Escapades of reason

One of the funniest news clips I've ever read

2009-03-31T19:18:00.000-07:00

The wisdom of Solomon

2009-03-23T15:34:00.000-07:00

So I'm driving down to the grocery store to buy some garlic for dinner. Champ's in the back seat sticking his head out the window, ears flopping, enjoying the afternoon sun. The sky's approaching azure and I've got some classic rock on. All is right in the world.

Now, normally when I'm in my groove there's no disturbing me. (I can drive right past my house when I'm grooving...and often do.) But today, as I'm pulling into the parking lot on the backside of the store, I pass a couple of vans that catch my attention. The first is a salmon-colored minivan with a lady driver. The second is a big, rusty Econoline with a man at the wheel. What caught my attention was how CLOSE they were driving! They're so close that, at first, I think the minivan's towing the Econoline. After I pass, though, I figure out I'm seeing a case of road rage, so I quickly flip around and follow them back onto the road just outside the parking lot.

By the time I get there the Econoline's parked at a weird angle in front of the minivan. Not exactly blocking it but close enough. The guy driver's standing alongside the woman's door, gesturing angrily. There's a Good Samaritan--an old guy--trying to help out, and a number of cars inching past since the guy's blocked off three-quarters of the road. I pull over behind the minivan and get out but don't approach. I'm not sure what's going on, but I want to be there to intervene just in case Mr Econoline goes nutso.

Econoline sees me and waves me off, saying, "You don't have to be here!" I ignore him and keep watching.

Apparently, 1) the lady in the van was blocking the exit to the parking lot because she was busy talking on her cell. 2) The guy pulled up behind her and honked. 3)The lady brandished her middle finger at him. 4) The guy followed her out of the parking lot and blocked off traffic to yell at her.

As I pick up the details, I'm torn about what to do. On the one hand, the lady was being inconsiderate with her car and her cell phone, and then compounded it by being obscene (with her daughter in the car, by the way). On the other hand, the guy was aggressive with his vehicle, inconsiderate of other drivers, and an all-around ass. Eventually, the lady wrote down his license plate and the guy let her drive off.

I'm still not sure if I did the right thing. I wasn't afraid of the guy, so I wasn't holding back out of fear; and I also wasn't there without reason: I would've stepped in if things had gone south.

...but, ultimately, I hate NOT doing anything: it leaves me feeling I've done something wrong or participated in the fruckus somehow.

I wonder what Solomon would have done?

Weighty Issues

2009-02-16T06:33:00.001-08:00

Hey, everyone's got to lay off Jessica Simpson for putting on weight!

She says she's HAPPY! And her boyfriend, Tony Romo, says he loves that she's willing to relax and eat a steak.

It's not like the media doesn't over-emphasize the importance of weight: giving everyone unrealistic ideals and self-confidence issues. Now they have to rip on someone who's willing to say she's happy anyway...

Way to reinforce the skinny=happy issue among the populace.

Media sucks.

What is virginity worth?

2009-01-26T15:45:00.000-08:00

I read on CNN about a girl, "Natalie Dylan," a 22-year-old selling her virginity online. Apparently her top bid is $3.8 million from a 39-year-old Australian, though she's holding out for more.

Now obviously this amounts to prostitution, and at least she admits it.

I don't think this says anything about society, really. This isn't exactly an everyday occurrence. That's why it's newsworthy: Because 1) a virgin is willing to sell her virginity, and 2) a man is willing to pay her $3.8 million dollars to take her virginity. So that's what I took from it...that there are opportunists out there and eccentric millionaires with too much money.

But that's not what Martha Kempner, vice president of the Sexuality Information and Education Council, took from it. Ms. Kempner reportedly feels that telling a young woman to stay "pure" misses the point:

"By putting the emphasis there, [on virginity], we're actually devaluing the rest of women, the rest of her, and the rest of her sexuality for the rest of her life."

I disagree. I don't think there's anything wrong with valuing virginity. When we value virginity we aren't actually valuing virginity...paradoxically enough we are valuing sex. We are emphasizing appropriate sex--and not just the first time but every time from then on.

Our problem as a culture/society is not overvaluing virginity. It's undervaluing appropriate sexual relationships.

A passion worth dying for

2009-01-11T12:47:00.000-08:00

I just finished watching Man on Wire, a documentary about Philippe Petit, the French high wire artist who broke into the World Trade Center and tightrope walked between the two towers for 45 minutes. It's a beautiful and well-made film that really put me into the mind of Petit and his accomplices.

Immediately after removing Man on Wire from the DVD player, I put another documentary in: Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man, about Timothy Treadwell, whose passion for grizzly bears and seasonal trips to Alaska ultimately led to his being killed and eaten by grizzlies. I'm only five minutes into the movie I'm already annoyed with Treadwell. He comes across as reckless and foolhardy. Having such a complete turnaround made me feel bad...but am I wrong?

It got me wondering: When is a passion worthwhile? When is it worth chasing a dream even if it kills you? Ever?

I can think of a few notable examples: Steve Irwin, the croc hunter; Dian Fossey (in Gorillas in the Mist); and Chris McCandless (Into the Wild). What makes them all similar is that, with the exception of Dian Fossey, none of them were engaged in a cause when they died (Petit is still alive, by the way.)

Most people can understand the concept of dying for a cause--like a war or a profession (e.g. firefighting). But if someone dies doing something most of us consider a hobby or an interest...are they an artist or just an idiot? Was their death meaningless?

At least they had passion. No one can deny that. But is that all they had?

Freud

2008-12-07T18:02:00.000-08:00

I finally got around to writing some comments on my last blog entry. Sorry it took so long. Also, sorry about the typos.

One of my favorite professors once said: "If you aren't occasionally kept up all night thinking, you're not thinking about things deeply enough."

I haven't been kept up by my thoughts for a long, long time.

Chrissa sometimes complains I'm on "auto pilot". I would describe it as "allowing the world to pass by." The thing is, I don't think that's the problem right now. I feel I am engaging things: I'm listening, I'm focused.

The problem these days is that nothing seems to be working right. Everything's broken. Things that were so easy are now very difficult--even smiling. I only remember feeling this way 3x before: my sophomore year of high school, my mission, and my senior year of college. All three times I was going through identity crises. (Freud enter stage right)

What makes it worse is that when I get like this I stop doing the things that help me get OUT of it. I stop writing letters or writing in my journal. I don't exercise and my diet takes a nose dive.

So that's where I'm at. If you check out Chrissa's most recent post you'll see we're both in the same boat. That's also why I haven't posted anything for a long time.

Anyway. Crap.

(Freud exit stage left)

A Mormon's views on Proposition 8

2008-11-15T14:06:00.000-08:00

I never heard about Prop. 8 until a week or two before the election. I didn't think much of it at the time. I was reading CNN.com and saw my church (the Mormon Church) and the Catholic Church were backing the initiative. This wasn't too surprising, considering the churches' views on homosexuality.

Like I said, I didn't think much of it until after the election. Then all hell broke loose.

I was initially surprised by the reaction. How come so many people are protesting the Church directly, I thought, when Yes on 8 was a political coalition? Then I heard that the Church had helped raise a large percentage of the $37 million for Yes on 8, and Mormon volunteers had manned phone banks, etc. Considering the fact that Prop. 8 just barely squeaked by (52 to 48)...I began to see why we were being singled out.

If you've read my blog long enough, you know that I'm torn when it comes to gay marriage. But I'm not torn in my views about Prop. 8.

Prop. 8 passed, fair and square. A majority of Californians voted in favor of it. The opponents of 8 can try again next election. That's their right. Putting up signs that say "F**k Mormons," (allegedly) sending envelopes of white powder to Mormon temples, and making a site blacklisting Prop. 8 doners is not the way to go. This is an attempt to terrorize the population. I would hope that the majority of LGBT supporters are also against such tactics.

If I were in California I would have voted for Prop. 8--despite my mixed views on homosexuality. If it were just a case of letting our homosexual friends and neighbors get married, I'm all for it. Sign me up.

The problem, as I see it, is not whether or not consenting adults should be allowed to marry. The problem is that--if homosexual marriage is legalized--its legalization will be used as a weapon to strip churches of their tax-protected status. Churches that don't believe homosexuality is kosher (forgive the expression) will be sued.

I think the backlash we're seeing now against the Mormon Church is only the beginning.

Where the Wild Things Are

2008-09-15T11:48:00.001-07:00

I was able to hear a segment of an NPR interview with Maurice Sendak a few days ago. I overheard Sendak describing a book he illustrated a few years ago called Brundibar. The only work I know Sendak for is Where the Wild Things Are--one of my favorite stories as a kid.

I was surprised to hear that Maurice Sendak is Jewish. I don't know why. After hearing it, I thought, "Well, yeah, that makes sense." But then I thought, "WHY does that make sense?" Because his book deals with escapism? Because it has a dark feel to it? Because the story is full of monsters? (Sendak was born in 1927 and lived during WWII)

I love Jewish culture. I love what they've given to the world. Their art. Their literature. Their philosophy. Their humor. The culture intrigues me even even more because I am not part of it and can never be in a way more intrinsic than other cultures.

A Jewish author, Daniel Goldhagen, once claimed that there is no such thing as a philo-semite...only anti-semites that love Jews. I disagree. His reasoning was that philos and antis both, in the end, do the same thing: treat Jewish people as a race apart. I think that to love or hate anything, you must treat it as something apart. But, anyway, I'm still wrestling with the idea.

One thing is certain, I feel sorry for them. Brundibár was a children's opera written by a Jewish Czech composer, Hans Krása. The opera was originally performed in a concentration camp by Jewish children performers--many of whom would end up being killed in Auschwitz. The character Brundibár is the antagonist in the story, an evil organ grinder who symbolized Hitler and was ultimately chased away.

The irony writes itself.

I don't like Westerns

2008-08-28T20:52:00.000-07:00

On the stepladder of movie genres, Westerns are near the bottom: above WWII flicks but below foreign romances.

I mean, ANY movie has the ability to break the mold and surprise you if the director's any good. But it's like Fantasy or Sci-Fi literature: the cards are stacked against it from the start. Get too fancy and you're not "traditional enough" for the genre. But follow the norms and suddenly you're run-of-the-mill or gimmicky.

BEFORE tonight, my Top 5 Westerns were

1) Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
2) The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly
3) Unforgiven
4) The Ballad of Gregorio Cortez
5) Silverado

But, tonight, I watched a movie that dethroned them all! I had just watched 3:10 to Yuma last night (Russell Crowe, Christian Bale), and it was pretty silly. So I wasn't expecting much from tonight's movie, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (Brad Pitt, Casey Affleck)...

Let me just say IT WAS AWESOME...(3 hours long)...but AWESOME!

It was nominated for two Academy Awards in 2008: Best Achievement in Cinematography and Best Supporting Actor (Casey Affleck). It deserved the first (There Will be Blood won) and, if it weren't for Javier Bardem, would have deserved the second.

I don't want to go on too long about it, but: In one scene a shootout takes place in a small room between two gunmen who really don't want to be getting shot at. One's scrambling across the floor and both are basically just pointing and shooting. They're much more scared than angry...probably thinking, "What did I get myself into?" It really convinces you how frightening the situation would be.

The biggest sell on the movie? I finished it an hour ago and am still thinking about it. It forces you to think about romanticized violence in a way that A History of Violence or Natural Born Killers did not. What kind of Western makes you THINK?!

Two thumbs up. Oh, and did I mention Brad Pitt was phenomenal?

My favor-eet animal

2008-08-03T20:16:00.000-07:00

Actually my favorite animal is the dog...but my favorite NON-domesticated animal is, by far, the camel.

It is so amazing to me that camels ever evolved or were created. They are so perfectly adapted to their environment. How do you dream up an animal with fatty deposits in its back that can go two weeks without water and sweat off 25% of its total body weight without dying?! Craaazy.

I love the expression on their faces: like they're always smiling. I like how they growl and complain whenever they are forced to kneel down or forced to get up. They remind me of grouchy old men--and yet they have the most beautiful oil drop eyes and the softest, curliest fur. I actually had the opportunity to ride camels one day in Jordan, near Wadi Rum. I ended up taking my shoes and socks off and tying them onto the saddle, then just letting my feet rub the fur all day long. And the lolling, rolling motion and the sun makes you really drowsy and relaxed.

Coolest animals ever. Good job, God or Darwin.

100 Things Jared

2008-07-09T14:16:00.000-07:00

I've decided to take up the guantlet.

