights, and Vietnam, the "now" generation is focused on one general principle: saving life on earth. This is a pretty general concept, but she goes on to voice it as the possibility and necessity of a sustainable future on earth. While this is an environmental concept that encompasses many elements of human, economic, and social rights, her post still missed some fundamentals of the panel's discussion.
Gordon states that the best news from our generation was that their accomplishments seemed easy to us. I am not sure that this was the view expressed by our side of the panel; in fact, I think the general sentiment was one of respect for their accomplishments, but also understanding that the issues and manifestations of protest have changed. If there is one thing that I learned from not only my education at Oberlin, but from the panel discussions, it is that activism is self-defined, dynamic, and completely intersectional (props to CAST!). You cannot address climate change without also addressing housing issues and socioeconomic factors. You cannot address housing issues without also addressing the economy and racial factors. You cannot discuss any of this without addressing poverty. Thus, my generation's activism is rooted in the idea that all social ills are connected, and while we may choose to individually focus on one or two specific issues of personal importance, participation in each movement does not allow one to fore go discussion of all other issues and movements. If anything, what we learned from the activism in the "then" generation was that exclusion has no place in any social movement: problems specific to women of color and lower-class women cannot by ignored by the feminist movement, LGBTQ members of the black community cannot be left out of race politics, racial and economic factors cannot be forgotten by the LGBTQ movement, and class and socioeconomic realities should go addressed in every movement for social change. If we are to extol and promote "adjacent possibilities", we must apply the principle to every chance for social change, and, man, are there enough to go around.
6.16.2008
too much time on your hands, stodd?
Our friend Scott, who graduated with b, has started a summer project called My Dad Napping. Leave it to an Obie to come up with something like this. Check it out for a good laugh.
picture of the day
This picture comes from Wired magazines black and white photo contest. The mag let readers vote for their favorite from submissions and these are the top 10. This one wasn't number one, but it was my favorite. They've also compiled an editor's top ten.
They are great to look at; check 'em out.
6.13.2008
b's latest book pick
Last summer, while unemployed and squatting in a house in Oberlin, I read this book and it changed my perspective on many things. Malcolm X, in my opinion, is one of history's most misunderstood men. This book should be required reading in high school.
From this book, one learns of the childhood that shaped his views about race relations, the time he spent in the north east as a young man, the prison sentence that would lead him to Islam, the influence he had on the NOI and its growth, and finally the shift away from the NOI after his trip to Mecca. Many contrast Malcolm X with Dr. King in such a way that vilified him, creating an image of a racist, hate-mongering separatist.
Read the book to realize how wrong that image is.
Related and highly recommended: Black Power: The Politics of Liberation
6.12.2008
picture of the day
This picture came from a slide show about an architect who designed an apartment as one giant scavenger hunt involving hidden clues in furniture and walls, poems behind wall panels, and that even forced the children's friends to crack the code seen in the picture. So awesome.
new track world record
While neither of us were hurdlers at Oberlin, we both were obsessive runners. The world record in the 110-meter hurdles has just been broken, by a man only 21 years old (and not the 2004 Olympic champion). It is the second short-distance event record to be broken in the last two weeks, setting the stage for a potentially exciting schedule of races at the Olympics in August. Kara Goucher, former NCAA 3000m, 5000m, and cross country champion, has already set the American half-marathon record (beating Paula Radcliffe's time!) and set a personal record in the mile this year. With so many young and new faces on the track and field scene, could we possibly overcome the doping scandals that have tarnished what little excitement there was for this sport in the U.S.?
The trials for the track and field events are scheduled for the end of June and beginning of July; as long as people are on their game for these races, it looks like the U.S. could really bring home some metal in track this year!
The trials for the track and field events are scheduled for the end of June and beginning of July; as long as people are on their game for these races, it looks like the U.S. could really bring home some metal in track this year!
Happy Loving Day!!
In honor of the day that celebrates interracial couples and the Supreme Court decision that did away with the prohibitive laws against said couples, I thought this throwback from my childhood was appropriate. Ah, to have the King of Pop back again...
PS- Happy Birthday, Ry!!
In honor of the day that celebrates interracial couples and the Supreme Court decision that did away with the prohibitive laws against said couples, I thought this throwback from my childhood was appropriate. Ah, to have the King of Pop back again...
PS- Happy Birthday, Ry!!
extra padding in the wallet or straight to the piggy?
Have you gotten your stimulus check yet? I haven't and I only know a couple of people who have. My inside connection on the Hill says that there was a glitch in the system, so anyone who filed their taxes online and had direct deposit for their returns are the last on the list and will be getting their checks by mail.
So if you have gotten it, what have you done with it? Are you actually boosting the economy? Have you even thought about what you would do with it? Suze Orman would probably tell you to save it, but isn't it kind of like a gift card for spending? Hopefully it will achieve what politicians are hoping for-- stimulating the economy (times are looking dim, even in sunny, rich California). I'd agree with Krugman though who says it's bad economic policy, but the best democrats could do. I guess we'll see what happens. . .