1) I'm 6 feet tall, but everyone thinks I'm taller.
2) I want to lose 20 lbs and be "lean" instead of "stocky".
3) I usually like myself.
4) I'm almost never angry or depressed.
5) Life's too beautiful to be depressed
6) ...even its dark aspects.
7) I write bad poetry.
8) I've always lost myself in books.
9) My favorite food are frozen burritos.
10) I don't share my writing except with certain people and only occasionally.
11) I keep a journal.
12) I wish I was brave enough to write everything in it.
13) I'm too afraid of what people will think when they read it.
14) I've almost destroyed my journals.
15) I never go back and read them.
16) I make lists.
17) I make To-Do lists on scraps of paper, Word documents, etc.
18) I eventually combine them into Master To-Do lists.
19) I have incomplete To-Do items from 10 years ago.
20) My favorite books are Watership Down, Lord of the Flies, and The Fountainhead.
21) They've remained unchanged for 8 years.
22) I've read Watership Down 7 or 8 times. I've read Lord of the Flies 14 times. I've only read The Fountainhead once.
23) My favorite Pop Tarts are Brown Sugar Cinnamon.
24) My favorite color is gray.
25) I fall asleep when people cut my hair.
26) My favorite TV show is "Mythbusters".
27) I love to cook (I feel like I'm creating something ex nihilo).
29) I shave my arms and legs with hair clippers.
30) I sleep with a fan on.
31) I have Rocky American flag shorts.
32) I surprise Chrissa, occasionally, by wearing them.
33) I jump out, do a boxing dance, sing the Rocky theme song, then run out.
34) I have "baby fever".
35) I'm already naming my kids.
36) I have insomnia.
37) When I get it, I have to sleep on the floor.
38 I was agnostic from high school through college.
39 I'm Mormon, now, but still have doubts about God and heaven.
40) I'm DEEPLY pariotic.
41) Cooked peas and carrots make me throw up.
42) I was a vegetarian for almost 2 months.
43) I don't like to kill things...even insects.
44) And yet, I like to deer hunt.
45) I justify it philosophically.
46) I like crossword puzzles and logic puzzles.
47) My favorite magazine is National Geographic.
48) I used to look for patterns in license plates until Chrissa said it was a sign of schizophrenia.
49) I sometimes feel schizophrenic.
50) I love word etymologies.
51) I love to camp.
52) I used to want to run away and hitchhike around the world
53) ...but I didn't want my family to worry.
54) ...and now I have a job.
55) I love vivid dreams and even nightmares.
56) I kept a dream journal for over a year.
57) My favorite building is the Blue Mosque, in Istanbul.
58) I love earthquakes.
59) (even though I'm afraid when I'm in one)
60) I'm afraid of deep water.
61) I swim further out than anyone else.
62) I do it to face my fear.
63) I love to sail. I love the ocean.
64) My dream would be to live in our cottage at Nags Head, NC, year round.
65) I want to visit Switzerland, Ireland, Scotland, Prague and Budapest.
66) I fell in love with my best friend
67) She's more gorgeous than Nicole Kidman, Angelina Jolie, and Juliette Binoche, all rolled into one.
68) My favorite thing about her is her laugh.
69) My favorite dessert is a three-way tie between Robert Redford Dessert, Strawberry Shortcake, and Better-Than-Sex Cake.
70) Though a good milk shake beats them all.
71) I think of myself as a movie and music connoisseur...but I'm probably just a snob.
72) I keep a list of all the books I've ever read.
73) There are 540 books on it.
74) I'm not at all afraid of heights.
75) I'm not at all afraid of death.
76) I used to sunbathe in the undeveloped land behind my house.
77) I love to be naked, but only by myself.
78) I'm not a night or a morning person.
79) I love schmoozing people's parents.
80) My favorite poets are TS Eliot, Billy Collins, Pablo Neruda, and Stephen Crane.
81) My favorite sculptor is Rodin.
82) I adore scars and stories.
83) The best feeling is when it's cold out and I have a blanket.
84) I can hear very quiet sounds, like background music from the kitchen, in a restaurant.
85) I rely too much on other people's opinions.
86) I don't like infinity or eternity.
87) I want a tattoo but am disgusted by them.
88) I can't grow a mustache or a beard.
89) My first movie memory is Pinocchio.
90) I cried when the whale appeared.
91) It's one of my very first memories.
92) My favorite place to bathe is under the stars.
93) I can't STAND typos.
94) I have no sense of direction.
95) Dandelions are my favorite flowers.
96) I've gotten in 2 fist fights in my life.
97) My favorite cars are 'stangs and Jeeps.
98) The quickest way to make me uncomfortable is to talk behind someone's back.
99) I'm the 5th of 7 kids.
100) I talk too much.

Our fascination with vampires

2008-07-05T22:45:00.000-07:00

Ok, so I'm reading Stephenie Meyer's Twilight. What's it to you?!

No, really, it's pretty interesting ... and not just because I'm a 15-year-old girl at heart. Granted, the writing can use some work. And granted, I don't get anything out of Edward's beautiful topaz-colored eyes. But Ms. Meyers took vampirism in a new direction with this one, and I like that.

I can't say too much without giving plot away, so I won't. But it's got me thinking about vampires and our fascination with them.

As far as I can tell, the reason we are intrigued by vampire stories more than other monster stories is because vampires are less "monstrous" than other monsters, like zombies or werewolves or Swamp Thing. Who wants to be a zombie? Vampires are human in form, but with superhuman abilities. Wouldn't you want to be able to move incredibly fast, or fly, or be impervious to nearly everything?

As I see it, the only real drawbacks to being a vampire is the fact that vampires are, 1) evil, and 2) killers.

In response: If you take religion out of the equation they are no longer evil--they are merely instinctual. And, as to the latter point, well ... most of us still eat meat even though we feel bad for the chicken.

Creation Museum

2008-07-02T20:28:00.000-07:00

For anyone who doesn't know, Chrissa and I live in Ohio. Ohio's a nice, modern state (ranked 29th on the "Loss of natural teeth" list) ... but some aspects of it are a bit different. For instance, religion. A lot of folks here are saturated with religion. Or, rather, for them it's religion-as-culture. They own the t-shirt ... they listen to the music.

About an hour away is the infamous Creation Museum, in Kentucky. My understanding is that the museum portrays

 The earth being 6,000 years old
 Dinosaurs living in the Garden of Eden
 A refutation of some (or all) aspects of Evolution

The museum created a big stink when it opened last year. Many people were hostile to the idea: saying it would create a generation of kids who refuse to recognize scientific fact.

My personal view? It's a private museum, so they can pretty much do what they want. Even so, I'd guess its displays will A) reinforce the beliefs already taught by kids' parents or B) not influence them at all. Even though I, personally, don't believe in Young Earth Creationism, I arrived at that conclusion through public education and personal studies. I don't see why other people can't do the same.

Sci-fi, revisited

2008-06-29T21:08:00.000-07:00

I started hitting the Netflix list again recently. One of my first deliveries was Sunshine, a Danny Boyle sci-fi movie. I'd never seen any Danny Boyle movies before, but I'd heard positive things about Shallow Grave and Trainspotting. This movie sucked.

My rating? 2 stars. Chrissa gave it a negative 9.

It was good at first ... your typical psychological sci-fi movie. But then it deteriorates into this bizarre horror movie. I don't know. Maybe it's just a problem I have with sci-fi. As a movie or book genre, sci-fi's a tough sell. Even so, my Top 10 (space-travel-related) sci-fi movies:

10) Stargate
Despite the wooly camels, I actually liked this movie.

9) Serenity
Best line: "Do you really think any of us is gonna get through this?"
"Well, I might."

8) Mission to Mars
Fairly realistic. Gotta give 'em props for that.

7) Pitch Black
What the--?! Vin Diesel?!

6) Star Trek (series)
I'm sorry ... I can't put Star Trek any higher. They used a WHALE to save the earth!!

5) Contact
Best space travel on film.

4) Star Wars (series)
Enough said. Still, the best space battles ever.

3) Alien
I promise to never go into an air conditioning grate hunting an alien.

2) 2001: A Space Odyssey
"I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission. And I want to help you."

1) Aliens
I want to be a Space Marine.

TV memories

2008-06-11T20:34:00.000-07:00

Memory #1
During sleepovers when I was a kid, TV was part of the Saturday morning ritual: We'd wake up dang early and sit on the carpet with our blankets, dogs, and a big bowl of cereal, watching all the cartoons. Ahh, childhood. Did I mention we were 16? Shows: G.I. Joe, Transformers, He-Man, The Smurfs, and an anime cartoon, M.A.S.K. Also loved the educational commercials: Cap'n O.G. Readmore, School House Rock! and this funny guy wearing a body suit who walked through a giant body. (They don't make 'em like they used to...)

Memory #2
When Chrissa and I ran away to Alaska, we stayed at a Bed and Breakfast/crack house with a vintage TV and shag carpet TV room. Our TV set was from the 60s and only had three channels. For lack of anything better to do, we'd watch TV every night with our pothead friend, Rob, who had dreadlocks and was 7' tall. Shows: Wheel of Fortune, That '70s Show, and Jeopardy! I've never felt so relaxed as I did living 1000 miles from civilization, in company housing, watching fuzzy television on an old tv set.

Memory #3
When I joined the AF, they sent me on a 6-week program with other new officers, down in Montgomery, AL. The course was easy and the military has a long tradition of alcohol abuse, so most of my classmates would go get drunk every night, or get drunk in the hall and play garbage can soccer. I had a lot of time on my hands. I ended up cooking mac and cheese in my Mr. Coffee and watching The Discovery Channel, History Channel, National Geographic, and Sci-Fi. Shows: Mythbusters, Seconds from Disaster, and Ghost Hunters. Yea, for learning!

Memory #4
Chrissa and I decided to save a buck while living in Texas. We paid $5 a month for basic cable. Through a gizmo glitch somewhere, that included The Food Network. (Ha! Ha! FOOLS!) Chrissa and I became FN junkies. We never thought watching someone else cook could be so interesting (though we noticed a correlation between our interest and our hunger level). Shows: 30 Minute Meals, Good Eats, Unwrapped, and Iron Chef America.

The best computer game ever!

2008-06-06T19:53:00.000-07:00

No, it's not Halo 3 or GTA. It's not Zelda or Mario Kart. It's not even Lode Runner, Dig Dug, or Pit Fall.

It's The Oregon Trail!

We used to play Oregon Trail during "computer time" at elementary. We had a room full of Apple II computers, with green monitors just one step up from an Etch A Sketch. Only half the class would come for a session, so most of us got our own computer.

Oregon Trail was an educational game with two-bit graphics of a wagon and an ox team. The oxen would move their legs and the landscape would scroll across. The graphics were nothing, really. What mattered was the text! It was basically a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure game, with you being the wagonmaster. You had to hunt, choose trails, buy supplies, and bury the dead as you made your way to Oregon.

I know that it was a pretty hokey game ... but I remember it with a lot of nostalgia because it was one of the first experiences I had with a computer and because it was a game that required a lot of imagination. I think about that when I see these obese couch potato kids these days. It almost makes me wish we still played sandlot baseball or shot marbles.

Ok, now I know you video game purists are upset that I referred to Oregon Trail as the best game ever, when we all know it's not. Here's my Top 10, to finish off the post:

10) Dr. Mario
9) Lemmings
8) Mortal Kombat
7) Road Rash
6) Worms 3D
5) Warcraft II
4) Madden NFL 2003
3) Mario Kart
2) Tetris
1) Super Mario World

Sign me up

2008-06-04T19:17:00.000-07:00

The Fountain of Youth

2007-11-20T16:37:00.000-08:00

If you discovered the Fountain of Youth, would you drink from it?

Heaven

2007-10-30T14:51:00.000-07:00

The belief in an afterlife is part of every religion I know of. Either as a perfect place or a perfect plane of being...

Each religion's afterlife is different, though. Valhalla, for instance, the Hall of the Slain in Norse mythology, is a place where dead warriors await the final battle of Ragnarök. This is like the Greco-Roman Elysium, the land of eternal spring set aside for the offspring of the gods. The Egyptians had their paradise of reeds; and the Christians, our Paradise of clouds.

I'm sure there are as many concepts of heaven as there are people. When I was 15, my friend and I decided heaven was an endless ski slope...broken only by the occasional chateau-dotted valley or hot chocolate-serving ski lodge.

My heaven, now, would be a place of neverending ease. A beautiful paradise containing every clime and weather. With no borders. No money or time...no deadlines. Where you can spend every day with your friends and family, whiling the time away playing card games or reading a book...or celebrating Christmas.

J.K. Rowling comes out of the closet

2007-10-23T15:00:00.000-07:00

I've decided to weigh-in on the news that Dumbledore is gay. If you haven't guessed, I've got mixed feelings about this one...

On the one hand, J.K. Rowling is the author of Harry Potter and has the right to do what she wants with her characters. If this was an aspect of Albus Dumbledore she wanted him to have, that's her right.

On the other hand, I had always considered Albus Dumbledore to be asexual...or rather, above sexuality. Dumbledore was a higher being: consumed by the pursuit of knowledge and the defeat of evil. He was iconic in that way--like Gandalf in Lord of the Rings. Could you imagine Gandalf having a love interest? But Dumbledore lost that icon status around Book Five. He suddenly became human. As the series progressed you saw he wasn't all-knowing, all-powerful, or even all-good. He made mistakes. He was subject to banal passion like anger, jealousy, and pride. The Dumbledore of Book Seven was not the Dumbledore of Book One. So Rowling's current revelation that Dumbledore was once love-struck for another wizard is, really, not as earthshattering as it would once have been.

The main reason I'm disappointed with Rowling is because of when she chose to make her revelation: waiting until after the books have all been released. Was it because she didn't want to affect her book sales, or was it her little joke she pulled on everybody?

Am I being too harsh? Maybe, but think about this. She's not stupid: she had to know this would be a big deal to a lot of people. So, the question is, why...did...she...wait?

The ugliest dogs...ever!

2007-10-17T18:24:00.000-07:00

I'm a dog person. I love dogs.

I love them because they're useful and because they're cool. They are very cool animals. Even the idea of dogs is cool. Here we have an animal we've engineered to be a part of the human world. ISN'T THAT WEIRD? They're social, like us...even "personable": with different personality types and temperaments. They're also amazingly athletic and intelligent. Having Champ (my dog) is like having the 6 Million Dollar Man living in my house.

The thing is I don't like ALL breeds of dogs. I can't understand lap dogs, for instance. I have friends with lap dogs and, although I like their dogs, I would never want one. In selecting such a small dog, you've taken away so many aspects of its dogginess: its athleticism, for instance, or its role as a protector. These dogs truly are "toys." It's like getting a baby that will never grow up. Plus we've got these weird designer breeds like labradoodles and cockapoos. These breeds make no sense. Most breeds make sense. They served a function at one time. And which is the worst breed for this by far? Pugs! Pugs are obnoxious little dogs. And very ugly. Why would someone breed an ugly dog?! Why would someone want an ugly dog?

Pugs invoke sympathy, sure. They make you laugh. But shouldn't we feel a twinge of guilt for having created a breed to be the butt of jokes? They can't even breathe through their flat noses! Honestly...to me pugs engender pathos and a little bit of disgust. Sorry pug owners. It's just too bad I had to be the one to tell you this...

The incomparable John Cusack

2007-10-09T14:48:00.000-07:00

I don't know what it is about John Cusack that makes me like him so much. He's one of my favorite actors despite the fact that he's not that good of an actor. As I argued before, for me an actor needs to show versatility to be considered a good actor. But with John Cusack I don't need that, I think because of what he signifies: ordinariness.

John Cusack is not attractive, he doesn't play heroics, and he doesn't show much emotion (by my count he has three: melancholy, yearning, exasperation). But it's BECAUSE OF his everymanity...BECAUSE OF his despondency...that I like him so much. It's as if one of us was cut out of our world and dropped in a movie. That's who he is. He's a paper doll we like to watch in novel situations: Let's see what John Cusack does confronted by the mafia. Let's see what John Cusack does hooked up with Catherine Zeta-Jones. Let's see what John Cusack does as a hit man...

But, at the same time, because he remains aloof and understated despite the craziness of movieland (ex. "Sorry I blew up your mom, Ricky") he takes on this cool, anti-cool quality--which makes us like him even more. We want people to be famous but we don't want them to act that way. He's like that, only in movies too. He's doing cool and interesting things, but he doesn't seem to care.

My favorite two roles for him are as Jonathan Trager (Serendipity) and Martin Blank (Grosse Pointe Blank).

Pale Blue Dot

2007-10-08T10:49:00.000-07:00

I was being particularly nerdy the other day and looking at Space.com and its "Top 10" lists--including everything from "The Top 10 Best Songs About Space" to "Top 10 Alien Abduction Movies Of All Time!"...

One list I looked at was called the "Top 10 Space Science Photos" and they were pretty cool. One photo...the #1 photo, was the Voyager 1 photograph of earth from a billion miles away.

The photograph was called "Pale Blue Dot" by Carl Sagan. He used it as a metaphor for how insignificant or planet is…and how insignificant humans are in relationship to the universe. I guess that's one way to look at it...

I look at that tiny pixel that is the earth, floating in a lake of blackness, and I think one of two things:

1) There is NO WAY that God only created one world in all that immensity of space. There must be more.

2) Our planet is a raft set adrift in space. We’re all we’ve got.

Either way, I don’t think the “pale blue dot” means that we’re insignificant. On the contrary, I think it means we…and our planet…are extremely significant.

Listmania: My just desserts

2007-10-01T14:59:00.000-07:00

A week ago, in a moment of masochistic insanity I bet Chrissa I could go 3 whole months without eating sugary foods...craaazy.

It's been over a week and I'm still on the bet. So I'm doing ok. Sort of. Actually, I'm starting to hallucinate like those guys in the "Starvation Experiment": I'm finding myself a little pre-occupied with dessert. This happened before with meat. When Chrissa and I became flexitarians we found ourselves watching the Food Network A LOT...

So, in the spirit of semi-starvation, I've decided to list my top 10 desserts!

10) Belgian waffles

Breakfast. Dessert. What's NOT to love?

9) Crêpes

See #10.

8) Grandma's 14 Layer Cake

My grandma use to mail us this cake made of paper thin vanilla cake and chocolate frosting. We would typically tear it apart layer by layer to eat it! (Best warmed with a little homemade ice cream...)

7) Tres Leches
White cake sopping with heavy cream, evaporated milk, and sweetened condensed milk. Strawberries on top and a little sugar. Best from Café Rio, in Provo.

6) Strawberry Shortcake

Not on angel food cake. On REAL shortcake with REAL whipped cream!! Angel food cake needs to die! (Not really, but only in the context of strawberry shortcake)

5) Better Than Sex Cake

...More fattening too.

4) Robert Redford Dessert

A little slice of heaven. It's like a giant parfait cup.

3) Tiramisù

I don't know what a ladyfinger is, but I like it.

2) Apple Harvest Pound Cake with Caramel Glaze

The best cake ever! Is it a spice bread?! Is it cake?! I don't know...this cake deserves to be a staple of autumn.

1) Milk Shake

Can't beat the basics. I love that you can eat it with a spoon and then drink it with a straw. And the best thing is when they give you the extra shake in the metal cup.

Welcome Back Kotter

2007-09-26T18:32:00.000-07:00

Chrissa's new blog! (About time...) :)

Theospection: Albert Einstein

2007-09-19T14:04:00.002-07:00

God does not play dice.

Einstein considered himself a deeply religious man and saw a connection between his religion and science. Einstein did not believe that God was an individual. In fact, he was a deist and a bit of a pantheist: he felt God and the Universe were one and, in this vein, felt the mysteries of the Universe were accessible through reason.

As far as personalized religion is concerned, Einstein frankly rejected it: feeling that religion was the product of primitivism. Einstein didn't believe in an independent soul, freedom of will, an afterlife, or divine good and evil. According to Einstein, morality is a purely human affair and without need of a divine law-giver. Nevertheless he was a strict moralist.

Einstein's religion, more than anything, was the impenetrable mystery of the cosmos. In this respect he was the consumate scientist.

Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible laws and connections, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in fact, religious.

______________
Sources: 1 2 3 4 5 6(<- best article)

The Explainer: The autumnal equinox

2007-09-19T14:04:00.001-07:00

'Equinox' comes from the Latin words aequus (equal) and nox (night). What's that mean? It means that, at the equator, the day hours and night hours would be equal: 12 hours each (kind of*).

That's one way to understand an equinox.

Another way to think of it is this: During the spring and summer months, the sun shines more on the northern hemisphere than on the southern hemisphere--hence the longer days. At the autumnal equinox, the sun has come to 'balance' on the equator again and is about to 'cross over' to the southern hemisphere, leaving us with shorter days and them with longer ones.

In an ideal world, the equinox would be the exact moment when the sun crosses from one hemisphere to the other, but this would only work if the sun were a single point in space--which it's not. Because the sun's a giant orb this 'moment' takes 2 1/2 days. The equinox they put on our calendars is the average of that time period.

This year's autumnal equinox, by the way, is the 23rd of September. Fall officially starts on Monday!

______________________

*NOTE: Even if you're standing on the equator during the equinox it won't actually appear like 12 hours of day/12 hours of night. This is because (1) the earth's orbit isn't perfectly circular, (2) the sun is a disc and can be seen even after the centerpoint touches the horizon, and (3) the sky refracts light, so you can see the sun's rays even after it sets. If you did away with these three inconveniences then, yes, it would be a true 'equinox'.

Theospection: Sir Francis Bacon

2007-09-18T14:18:00.000-07:00

A little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion.

I've decided to start a Theospection series, where I research different thinkers and give a blurb about their thoughts on God. I'll try to get a wide range of opinions (...and not do them that often). It's for scholarship more than debate.

Sir Francis Bacon is a good philosopher to start my series with: He was a founder of the Empiricist school of thought--attempting to use observation as the foundation of science. He's also attributed with developing the scientific method. In addition to being a scientist, Bacon believed fully in God and felt his own philosophy was a calling to glorify God and religion.

It's important to note, though, that Bacon separated religion and philosophy--saying the two cannot coexist. He felt philosophy was based on reason while faith was based on revelation and is, therefore, irrational. As he said: "the more discordant, therefore, and incredible, the divine mystery is, the more honour is shown to God in believing it, and the nobler is the victory of faith."

In Bacon's essay on atheism, he argues that atheism is founded upon (1) the divisions of religion, (2) the scandals of the priests, (3) profane scoffing of holy matters, and (4) the existence of "learned times" in conjunction with peace and prosperity.

Above all, Bacon felt, "atheism is in all respects hateful...[for] it depriveth human nature of the means to exalt itself above human frailty."

_______
Sources: 1 2 3 4

9/11

2007-09-11T18:37:00.000-07:00

A while ago I was sent a link to Loose Change, a conspiracy website about the September 11th attacks.

The site has since changed and looks nothing like it did when I first saw it. The most engaging thing was the video (79 min).

I'm not a conspiracy buff but it did make me think.

I have since decided that the conspiracy theory is too preposterous, especially when the reality of it actually makes more sense: that America's foreign policy and the fall of the Soviet Union have left us, precariously, as top dog and a viable target for the world's terrorist organizations. These elements have taken their product international and we are the prime competitor. There is no need for a conspiracy.

That being said, I ran across a pretty good video from Dutch television explaining why the Twin Towers collapsed the way it did. Enjoy.

Disney Roles for Minorities

2007-09-09T18:15:00.000-07:00

The other day Chrissa mentioned that Disney had never released an animated feature film with a black person as the main character.

I brought up Song of the South which I vaguely remember from when I was young. I looked it up, though, and was surprised to discover that it's a live-action film intermixed with cartoons animals (like Mary Poppins)...so I don't think it should count. Besides, the movie is considered quite racist.

So I started thinking about it and wondering how many "special interest groups" * Disney has given a semi-main role to in their full-length cartoons. I've decided to only count movies from The Little Mermaid onward: as these would be the most effected by the latest political correctness movement. Here's what I came up with:

Black: Mufasa/Young Nala/Rafiki/Sarabi/Shenzi the Hyena, The Lion King (1994); The Muses, Hercules (1997)

Hispanic/Latin American: Banzai the Hyena, The Lion King (1994); The entire cast (not really), The Emperor's New Groove (2000)

Far Eastern/Oriental: The entire cast (minus Mushu), Mulan (1998)

Middle Eastern: The entire cast (minus Genie), Aladdin (1992)

Pacific Islander/Polynesian: Lilo/Nani/David, Lilo & Stitch (2002)

Native American/Eskimo: Pocahontas, et al, Pocahontas (1995); Kenai/Koda, Brother Bear (2003)

Gyspy: Esmeralda/Quasimodo/Frollo/et al The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996)

Handicapped: Quasimodo, The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996)

Homosexual: Scar (allegedly), The Lion King (1994); Victor (possibly), The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996); Hermes, Hercules (1997)

Orphan: Aladdin (although he originally was going to have a mother), Aladdin (1992); Quasimodo, The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996); Hercules, Hercules (1997); Tarzan, Tarzan (1999)

* i.e. Groups who have historically received prejudice within the United States. Also, a few others I felt deserving of note. Note: In some cases, I've included characters who were obviously supposed to be ethnic, even if they were played by a Caucasian.