So if you have gotten it, what have you done with it? Are you actually boosting the economy? Have you even thought about what you would do with it? Suze Orman would probably tell you to save it, but isn't it kind of like a gift card for spending? Hopefully it will achieve what politicians are hoping for-- stimulating the economy (times are looking dim, even in sunny, rich California). I'd agree with Krugman though who says it's bad economic policy, but the best democrats could do. I guess we'll see what happens. . .
6.11.2008
picture of the day
I frequent the NY Times slide shows; there are generally some great images of all kinds of different people, places, and events. This slideshow was great because it reminded me of a more upscale version of an Oberlin party or something: part hilarious, part comforting. Plus, when I saw this picture, the woman on the right kind of reminded me of our friend, MDH, and it made me smile. So, it's my picture of the day, a new daily post I suppose.
more tennis
Just a short post to add to the comment stream from ap's tennis write-up because I think everyone should see the latest cover of Ebony.
Serena is bangin'.
Serena is bangin'.
6.10.2008
marquer l'histoire
I promised my sister that I'd blog about tennis, the men's finals in particular, because it was so cool to watch Rafa at his best. Nadal played Federer in the finals on the clay court at Roland Garros in Paris this past Sunday. Unlike the long, close match at Wimbeldon last year, Rafa beat Federer pretty fast in 6-1 6-3 6-0. Everyone seems to love Federer, the suave Swiss who pretty much always has control over the match he's playing (except when he had mono this past Australian Open) so I couldn't help but hope the Spaniard underdog would win. It was bittersweet though seeing Federer fall so fast and hard, especially since he's vying for Sampras' career grand slam title record and needs 2 more to tie it, 3 to beat it. Of course I want him to beat it, because Sampras is annoying AND a republican.
I'm a big fan of the Williams sisters and neither of them were in the final, so I'm not going to comment on the women's match. Dinara Safina is fun to watch with her attitude and huge comebacks, but I need to see a little more of her before becoming a fan.
I'm a big fan of the Williams sisters and neither of them were in the final, so I'm not going to comment on the women's match. Dinara Safina is fun to watch with her attitude and huge comebacks, but I need to see a little more of her before becoming a fan.
6.06.2008
AP's book pick
George Soros came out with a quick book this Spring about the current financial crisis and how it fits into his analysis of the evolution of finance since he started out on his own in London in 1947. He does a great job of not only explaining the credit crisis, but also his philosophical ideas that relate to the human element that is inseparable from markets and how people behave. He definitely wrote quickly, which shows in his writing, but it's worth the 160 pages and a couple of afternoons of reading.
for those of us starting jobs/internships this summer
ok, i stole this from fashionista, but i think it's a good list to follow this summer.
"Flip-flops, Crocs, ripped jeans, denim shorts, chipped nails, exposed lingerie, and makeup experiments." - Meredith Melling-Burke's list of fashion don'ts for her interns, from Style.com.
"Flip-flops, Crocs, ripped jeans, denim shorts, chipped nails, exposed lingerie, and makeup experiments." - Meredith Melling-Burke's list of fashion don'ts for her interns, from Style.com.
6.03.2008
obies in the news
Ok, well, maybe not in the actual news, but after they blow up from being on our blog, they probably will be in national media outlets.
A former teammate of mine and ap's has created a magazine with two other Oberlin students. I was really impressed when MDH gave me a copy of the first edition, and just wanted to share the online version with others. Keep in mind this was all created while taking a full semester of classes!
A former teammate of mine and ap's has created a magazine with two other Oberlin students. I was really impressed when MDH gave me a copy of the first edition, and just wanted to share the online version with others. Keep in mind this was all created while taking a full semester of classes!
6.02.2008
a long time gone
Yes, we are fully aware that it has been almost a month since our last post. There are many reasons for this:
AP had finals and then senior week and then graduation! She starts work in two weeks and then will be considered a full-time member of the real world.
B had a huge, time sensitive project due at work that was taking up her evenings. She then began the move from her apartment to her Dad's basement in order to save money for the summer before she joins ap in the bay area. Which leads me to our next news:
Since ap has gone back to the bay, she is starting the apartment search for the two of us. As of 11:30 p.m. EST yesterday, she had found "the perfect apartment". B is anxiously waiting to hear about said apartment, but fully trusts ap's judgment.
Things are beginning to settle down for the two of us, and afterwards, we hope to be back in full force.
AP had finals and then senior week and then graduation! She starts work in two weeks and then will be considered a full-time member of the real world.
B had a huge, time sensitive project due at work that was taking up her evenings. She then began the move from her apartment to her Dad's basement in order to save money for the summer before she joins ap in the bay area. Which leads me to our next news:
Since ap has gone back to the bay, she is starting the apartment search for the two of us. As of 11:30 p.m. EST yesterday, she had found "the perfect apartment". B is anxiously waiting to hear about said apartment, but fully trusts ap's judgment.
Things are beginning to settle down for the two of us, and afterwards, we hope to be back in full force.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