Poem: The Second Coming

2007-09-04T19:01:00.000-07:00

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

--William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)

Deleted Wikipedia articles

2007-08-31T18:58:00.000-07:00

Despite Wikipedia's faults I like the site. I know it's no Encyclopedia Britannica, but it's not designed to be. Its draw is that it has articles about things of little significance and also has no space limitations. It's a giant corkboard with a search feature.

I enjoy browsing Wikipedia. I like clicking on hyperlinks and article after article. As I learn about Dracula, for instance, I might get interested in reading about Vlad the Impaler, which might lead me to learning about the Ottoman Empire, and so on. Knowledge is endless, and encyclopedias show us that.

The other day I came across a Wikipedia page that caught my eye. It's a list of strange articles discovered and deleted by Wikipedia's team of editors. I've cut it down to some of my favorites. Enjoy! (Warning: A couple of articles are racy or un-p.c.)

1) Attack of the fifty foot Hitler
2) Ben Harrison: There was a problem with your search. This is probably temporary; try again in a few moments, or you can search Wikipedia through an external search service:
(yes, that was the article's title.)
3) Birth defects considered snazzy by the FDA
4) Chucking loads of elephant poo at people
5) Ceiling cat
6) Emily's Famous Nacho Recipe
7) Famous watermelons
8) I just poured HOT GRITS down my pants
9) Jesus built the Pyramids
10) List of bands beginning with the word "lemon"
11) List of people who are alive or are dead
12) List of people who died with tortoises on their heads
13) List of those who are "far left" according to Bill O'Reilly
14) List of words that rhyme with Oompa Loompa
15) Manly ways to eat fruit
16) MASSIVE TRAFFIC CONE SHAPED ALIENS FROM OUTER SPACE
17) Monkey wedding
18) Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo (this redirected to the Darth Vader page)
19) Putting Salt on a Snail
20) Sometimes the donuts move
21) Some Pretty Good Friends of Mollie
22) The Dog Dies at the End
23) Which Backstreet Boy is Gay
24) Why I Want to Be King of Australia
25) Yak Combing
26) Getting pushed into bananas (Mario Kart)
27) General Pissidness Factor (GPF)
28) GoatSurfing
29) Bush is a jew
30) 22.86 Centimetre Nails
31) Awesome Fest
32) Aqua-hoochie
33) Apeism : Ape worship and the history of Apeism
34) Ballad of Saddam Hussein

That's all. I think there should be an Awesome Fest...

Religion as the basis for civilization

2007-08-28T18:28:00.000-07:00

I work next to a guy who's non-denominational, bordering on anti-religion. We've had a conversation a couple of times about religion, in general...

He feels religious philosophy and morality are not bad, but that religious institutions are almost inherently so: he feels religions lead to intolerance, persecution, and conflict.

In some ways I agree with him. On the other hand I think we find reason enough to kill and hate each other without religion. I credit religion for its positive aspects and try not to blame it for the way people misuse it.

One theme that's come up a few times is whether religion has helped advance civilization or hinder it. My friend feels that the earliest civilizations--Sumer and Babylon--were the products of science and not religion. He would probably point out the domestication of animals, cuneiform, pottery, geometry, architecture, plant domestication and irrigation.

But I think he's forgetting something. The reason cities formed was because people donated time to labor on temples and city walls and irrigation canals to support their priest-kings. Without that excess labor they would never have had surplus food to support their city, feed their king, priests and army. Without those things they would have been destroyed by marauders... Religion provided the impetus for corveé labor: they worked in order to appease the gods and avoid drought, flood, or attack.

Furthermore, priests were the world's first academics and scientists, language was religious in its inception, and law was as much religious as it was political. Babylonian science (including its astronomy and time system) influenced the Greeks. And Babylonian legal codes, combined with Greek philosophy, formed the basis of democracy.

Is it any wonder that the system created in Mesopotamia--cities run by priest-kings--would influence all of western civilization, which continued to be run by "priest-kings" all the way up until the Middle Ages and beyond? Think of the Holy Roman Empire, France, and England.

People will work, yes, but what were they working for if not religion?

Answers from a file box

2007-08-20T19:47:00.000-07:00

I riffled through my file box the other day and came across an essay I wrote called, "Are there limits to the Enlightenment?" It's a good essay, I think. It explains a lot about who I am. Surprisingly, it also gave me an answer to something I've been mulling over for some time.

For anyone who hasn't been reading my posts: Although I'm very liberal about international politics I'm socially conservative when it comes to domestic issues. Though, if you read my posts, you'll also know this incongruity is difficult for me and I've wrestled with it...unsure of how I should feel. For example.

The reason I use homosexual marriage as an example is because it perfectly illustrates my dilemma: I believe people should have the right to choose, even if they don't make the same choice I would make--and yet still don't feel homosexuals should have the right to marry. So how do I justify my opposing viewpoints?...

I found my answer in this essay. Or rather, two answers. The first is this: Consequentialism, the philosophical belief that those actions should be allowed which bring about the most good overall. As applied to the topic at hand, the reason homosexual marriage shouldn't be allowed is because of the impact it would have on society. It has nothing to do with individual rights.

And the second reason I found was this: America's government--the first government to arise from the Enlightenment movement--was never designed to give all rights to its citizens. On the contrary, it only names three self-evident rights: "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". I don't bring this up to bicker about the definition of "the pursuit of happiness". I only mean it to say that the Founding Fathers differentiated "self-evident rights" (as defined in The Declaration of Independence) from government-dictated rights (as defined in The Constitution). The Founders differentiated between individual rights and societal rights.

Or, as I said in my essay, "the issue is [not] one of an individual enjoying all rights which do not infringe on the dictates of another individual, so much as an individual enjoying all rights which do not infringe upon the dictates of society."

I couldn't put it any better.

The anatomy of a revolutionary

2007-08-03T21:29:00.000-07:00

I was thinking about The Motorcycle Diaries the other day, and thinking about Ernesto "Che" Guevara. For anyone who hasn't seen the movie, you should. Among other things, I was impressed to learn that Che, prior to becoming a revolutionary, was a medical student.

That got me thinking about revolutionaries-as-people. What makes them tick? What are their backgrounds? Why wouldn't they conform? I've listed below a few 20th century revolutionaries and their occupation prior to their revolution...

Vladimir Lenin - Lawyer
Joseph Stalin - Seminary student
Adolf Hitler - Failed artist/soldier
Ho Chí Minh - Chef
Emiliano Zapata - Village leader
Pancho Villa - Sharecropper/bandit
Subcomandante Marcos - Philosphy and communications professor, Jesuit-educated
Osama bin Laden - University student (economics and business administration, or civil engineering)
Chang Kai-shek - Military officer
Mao Tse-tung - Political official
Abimael Guzmán - Philosphy professor
Mahatma Gandhi - Lawyer
Yasser Arafat - University student (civil engineering)
Fidel Castro - Lawyer
Hugo Chávez - Military officer
Ruhollah Khomeini - Muslim cleric/political philosphy teacher
Augusto Pinochet - Military officer
Muammar al-Qadhafi - Military officer

So, according to my count: 4 military officers, 4 students, 3 lawyers, 3 professors/teachers (philosophy or political science), 2 village/political leaders, 1 chef, and 1 sharecropper bandit...

The Revival of Phrenology

2007-07-16T14:08:00.000-07:00

I read an article in New York Magazine called "The Science of Gaydar". It's long, but I'd recommend you at least glance at it.

We all know what "gaydar" is. Right? The ability to discern whether or not a person is homosexual. The author of the article, who is gay, wonders whether or not there's a scientific basis for "gaydar". That is to say: if homosexuality is innate, then might the genes that cause homosexuality also cause other traits? And, if there are other traits, would it be possible for a person to detect them?

Now, I'm not going to attempt to argue whether or not homosexuality is biological or cultural. I'm also not going to argue about the scientific basis of gaydar, except to say that telling someone's sexual orientation by the length or their index finger or the whorl of their hair sounds a bit like phrenology.

All that aside. The thing that most struck me about the article was this: When special interest groups drive science, it's bound to lead to disaster. What if geneticists say they can prove homosexuality in gays but not in lesbians? Or in gays/lesbians, but not in bi-sexuals or transgendered invididuals? You could imagine what would happen.

David France (the author) says it himself: "Politically, there is something very powerful about the notion that sexual orientation is a matter of biology, not choice." Another man quoted in the article says, "If I could tell my mother it’s a gene, she would be so happy"...

It makes me sad, the plaintive tone of their statements. But it also illustrates a prevalent current in homosexual research: find me an answer to what I already feel to be true. And if you bring me an answer that I am unprepared to believe in...I will reject it.

If I were George Lucas...

2007-07-05T15:54:00.000-07:00

A friend and I were discussing, the other day, what went wrong with Episodes I-III of the Star Wars series.

In discussing it, I started daydreaming about what I would've done if I were George Lucas with billions of dollars and all the magic of ILM behind me. (Cue daydream here...)

First, I would have made Anakin less the rebellious teenager and more of a withdrawn loner. He would have been almost bipolar: showing elements of greatness and leadership, but then drifting back to his dark, almost callous side. This would have made it more plausable that Padmé would have fallen for him...and more realistic that he become Darth Vader (who is hardly impetuous or reckless)!

Next, I would have made Obi-Wan and Anakin better friends: less master-apprentice and more co-equal. Not that Obi-Wan wouldn't be more powerful than Anakin, but only because he kept himself under control--not because of brute strength. They could have shown this if they had sparred (friendly-like) in Episode II--which would have been an allusion to their seminal fight in Episode III and their final fight in Episode IV. This also would have made Obi-Wan's attempts to save Anakin from his dark side all the more meaningful, and his death at Vader's hand more emotional and tragic.

Third, I would have made the Jedi Council more organized. It always came across as a bunch of individuals bickering, when it should have felt more like a society with a great deal of history and respect. You should have WANTED to be a Jedi. They should have retained their mystery and fraternity.

Finally, I would've had Anakin actually hunt down Jedis. It should have started as some internal drive to balance the force, almost psychotic...and only later would he fall under the spell of the Sith. With each succesful hunt and kill, you would have seen him transition toward madness and evil, while becoming more and more powerful. It would have been a greater series of "evil tasks" than killing Jedi apprentice children. (You even could have a part where Obi-Wan finds Anakin and asks him where he's been and Anakin says, "Out killing Jedis" very softly. The thought gives me chills!)

O Palestine!

2007-06-14T15:57:00.000-07:00

For anyone who didn't hear: Hamas took over the Gaza Strip last Thursday. The Hamas-controlled Parliament was then dissolved by (Fatah) President, Mahmoud Abbas.

It was inevitable.

When Arafat died in Nov 04, Palestinians had no reason to vote for Fatah any more. Even prior to his death Arafat was the "little Dutch boy" holding his finger in the dike: Hamas and Fatah fought for years and Arafat could do nothing to stop it. And within Fatah, Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade and others were disobeying Arafat.

The sole reason Arafat held on as long as he did was because Palestinians didn't have another icon. He was it (in part because he made it so), and when he died there was no other. Compared to Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas was a Western lackey.

Palestinians were through with Fatah and Fatah corruption--so in the first election they voted for Hamas. Community-minded Hamas, who had been building hospitals and running charity organizations since 1987. This caused the West to cut off funds to the PA (since Hamas won't recognize Israel) and to try and starve them out while Palestinians were engaged in a low-grade civil war. But the US/Israel liked that. (I wouldn't even be surprised if Israel supplied Fatah with weapons!)

Now that Fatah has lost its Gaza offices there are effectively TWO Palestinian governments: Hamas, in Gaza, and Fatah in the West Bank.

Maybe this is a good thing. Maybe now the West can give funds back to Fatah or, better yet, directly to Palestinian hospitals...and we can look like the good guys. Meanwhile, we'll hope the Gazans will see what happens when you support the West. Unfortunately, it won't stay that way for long. Israel will probably do a couple of "surgical strikes" over the next few weeks: assassinating Hamas leaders with missiles. Then they'll wait for the katusha rockets to start falling on S Israel--or a soldier to be kidnapped. Next they'll invade.

This won't be S Lebanon again. Just their armored thrust: probably one leg to secure the Egyptian border and one to attack Hamas offices. But mostly it will be to turn up the heat on Gazans and give Fatah a chance to re-take Gaza. Israel won't require the US to do anything except stall the Security Council and keep an international peacekeeping force at bay.

Easy enough...we've been doing that for 50 years.

A children's memory

2007-06-08T20:16:00.000-07:00

There's a book I read as a child. I thought it was a Dr. Seuss book but I looked online and can't figure out which it would be.

The book opens with an Edenic planet filled with grass and grazing animals. Suddenly, from the sky come these massive football-shaped space ships. The ships land and lower their hulls and out come these colonists and crazy machines. They swarm across the hills and begin building cities in every direction.

The cities are erected with ruthless efficiency and, soon, the entire planet is covered in asphalt and buildings. The sky becomes toxic from pollution and all the animals hide in sewers. Finally the people pack up in their metal ships and zip away into space, looking for a new planet.

In the final pages, the animals re-emerge from beneath the streets and stare in astonishment at their ruined world. On the last page, an animal discovers a small plant that has managed to poke its way through the asphalt to reach the air.

The End.

(I liked the book for obvious reasons, and I would like to buy it before it goes out of print. If anyone knows what book I'm talking about, please let me know!)

Killing Bambi

2007-06-05T08:44:00.001-07:00

When I was young I only ever killed two animals. The first was a finch when I was ten; the second, a pheasant when I was twelve. With the finch, I was at a water park and I swatted it with my towel as it flew by. I didn't think I would hit it, and I felt terrible when I did. The pheasant I shot with my .22. Once again, I didn't think I would hit it. Once I was an adult, on my mission, I killed more than two animals...but I felt it was out of necessity. I killed 128 scorpions, four rats, two mice, a giant spider, and two bats. I only felt bad about the bats...

So the first time I went hunting with an actual intent to kill I was 26 years old. We were up in Minnesota, and I went out for the opener with my brothers- and father-in-law. I stood alone on a tree stand for almost eight hours with my rifle cradled in my arm, watching the snow fall and never seeing a single deer. It was gorgeous. I loved it!

Two years later I went again. I saw three deer--I shot one. It was remarkably easy to do. I didn't have hunter's regret until a day or two later: I killed a deer! I thought. I killed a doe that could have lived a full life if it weren't for me! Chrissa thought I was silly, but that's the way I felt. Besides, I was a bit disturbed by the power I felt when the gun went off, or my satisfaction when it died immediately.

Eventually, I got over it. Like my boss says: When you think about something long enough, you'll figure out a way to justify it. But the truth is I came to see I was being a hypocrite. If I feel bad for killing this deer, why don't I feel bad for the hundreds of cows and thousands of chickens I've eaten? Just because it wasn't me who killed them? How naive...

When it comes down to it I don't enjoy killing things, large or small. But I did enjoy the hunt and I did enjoy having deer meat for three months afterwards--free, natural, and lean. I hunted for the meat, but I would be lying if I said there wasn't sport to it as well.

Children's Lit

2007-05-17T15:46:00.000-07:00

Children’s literature dwells in a realm all of its own. On the one hand, it’s large enough to engulf all the other literary genres: mystery, fantasy, horror, comedy, et al. On the other hand, it’s forced to be palatable and deliverable to a young audience.

And yet it doesn’t feel constricted: it’s not as if all children’s literature falls into the same rut or style. On the contrary, it’s as if the simplicity of the prose allows for more ingenuity...not less. (And I’m not even talking about illustrated children’s books, which are the ultimate combination of literature and artwork, even though Dan and Scott McCloud might say it’s the comic book.)

That's why some of my all-time favorite books are children’s books. Childrens' books were able to transport me in ways that adult fiction can’t. There are a few children’s books, in particular, that are able to transcend their audience and be just as interesting to adults. I think it's because some (but not all) include non-children themes...or dual layers of depth.

The Hobbit
Watership Down
Tuck Everlasting
The Secret Garden
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass
The Education of Little Tree
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
The Chronicles of Narnia
The Great Brain series
The Whipping Boy
The Wind in the Willows
A Wrinkle in Time
A Wizard of Earthsea
Matilda
The Call of the Wild
White Fang
The Giver
The Harry Potter series

Bloody Good

2007-05-10T21:01:00.000-07:00

There aren’t many actors I would say are great actors.

I’m not ranting. This isn’t like my music rant: it’s not like I think actors used to be good and now aren’t anymore. On the contrary, I feel today’s best actors are really much better than yesterday’s best actors. They’re much more subtle and realistic.

If you spread Hollywood out I think you’d find actors fall on a bell curve: ranging from terrible actors up to outstanding. On the far right, you’ve got atrocious actors like Paris Hilton and Jennifer Garner. Next, you have your low-grade actors – like Mark Ruffalo and Jennifer Lopez. That's followed by average actors like Julia Roberts and Denzel Washington.

On the “above average” slope it starts getting tougher. You have to compare. Is Russell Crowe better than Benicio Del Toro? Cate Blanchett or Tom Hanks? What about Ryan Gosling?

But at the top of the bell curve you have the crème de la crème—the greats. It's a small crowd. In fact, I can only think of a handful of living actors I’d put here. They are

Anthony Hopkins
Brad Pitt
Dustin Hoffman
Edward Norton
Adrian Brody

Why did this come up? Because I was considering adding someone else to the “great” list and it really surprised me. Leonardo DiCaprio.

Chrissa and I watched Blood Diamond last night. We stayed up until 1 a.m. and it was really good. Why does this surprise me? Because I don’t want to like Leo--he was in TITANIC!

But thing is...he’s really, really good! Leo played an ex-mercenary/diamond trader from Rhodesia. He nailed the accent and he nailed his character. He was venal and swarthy…not Jack-from-Titanic. And this is the third time Leo’s surprised me recently (first, The Aviator; then, The Departed...and now this).

Is he there yet? Not quite. He needs to take on a few more challenging roles. In fact, he needs a totally brilliant role: like Edward Norton in Primal Fear and The Score, Brad Pitt in Twelve Monkeys and Snatch. or Dustin Hoffman in Rainman, Midnight Cowboy and Papillon.

...But he’s young yet.

Enchanted Forests, Part II

2007-05-05T09:22:00.000-07:00

When I was small my family lived in Redmond, Washington.

Redmond was more forest than house in some areas, and I knew all the shortcuts: which yards you could cut through and which fences had holes in them. I used to wander over to Tam O'Shanter Park which, despite its name, was more bog than park. It was the closest thing to an enchanted forest that I knew of.

Tam O'Shanter didn't grow in that orderly, clean way that most pine forests did. It grew in dark snarls of vines and rotting logs. It was primeval. Older kids told me there were tar pits under the ground, and in my mind I imagined enormous, perfectly-preserved dinosaurs lying in wait -- waiting to crunch my bones if I misplaced a step...

In addition to dinosaurs, there were spirits. I thought each cluster of mushrooms I found was a fairy ring. If I held my breath, fairies and leprechauns would creep from their holes and find me there. It's a shame I don't still believe that.

When he was six, he believed that the moon overhead followed him
By nine, he deciphered the illusion, trading magic for fact, no trade-backs
So this is what it's like to be an adult?
If he only knew now what he knew then

Enchanted Forests, Part I

2007-05-02T20:32:00.000-07:00

Chrissa and I went tree shopping the other day to replace the tree we cut down in the backyard. I never knew trees were so dang expensive!

We walked around this garden center looking at all the trees and smelling green all around us. They even had this one greenhouse only with opaque screens to filter the sun down to a warm glow. In the greenhouse were all of the Japanese trees that aren't accustomed to direct sunlight. It was gorgeous in there. We were surrounded by this heady scent of the Orient. I’ll tell you what: there’s nothing more enchanting than walking through trees. It’s no wonder that so many of Grimm’s fairy tales took place in forests, or that Robin Hood lived in Sherwood Forest.

My retirement dream has changed over time. I first wanted to work for the government, then teach history, then retire to a private island somewhere with a yacht. Eventually that last part changed to ‘retire to a farm somewhere.’ Somewhere along the way the dream morphed again to where it is now: retire to a cabin in a forest somewhere…probably in Montana or Canada. Somewhere inaccessible during the winter, where Chris’ and I can snowmobile over to the nearest town when we need fresh vegetables or human company.

Rocco DeLuca and the Burden

2007-04-23T19:49:00.000-07:00

Did I say there are NO good artists these days?

I was wrong.

Chris' and I saw them the other night in Cincinnati. Here's our video...or you can watch the extended version (not from our show.)--well worth it!

Smoke Censors

2007-04-13T20:52:00.000-07:00

I read in the news that the new president of the Motion Picture Association of America, Dan Glickman, is considering giving movies an "R" rating if they portray cigarette use. There has been a call for this for some time from anti-smoking groups and others who claim smoking in movies contributes to kids picking up the habit. To read the rest of the article, click here.

At first I wasn't that sure about it: It seemed a little too cautious. But then I thought more about it...

PG-13 movies are viewed more and make more money than R-rated movies in theaters. It's in cigarette companies' best interest to hook smokers young (1/3 of smokers had their first cigarette before the age of 14). Even though it's against the Federal Trade Commission for cigarette companies to pay for movie advertising, it's suspected that they continue doing so. (Read here, here, or here).

I discussed the issue with a friend and he didn't like the idea because he doesn't agree with government censorship. The thing is, the MPAA is a non-profit organization--not the government--and it doesn't actually censor. Producers aren't forced to have their film rated through the MPAA. They choose to because they worship the almighty dollar and if a movie is Non-rated it won't be picked up by theaters. Even if it's R-rated it will lose money, unless it's a blockbuster. That's why producers often push the envelope of an R-rating but will cut out just enough language, violence, and sexuality to garner a PG-13 rating.

When it comes down to it, the MPAA has every right to deem what standards it requires from a movie to "award" a certain rating. And it has the responsibility to decide what is appropriate for people of different ages. If the MPAA decides to ban cigarettes from PG-13 movies they have every right to. And if this cuts down on the proportion of smokers in the US, then they've accomplished something.

The jig is up

2007-04-07T11:58:00.000-07:00

Today's language lesson is on the phrase "the jig is up".

I've heard it two ways--"the jig is up" or "the gig is up"--but didn't know which was correct. CBC News Online wrote an article about it in 2001 called "Gigs, Jigs, and Jibes".

Two phrases. Two possible meanings:

1) A gig is a musical performance usually played in the course of one night.

So to say the "gig is up" would mean an engagement has played its course.

2) A jig is a dance, a fishing lure, or a ruse (probably because the fishing lure lures the fish).

So to say the "jig is up" could either mean the dance is over or that a ruse is over (i.e. the scoundrel has been outed and the cops are on their way).

So the answer is....The original phrase was "the jig is over" (1777) and scholars believe it applied to a trick or a game being over: since that was meaning it had when Shakespeare later used it. Besides, gig hasn't meant a musical performance until recently. To be fair to the gig people: jig has also been spelled gig for centuries (since g could also have a j sound). That's how we get the word gigolo. But just like we don't write "gaol" for "jail" anymore, we don't write "gig" for "jig".

So the jig is up for people who say "gig"!

My Super Sweet 16

2007-04-02T17:50:00.000-07:00

'kay. There are a lot of crappy shows out there, but probably not one that ticks me off as bad as MTV's My Super Sweet 16.

For anyone lucky enough NOT to have seen it, the show's about these spoiled brats whose parents decide--for some reason--to fork over $200,000 for their kid's 16th birthday party.

These parents aren't extremely wealthy. You can tell they live well, but you can also tell they're going way into debt to pay for the party. Paying for rap stars to make 5-minute appearances, incredible decorations, deejays, food ... not to mention $97,000 Jags and some sort of diamond necklace or tiara. They never interview the parents, but I'm guessing they overspend for 1 of 3 reasons: 1) they want their kid to have what they never had, 2) they want their kid to be popular/living vicariously through their teen, or 3) they don't want to look poor on camera.

So you'd think these kids would be grateful, right?

Wrong.

The brat thinks her parents owe her something. It's like that fat kid you see in the supermarket throwing a tantrum until his mom finally gives in and buys a candy bar. These kids are the most conceited, undeserving children in the world. If the parents think they are buying their kids, they are SORELY mistaken. Just stoking the fire...

When I think about what's wrong with kids these days I think about this show.

Music and Lyrics

2007-03-29T19:32:00.000-07:00

Whenever I think about what's wrong with music these days, I always focus on how nobody can PLAY like they used to: How nobody can do guitar like Mark Knopfler, or blend genres like The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac. There are great bands, sure, but they're holdouts from earlier generations of rockers (like Aerosmyth, Pearl Jam, and U2). There are great solo artists still - like Christina Aguilera, Tori Amos, Jewel, Sarah McLachlan - but pop never changes.

The basis of solo artistry is still one voice with a guitar. With a group you need the right blend of talent and personality. Synergy. You can't have a band based on one person's talent...or no talent.

So Chrissa and I were in the car a few days ago and she threw in a Cure CD. It'd been so long since I'd heard them, I'd forgotten what a great band they are.

"You know what?" I said, "I never think I like The Cure, but I really like The Cure."

Chris' said: "I love The Cure. Nobody writes abstract lyrics like they do. Everyone writes crappy lyrics like 'I love you, you love me, show me your grill.'"

So I thought about it. And it's true. I typically think only about musical technique and guitar-playing and I forget about the poetry and composition. The Cure has incredible lyrics, Depeche Mode has really good lyrics...but not just that. The lyrics and the music perfectly compliment each other. When the music stops the lyrics are there and vice versa. Like an incantation, more than a song.

When I listen to great groups I'm transported.

That's the way music should be.

An Inconvenient Movie

2007-03-25T17:10:00.000-07:00

Chrissa and I just finished watching An Inconvenient Truth. Not the most ground-shaking of documentaries because it isn't really a documentary. Not really. It is the film-version of Al Gore's slideshow presentation.

I felt like I was sitting in the audience of an Al Gore lecture.

So was it a good documentary? Nope. But was it interesting? Abosolutely (if you're into college lectures). I walked away feeling more knowledgable about the issue of global warming. I want to be more environmentally friendly, and am willing to vote "green". It seems the ethical thing to do. And I don't hear ethical arguments from the other side--only rejectionism and apathy.

There was a part of the lecture where it showed which U.S. states have passed laws to control CO2 emissions since the Federal government refuses to do anything about it... As the states lit up (California, Oregon, New England states...unsurprisingly) I was really proud of them. It almost made me want to become a Democrat. Almost.

Morbid

2007-03-13T19:50:00.000-07:00

When my best friend Dan and I were in high school, a friend of Dan's once told us that she disapproved of our "cavalier attitude of death."

Dan and I were in a theater class and we had to produce a series of pantomimes. The thing is, in every single skit we made someone died. Shot by an arrow or run over by an ambulance. Death was amusing. About this time we invented our own writing style called Literature of the Bizarre (later: La trahison des clercs). In it, our main characters often met untimely but appropriate deaths.

Around then I heard about Faces of Death: a series in which people's deaths are caught on camera. A friend of mine told me not to watch it because it was too disturbing. I didn't. But now, on the internet there are sites like ebaumsworld.com and rotten.com where you can see the same stuff. I have to admit that I have looked once or twice. My friend was right: it is disturbing.

When I look at those things I have to wonder why I'm doing it. Entertainment? Curiosity? Or just a desire to see what death looks like?

I'm not amused when I've seen it. I'm watching some poor person die, without the ensuing grief and suffering that must surely take place. Who is this person to me? No one. But, then again, perhaps they are me if circumstances had been different. Maybe that's why I've looked. I put myself in their position, just moments before the end, and I wonder:

"What would I be thinking?"

The Ugliest Animals

2007-03-05T19:09:00.000-08:00

I read an article the other day talking about the aye-aye. I'd never heard of an aye-aye; but apparently it's an animal in Madagascar bordering on extinction. The thing is, it's uuuuugly. Extremely ugly. It looks like a monstor in a horror movie. So the article was asking: "How do you get people to care about an ugly animal?"

I came up with a list of what are, I think, the world's ugliest animals. In order to do so I had to set some ground rules. 1) No animals smaller than my thumb. 2) No parasites. That was to exclude fleas and ticks and tapeworms.

So here we go...in no particular order.

Wolf Eel

Octopus

Horseshoe Crab

Echidna

Belarus Catfish

Leopard Slug

Anglerfish

Aye-Aye

The New Seven Wonders of the World

2007-02-24T21:31:00.000-08:00

If you haven't heard, you can vote for the "New Seven Wonders of the World".

The historical Seven Wonders of the Ancient World were named by the Greeks in the 2nd Century BC. They were:

The Great Pyramid of Giza, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Temple of Artemus at Ephesus, the Statue of Zeus at Olympia, the Mausoleum of Maussollos at Halicarnassus, the Collosus of Rhodes, and the Ishtar Gate (later substituted for the Lighthouse of Alexandria)

The Greek word for "Wonders" was "must-sees" and the list was kind of a handbook for Hellenic world travelers. So keeping that in mind: far-flung, awe-inspiring architecture rather than historical importance...I'll cast my vote for the New Seven Wonders.

1) The Great Wall of China

Hands down one of our most amazing creations. You can see it unaided from space!

2) The Palace Tombs of Petra

As featured in Indian Jones and the Last Crusade. In the middle of the desert, in the bottom of a canyon, carved from solid rock. Cool.

3) The Roman Colloseum

A stunning example of the lengths we go through for entertainment. They could flood it and have naval battles!

4) Machu Pichu

The terraforming is even more impressive than the architecture. Though I'm hesitant to name a Wonder that is in such disrepair...

5) Stonehenge

50-ton stones dragged from hundreds of miles away, stacked using Stone Age technology.

6) Easter Island

For some of the same reasons as Stonehenge...I also didn't know they're 25 meters high (85 feet).

7) Potala Palace

I know it's not on the list, so it can't actually be voted for. But, really, I can't vote for anything built after 1500 and the buildings are difficult to compare one against another. The Potala Palace on the other hand is more of a city than a building. And built 12,000+ feet up...well...that should be worth bonus points.

Tattoo or Not Tattoo

2007-02-19T19:26:00.000-08:00

It seems like everyone's got a tattoo these days. According to a poll I saw, 16% of all adults have a tattoo.

I thought of 4 categories of tattoos--divided by purpose...

1) "Corporate" Tattoos

e.g. Hells Angels and Navy SEALS

These tattoos have been around for a while. A lot of biker gangs got their start as motorcyclists in the US Army in WWII. So although you get the "I Love Ma" tattoos, you also get tattoos that identify you as a member of a group, be it military or gang.

2) Anti-Establishment Tattoos

e.g. hippies and punks...and yokels

I associate these tattoos with the hippie movement and, later, with punks and Eurotrash. This tattoo's purpose is to say, "I will not conform."

3) Religio-Cultural Tattoos

Of course this would include Maoris and Central Asians living in the states. But this would also include crosses and such, among the local-born.

4) Artistic Tattoos

I suppose it could be argued that ALL tattoos are "artistic". But I think there are tattoo purists, and that their sole purpose is to make an artistic statement. I suppose these are the people you find in Tattoo magazine: their entire body covered with design after design.

...I think the new fad for tattoos would be a sub-category under Category 2. I don't know if all the people getting tattoed these days are subversive of society. It's more an attempt to stay young. So, in a way, their posers. In another way, they're dallying with rebellion. I think that's why you see middle-aged ladies getting little tattoos on their breast, or ankle or on the middle of their back. They're trying to keep up with their daughters.

I go back and forth on tattoos: Sometimes I want to rush out and buy one and other times I'm glad I haven't done so. I'd probably regret it. Three things have held me back: 1) I haven't decided on a design I'd want, 2) I'd disappoint my wife and family, 3) my church frowns on them.

If I were to get tattoos, I'd want an "om" (the meditation syllable) and something written in Arabic--though what, I don't know.

The Dixie Chicks

2007-02-15T18:44:00.000-08:00

The most surprising thing about the Grammy Awards was the Dixie Chicks winning five awards, including Album of the Year. Well, first was their winning Best Country Performance by a Duo or a Group. Every country fan in the world went apoplectic at that, I'm sure. They're not COUNTRY, people!

The thing is, I can't help but wonder if their cleaning up had anything to do with the entertainment industry welcoming them back in the fold after their political controversy.

Don't get me wrong. Their album is good (at least, the songs I've heard). And I love the song "Not Ready to Make Nice" ... especially now that I know what it's about.

It's a shame they were treated how they were for speaking their mind. Death threats and fans turning against them. Especially when so much of the US has come to feel the same thing about Bush and it's suddenly popular to be anti-war. If the turnout of the last election is the real reason the Grammy Foundation decided to throw the Dixie Chicks a bone...well...that's crap.

I typically don't enjoy celebrities getting involved in political causes; but there are exceptions. Bono's doing some really good things for instance. I just wish he would take off his sunglasses. And Bill and Melinda Gates are celebrities in their own right, and incredible philanthropists.

Anyway. Just my two cents.

I’m not ready to make nice
I’m not ready to back down
I’m still mad as hell and I don’t have time to go 'round and 'round and 'round
It’s too late to make it right
I probably wouldn’t if I could
‘Cause I’m mad as hell
Can’t bring myself to do what it is you think I should

Amazing...and kind of creepy

2007-02-13T13:48:00.000-08:00

I haven't had anything interesting to say lately so I haven't updated. Thought you might like this...

Fear itself

2007-01-29T19:20:00.000-08:00

A friend of mine told me about how he was spelunking and got wedged in a passage. He told me something I'd never thought of:

When you're stuck you usually panic. When you panic your chest muscles constrict, making you more stuck. The only way to extricate yourself is to relax and exhale all your breath until you're skinny enough to slide out.

I don't know if I could do it.

I'm not claustrophobic, but I know that given the right circumstances I would become so. The thought of millions of tons of rock hovering above and below me...it gives me the creeps.

All of the things that make me afraid--claustrophobia and deep water and the night sky--they all have something in common: infinity.

When I was more skeptical about God, Shasta asked me if the thought of death frightened me. I told her no and I meant it. How can I fear nothingness? Endlessness is much more frightening. Or maybe it's just me.

Slavery and reparation

2007-01-24T17:53:00.000-08:00

I had a conversation about race today. Always a delicate subject...

A black co-worker was talking about a Virginia congressman who said black people need to "get over slavery". As you can imagine this sparked some controversy.

"Look." I said, "I didn't hear the comment, but I kind of agree."

Before anyone calls me a racist...

I feel many people get a raw deal in this life. Growing up in slums (whatever your race) limits your opportunities. America needs more social reform. We need more scholarships and grants. But I don't think it has to do with slavery--it has to do with humanitarianism.

If your understanding of the world is that it owes you something, or that your race was wronged in the past, and it becomes a cultural mythos...I don't think you can progress as a race. Taken to the extreme you have Bosnia or Rwanda. In the West there are at least 3-4 ethnicities who feel Europe has wronged them, either through slavery or by the fact that Columbus discovered America. Some of them feel they deserve reparations.

My friend, a very honest person, admitted: "Yes. Some of my relatives feel they are entitled to something."

Another friend asked: "If you don't mind my asking, what do they feel they are entitled to? What would pay the debt?"

She shrugged, "Freed slaves were promised forty acres and a mule" (Though she didn't suggest this as if she agreed with it). So I submit that question. What do you feel you are entitled to? Christopher Columbus landed in 1492 and subjugated the American Indians. Some Africans enslaved other Africans and sold them to white slavers, who brought them to America. That is atrocious.

But now what?

A quarter past V

2007-01-12T04:06:00.001-08:00

So I thought I'd just do an FYI post about Roman numerals. Just 'cuz.

It is believed that Roman numerals originated from tally sticks. The Roman numeral I was one tally, a II was two tallies, etc. Every fifth tally was made different to make counting easier. The five was Λ or V (possibly representing a hand).

When writing numbers out you could write eight as IIIIΛIII, or abreviate it as ΛIII since the Λ implies four previous notches. Same with four, which could be written as IIII or IV. (In fact IIII was preferred since IV was the first two letters of IVPITER (Jupiter), a pagan god).

Since the number system developed independent of the alphabet, its symbols originally were not Roman letters. Fifty could be written as N, И, K, or Ψ. By Augustus, this had become an inverted T, and it was only a matter of time before it transitioned to L.

Clock faces with Roman numerals--curiously enough--use IIII for 4 o'clock rather than IV. There are a number of plausible explanations for this (though I only list a few):

1) The four characters of IIII create visual symmetry with the VIII on the opposite corner of the clock face.

2) The I symbol would be the only symbol in the first four hours, the V only in the next four, and the X symbol only in the last four.

3) The number of symbols on the clock totals twenty Is, four Vs, and four Xs: so clock makers needed only a single mold with five Is, a V, and an X...cast four times to make a clock.

There are other reasons listed of course. The ideas of symmetry are very impressive, from an aesthetical and mathematical point of view. However, the cynic in me likes the third explanation: that even at the height of the glorious Roman Empire, lazy people were looking to save a buck. Or...a denarius.

The X-Files

2007-01-11T03:33:00.001-08:00

So a new couple moved into our ward this week. They're young and don't have any kids so we are--by default--friends. They live in this three-story house built in the late 19th century. It's this gorgeous, creepy-cool house with wood floor boards and carnival glass lamps. So naturally we started talking about ghosts...

They asked us: "Do you believe in ghosts?"

We both answered, almost simultaneously: "Sometimes."

The thing about paranormal stuff is that I am totally enthralled but extremely skeptical. I used to watch Ghosthunters almost every week. For those who haven't seen it, these guys (TAPS) investigate hauntings with regular and thermal cameras, tape recorders, etc. Most of their shows are really boring but...every once in a while...they catch something weird that gives me the creeps.

I probably do believe in ghosts. I just don't believe most ghost sightings. There are too many things, I think, that can be mistaken for stuff like that. We just don't notice the way the house creaks during the day because we're walking around and making noise.

The nice thing about believing in ghosts is that it meshes well with religion. The same can't be said for Nessie and Bigfoot and UFOs...unless you're in Heaven's Gate.

The things is, for me to truly believe in any of these things I'd have to see them first-hand. Until then, this is all just a moo point.

Ebert & Jared

2007-01-06T15:32:00.000-08:00

The other day I watched Superman Returns. I'd been putting it off because...well...because of Chrissa. As anyone in a relationship can attest, once you are a "we" you don't get to see every movie all the time in the theater. Sometimes if we're lucky there'll be two movies out at the same time, and I can see a manly-shoot 'em up while Chrissa is seeing her girly-kissy movie.

We now have Netflix and are milking it for all it's worth. Chrissa has her list and I have mine. If the stars align and I happen to want to watch her movie, or she mine, then we watch together. Otherwise, it's every man or woman for him or herself.

So Superman was really good! I think Brandon Routh made an even better Superman than Christopher Reeve. He had a better physique than Christopher Reeve and his acting was better. He was able to convey both humanity and alienness. He was also more international--protecting the whole world rather than just Metropolis. I enjoyed how he hovered above the earth and listened for people to help. It strengthened the metaphor of Superman as a symbol of Christ.

I think the biggest letdown of the movie was Kevin Spacey. Not because he wasn't good. He was a better Lex Luthor than Gene Hackman. But Kevin Spacey had the potential of making Lex Luthor a truly intricate character. Bad but with depth. And really scary. Instead, he was the melodramatic evil-genius surrounded by bumbling henchmen in black shirts and suits. Maybe that's truer to the comic book, but I just wished they had used this opportunity to bump it up to the next level.

Swear on the Bible

2007-01-01T17:05:00.000-08:00

Keith Ellison was recently elected to the House as a representative for the state of Minnesota. Ellison is a Muslim convert and, as such, is the first Muslim to be elected to Congress!

Unsurprisingly, Ellison said he'd like to take his oath of office using a Koran instead of a Bible. To the consternation of some...

The Christian Science Monitor has a great article that gives some detail about swearing-in and what the Constitution has to say about it. It explains that Congressmen don't actually take their oath on the Bible in public. They take their oath with their hand in the air (and some may elect to hold a book). Later, if they choose, they may have a private swearing-in ceremony where they use a Bible of some sort. For example, a Jewish Congressman used the Old Testament, and a Mormon Congressman used a Latter-day Saint edition which included the Book of Mormon (i.e. a Quad).

People should be able to swear-in on whatever book they choose. It's a personal choice to have the private ceremony anyway, so the fact that they want to swear on a book at all should tell you that--whatever the book--it holds some personal meaning to them in combination with their oath.

If someone wanted to swear in on Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire I'd say they're either taking their oath or the oath-taking process lightly. But if I feel that way so will all their voters...and they'll probably not be re-elected. The system will hopefully fix itself.

The fact that Ellison is a god-fearing person is more telling to me than the fact that he calls his god "Allah."

Coolest commercial ever!

2006-12-27T07:56:00.001-08:00

Lethal morality

2006-12-21T16:40:00.000-08:00

Last Wednesday a condemned convict, Angel Diaz, was executed by way of lethal injection. The needles were inserted too deep, passing through his veins and into the flesh below. The chemical "cocktail" was injected into his tissue rather than his bloodstream--thereby dragging out his death an additional 12 minutes.

Although the medical examiner refused to comment whether Mr. Diaz died a painful death, a couple of professors said that was likely--and that it would feel as if "your arms were on fire."

I don't like human suffering. Personally, I see nothing wrong with NOT using the cocktail: perhaps just use a massive dose of sedative. According to a BBC report, the reason they don't do that is because it's too close to medical-induced deaths (i.e. in hospitals) and is deemed not stringent enough to be an execution.

As we listened to the BBC report at first I was bothered. I am for capital punishment but am also against needless suffering. A pro-capital punishment professor was being interviewed on the BBC; and right as I was thinking about this, he was criticized by the interviewer for his views. So he talked about the case of a man who had recently been executed.

This man, the professor said, was a homosexual who was jealous when he found out his partner had a girlfriend. He strangled her with a belt until the belt broke, beat her face with a claw hammer, raped her and then killed her with a knife.

Surely, that is worth a few minutes of accidently induced suffering.

Foods, not so good

2006-12-14T20:13:00.000-08:00

If I only stocked my fridge with the following foods, I would be a very skinny individual.

Listmania!: The Grossest Foods on the Planet Earth

10) Peas
9) Tuna
8) Spam
7) Creamed corn
6) Crab salad
5) Oysters
4) Blue cheese (except in small doses)
3) Balogna
2) Radishes
1) Sushi

Anti-Semitism

2006-12-11T20:54:00.000-08:00

In my last post I mentioned the anti-semitic remarks Mel Gibson made while being arrested.

Mel allegedly asked the arresting officer if he was Jewish and accused Jews of starting all the wars in the world. Were Mel Gibson's remarks insensitive? Yes. Were they anti-semitic? Yes.

But...I could probably be accused of anti-semitism, of a sort.

I don't like the government of Israel. I don't agree with the way it was founded as a country. I don't agree with what Israel is currently doing to the Palestinian people.

Is this anti-semitism? I say no but many people would say yes. In my opinion, equating anti-Zionism with anti-semitism is designed to stifle criticism of Israel. I don't see how criticising the Likud party or Ariel Sharon is an attack on Judaism--even if Israel is a Jewish country. That's the same thing as saying that criticising the Queen of England is an attack on the Anglican Church.

Of course, anti-Zionism can serve as a cover for anti-semitism. Sure. But not always. We need to be able to speak freely without being accused of bigotry. How can we hold an honest dialog about the Middle East otherwise?

Anti-Semite?

2006-12-11T19:33:00.000-08:00

Mel Gibson's Apocalypto came out on top this past weekend, making $15 million in box office sales.

Mel Gibson came out on top again as well.

I don't know if Mel Gibson's an anti-Semite and I don't really care. If he is, that sucks; but I try not to let my opinion of an entertainer's personal life dictate my view of their work. I don't care much when someone says that Russell Crowe threw a phone or Sean Penn hit a reporter. If I were hounded all day by obnoxious reporters I'd probably hit one too.

When Mel Gibson released Braveheart eleven years ago, he proved he could direct and produce a succesful movie. So he did it again in 2004 with The Passion of the Christ. The Passion created a big uproar before it was even released: Gibson was accused of inflaming anti-semitism, and in blaming Jews for the death of Christ.

The thing is the New Testament does blame a group of Jews for Christ's death. You can't really blame The Passion for bringing it up, without also blaming the New Testament. And then you can't leave it out of the movie since it's critical to the crucifixion story. [Note: there were some valid concerns brought up about the portrayal of the Jews in the movie as well--but I think they were secondary to this main concern about Christ's death.] Possibly because of this uproar Gibson had a difficult time finding a distributor.

I think Gibson has cut his ties with the media groups...many of which are run or financed by Jewish individuals or firms. I think these people love the fact that Gibson made anti-semitic remarks while intoxicated. I think these people are not going to let the public forget it. Is Mel Gibson an anti-semite? Maybe...(I've a few thoughts about what makes an anti-semite. More to come in my next entry.) Did Mel Gibson make The Passion due to his anti-semitism? Doubtful.

Am I interested in seeing Apocalypto? Heck yeah.

The Iraqi Study Group

2006-12-08T18:51:00.000-08:00

The Iraq Study Group, the group commissioned by Congress to make recommendations about Iraq, just released their 84-page report on Wednesday.

The war (surprise, surprise) is not being handled well. There has been a general decline in all aspects of security, politics, and economics. Their recommendations?

1) Give a timeline for US staged withdrawal
2) Build a coalition of international support
3) Talk to Iran and Syria

What did Bush have to say about it? He'd take some of their recommendations into consideration but refuses to talk to Syria and Iran. Oh yeah, and he won't give a timeline for US withdrawal. Translation: absolutely nothing is going to change.

The US has had the same foreign policy since the Mexican War. If we want something we take it. The only progressive presidents we've had were Nixon, Carter, and sometimes Reagan. Nixon dealt with the Chinese. Carter dealt with Yasir Arafat. Reagan dealt with Gorbachev.

Bush deals with Halliburton.

Massage chair

2006-12-03T12:58:00.000-08:00

Mr. Manners

2006-12-02T16:46:00.000-08:00

I'm not going to name names, but someone I'm married to whose name rhymes with "Trissa" screens her phone calls. If she doesn't recognize the name or phone number she doesn't answer. (Sometimes, even if she knows who is calling she doesn't answer). I on, the other hand, answer every call--including the ones that say "unknown caller" or "out of area."

We told a neighbor about this today. She agreed with Chri--I mean the person whose name rhymes with Trissa. It got me thinking. And I've decided there are three reasons I always answer.

I am curious to see who's calling
I like to be honest
I like to be polite

When I'm watching a movie I'll still answer; but then I'll say, "I'm watching a movie. Can I call you back?" If they call late and I'm tired I'll still answer, talk for a few minutes, then beg myself off to bed.

Our neighbor say, "No. They're being rude for calling so late. Why should you be polite?"

I say, "You don't gauge politeness by how you treat polite people, but by how you treat impolite people."

Here's the funny thing about "Trissa." She doesn't answer the phone but still she expects them to leave a message. In fact if they don't leave a message she gets a little bugged. I laugh because I think, "If you were curious about who was calling, why didn't you answer in the first place?"

I mean, seriously: What if it's Ed McMahon?

I wish I were in Alaska

2006-11-28T16:18:00.000-08:00

Here's a picture from Stacey's photoblog. It's one of my all-time faves.

I love the depth. It makes me feel as if I'm standing in the picture. Stacey and Marci are my two favorite photographers, followed by Ansel Adams.

The Anti-Feminism

2006-11-23T16:14:00.000-08:00

If you didn't hear about it: the organizers of a fashion show in Madrid banned overly thin models from participating in a show this past September. Their argument? That underweight models were contributing to eating disorders. A number of modeling agencies were quick to protest, arguing that they were being scapegoated...and that their "naturally gazell-like" models were being discriminated against.

This brings up two points. First, that political correctness is all about spin. Only in our day could you say models were being discriminated against.

The second point: feminism is impeded not just by chauvenistic men but by women as well. Not conservative, traditionalist women but also liberal women. Anti-feminists. For every feminist who says a woman should respect herself and not dress skankily or act promiscuously, another feminist will argue a woman's free use of her body is her strength. A stripper is not a woman selling her wares to men. She is a liberated woman.

Anti-feminism is officially called sex-positive feminism. It opposes "legal or social" control of sexual activity. Any sexual activity...including pornography.

The root difference between the two groups is whether or not female sexuality is an extension of male privilege. I can't take either side entirely. But the fact that pornography is mostly viewed by MEN, that hookers are mostly hired by MEN, and that strip clubs are most frequented by MEN causes me to believe that sex-positive feminists are a bit naïve. Strippers and pornstars are selling themselves for money. Pure and simple. They are not champions of feminism. They are modern-day prostitutes.

In the Army now

2006-11-18T14:55:00.000-08:00

Last Thursday Spc. James Barker, 23, was sentenced to 90 years for raping a 14-year-old Iraqi girl, murdering her and her family, and setting her body on fire. It's the largest sentence a soldier has received in connection to the war in Iraq.

Good.

Barker pleaded guilty and agreed to testify against his comrades--some of whom face the death penalty. They deserve it. They didn't extend mercy to the girl or her family. Why should we extend it to them?

But I also think something like this just doesn't happen. It's a symptom of something deeper. Like the My Lai massacre these soldiers had to be in a certain state of mind prior to the attrocity. I believe this war's becoming another Vietnam: where soldiers don't know have a purpose for fighting--don't know why they're there and don't want to be there. I also believe that the military's loosened recruiting standards and lengthened deployments are leading to underqualified soldiers and soldiers on edge.

But there's one more thing: racism. Anti-Arabism and Islamaphobia. I've heard soldiers call Iraqis "towel heads," "sand niggers," "Hajis," and "cockroaches". Being in that environment of imperialism and condescension, is it any wonder we have incidents like Abu Ghraib, Haditha, and the murder of this girl's family?

As an ex-Airborne co-worker of mine said: "The first indication a war has gone bad is when the troops no longer believe in it."

The Proper Response to Hate

2006-11-15T14:52:00.000-08:00

I ran across a slideshow called "A Critical Look at White Supremacy". It contains pictures of Nazis, Neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and members of the Aryan Nation. As I looked at the pictures I experienced a variety of emotions: surreal awe at the pictures of a Nazi "baby farm", condescension at the low-class Klansmen, fear and rage.

When I see their swastikas, shaved heads, and flags in parade, I am affected. I am afraid. If that's the result they're hoping for they have succeeded...even in still photographs...even 51 years later. I'm horrified at their hatred and the fact that they revel in it.

Right after that I get angry. I feel like burning their flags. I feel like taking their kids away. Stop the cancer. And that bothers me. It bothers me that I respond to their hatred with hatred. It may be natural, and my anger may be justified, but it's not right.

But the thought of responding to racism with anything other than indignation also seems wrong.

For instance what if I observed the Rwanda genocide or the Nazi Holocaust and was unaffected. What would that say about me? Is the only acceptable response love? Love of what? Love for whom? I find it very difficult to love someone preaching hate.

How did our world ever raise a Martin Luther King, or a Mohatma Gandhi?

Not-So Grand Old Party

2006-10-30T15:35:00.000-08:00

Sorry I've been such a wanker and haven't updated for so long...

Like Dan, I think I'll weigh in on the election results. I like to think of myself as an Independent but I don't know. I tried a website that would supposedly define me but its questions weren't detailed enough for me to decide. I guess I'm fiscally a Democrat but morally a Republican.

One thing for sure: Congress needed to go! There have been no checks and balances for the past 6 years. Anything the president wanted, he got. He altered bills before signing them, people added "pork" to every bill they passed, there has been no Congressional oversight for the war or terrorism, no subpeonas for military or intelligence mistakes, no campaign finance reform, and of course no charges brought for ANY scandals (Jack Abramoff, Tom DeLay, Abu Ghraib, etc.). These guys are crooks! I think they're getting off easy. Same thing with Rumsfeld.

George Bush's administration should go down as one of the most crony-laden administrations ever. I'm sick of no-bid contracts, $1.5 billion unaccounted for, Haliburton, and how nearly every presidential appointee is Texan and worked for Bush's father (e.g. Robert Gates).

I'm not saying the Democrats are any better. Given the same circumstances, I'm sure the Democrats would be just as corrupt, but the Republicans have been in power for so long they have the big lobbyists in their corner and, so, outdo the Dems for moneyraising. The Democrats don't have anything going for them except that they aren't Republicans. They ran on the promise of change. So let's see it.

My only regret is that they didn't win more senate seats. When things are this close, every Democrat will probably vote Democrat and every Republican will vote Republican. We won't see any internal party discussion. We'll have partisan politics for another 4 years...

Business as usual.

Scary movies

2006-10-20T19:50:00.000-07:00

There aren't that many Halloweenish movies coming out. Only two that I can think of: Saw III and The Grudge 2. The Grudge commercials don't really scare me. The first was creepy, sure, in that new Japanese horror-flick kind of way. They used some of those eerie, disjointed body movements and stop-action filming. But it wasn't scary. Just gross.

It takes a lot to scare me.

Maybe my problem is that I can't believe horror movies. I can't put myself inside of the movie. And gore and special effects, rather than sucking me in, usually push me back to reality. Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Final Destination? Popcorn movies.

But I won't watch Saw. Any of them. Saw falls into a genre of movie I'll call "claustrophobic movies": a movie where a character is trapped or powerless. In slasher movies the hero or heroine is given a chance at survival. They can run, they can fight back. But in the Saw movies the person doesn't have that chance. And it's not just horror. I get the same feeling in other movies. Like What's Eating Gilbert Grape. I think it was his mom.

There are 3 types of movies I won't watch:

1) Claustraphobic Movies

'Nuff said.

2) Satanic Movies

Why take the chance?

3) Morally Ambiguous Movies

Movies where there isn't a good guy. Like Pulp Fiction or Fargo. Plus HBO series like Deadwood and The Sopranos. Call me weird but I feel that serious movies should have a moral. Something deep in me requires it. When I see a movie where there is no one you can pull for I feel depressed and empty.

Maybe I need to watch less movies.

Marci the Model

2006-09-28T20:32:00.000-07:00

So I didn't know it, but my sister Marci has been moonlighting as a model for Pr1me Outlets!

Just kidding. But seriously. Doesn't this look JUST like her?

Chrissa and I saw (our brother-in-law) Shayne's long-lost twin once driving a hatchback in Kettering, OH. But unlike Marci's twin, Shayne's isn't an outlet model. His is as elusive as the great yeti herds...

Peter, Peter, Pumpkin Eater

2006-09-26T17:35:00.000-07:00

I went to a Tex-Mex place today, called The Highlander, and they had a Garth Brooks album playing in the background. I almost felt I was in Texas again. Schizophrenic as I am, I had the lyrics stuck in my head all day. The song was It's Midnight Cinderella and the lyrics:

I'm Peter, Peter the Pumpkin Eater, and the party's just begun...

Neurotic as I am schizophrenic, I decided to find out what that nursery rhyme means. From Judaism.com...

Peter was a poor man who had an unfaithful wife. She kept cheating on him (couldn’t keep her), so he had to find a way to stop her running around. His solution, fairly common in the middle ages, was a chastity belt (pumpkin shell). For those who don’t know, a chastity belt is roughly a pair of metal underwear with lock and key, so that no one could enter the private region of the woman except whoever held the key, usually her husband. And as the rhyme goes, once he put her in that belt, he kept her very well.

Women!

A Brave New World

2006-09-21T13:43:00.000-07:00

I don't know how many of you are familiar with Huxley's A Brave New World but I read an article today that reminded me of it. If you saw Gattica then you'll also know where this is going...

Where do we cross the line when we're dealing with eugenics?

eu‧gen‧ics: The study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding.

Eugenics was an idea spawned by the Social Darwinists of the late-19th century, who felt that the social order of man was a product of natural selection: if you were poor you had been selected to be poor due to the genes and ambitions of your ancestors. So why not help natural selection along? Eugenics came to a crescendo under the Nazis: who actually attempted to implement it through selective breeding and extermination.

So, suffice it to say, eugenics got a bad rap in the 20th century.

But there is a more subtle form of eugenics that has wormed its way back into the picture through artificial fertilization and genotyping.

Fertility clinics are making inroads at screening for diseases. You can look at a dish full of viable embryos and tell a parent, "This one is more likely to develop cancer," or "this one has Down Syndrome"... and then they can only implant those embryos predisposed to have healthier lives. We're not talking manipulating genes here or designing a child. We're just talking about increasing the odds of having healthy children.

But it's only a matter of time before we will be able to map out the human genome to the point that we can choose what baby we want to have: a boy or a girl, brown eyes or blue, athletic or brainy... And we don't have any policies in place against that.

An example. The article mentions a woman who has three children--two boys and a girl--and would like another daughter. Most fertility clinics don't have a policy against nonmedical sex selection and (in fact) of the clinics that offer "preimplantation genetic diagnosis" (PGD), 42% have done it. Like the author says: "It's a slippery slope." Do I think it's unethical to choose your baby's sex? No. Do I think it's unethical to screen your baby for potential diseases? No. But that's the problem: Any one of these types of questions, within reason, is difficult to say no to.

It's when you put them all together that it becomes painfully obvious that these decisions could have a large impact on the social order. Eugenics could create a society where social order is not built on a monetary scale but on a biological one: where the wealthy are even more firmly entrenched because they'll be the only ones who will be able to afford the treatment.

A whale of a tale

2006-09-17T13:23:00.000-07:00

A couple of weeks ago, Chrissa and I were in Sunday School and our teacher, Bro. Cavenaugh, was talking about Jonah.

He asked the question, "Are there any accounts of people having been swallowed by a whale or a fish?"

I opened my big mouth and said, "Actually, there was a Japanese sailor on a whaling boat that was swallowed by a whale. They killed the whale and when they cut its stomach open they found him, bleached white by the stomach acids, but otherwise alive."

Bro. Cavenaugh looked a little bit stunned and then went on with his lesson. Chrissa leaned over and said, "I don't think that was the answer he was looking for."

I decided to find out if what I had said was true or not. I vaguely remember being told this story myself, but I can't remember when or where. So I started looking online and, I'll tell you...it does not look good! First off, I haven't been able to find ANYTHING dealing with a Japanese whaler being swallowed--only Japanese fishermen killing a Great White shark that had the skeleton of a man, obviously not alive. I've only found 3 cases of humans being swallowed, and one of a dog. Here are the humans:

James Bartleby

A sailor on the "Star of the East," a British whaling vessel. James Bartleby allegedly was swallowed by a sperm whale around the year 1889, off the Falkland Islands. This case has been often cited in Christian literature and continues to be so online. However, a history professor named Edward B. Davis carried out a very thorough investigation and does a good job of debunking the tale.

Marshall Jenkins

A Bostonian who supposedly was swallowed by a sperm whale in the South Seas in 1771, but apparently was immediately vomited up. Not as published as the Bartleby story (probably because he wasn't in the stomach as long) and so I haven't been able to find anything for or against it. But, either way, not the story I was quoting.

A Reader's Digest article

In an article written to support a literal reading of the Bible, an author references a Reader's Digest article written about whale sharks, including the story of a man swallowed by a whale shark and recovered 48 hours later, alive. He doesn't give a citation. I've written Reader's Digest and the site managers to see if I can get a reference. If so, this could be the "Moby Dick" I'm hunting.

By the way, just in case it wasn't obvious: my whole point of writing about this isn't to prove whether or not the Book of Jonah really happened. It's to see if I'm a liar.

I'll let you know if I hear anything back about that Reader's Digest article. But, for now, it looks like I'm going to have to come clean to Bro. Cavenaugh...

Only peace remains

2006-09-15T16:57:00.000-07:00

I decided to give Hero a second chance. Well, to be honest, it was the only thing on TV...But I tried to keep an open mind. I didn't want to be so cynical. Oh yeah, and I tried not to let the "puppet fighting" get to me so much...

First off, Dan, the fighting. From a special effects perspective the fighting really was amazing. To carry out a realistic sword fight while doing acrobatics...well we've come a long way since Mary Martin. And the flying leaves/wind were rather artistic.

More important, though, were the subtleties of the fight beneath the fight. Unlike American martial arts movies where it's about who's the best fighter, this was about who was the more controlled fighter, the wise fighter: unwilling to take their oponent's life even if they could. Which was why I loved Broken Sword. He carried off what Chow Yun-Fat could not: he was wise and emotional but not weak. In Crouching Tiger, Chow Yun-Fat's striving for perfection led him to hold back his feelings. He was not at peace with himself. In Hero, Broken Sword won't allow himself to be with Flying Snow because of their different philosophies--and he's right.

So I've changed my mind. Zhang Yimou wasn't encouraging weakness. There was nothing weak about Broken Sword or Nameless sacrificing themselves. They did not have to die. (They were the two best fighters)

The moral of the story, I see now, is what the King of Qin said at the end. Nameless is still not sure if he should assassinate the king or not, and the king is studying the calligraphy: the king vocalizes that the highest level of swordsmanship is, paradoxically, to do away with the sword:

The warrior embraces all around him. The desire to kill no longer exists. Only peace remains.

The first time I saw Hero I could only see it within a modern Chinese context. Now, as the wars in the Middle East reveal themselves to be a perpetuation of every war that ever was...I'm becoming sick of fighting. All fighting. It's lost a lot of its Hollywood glamour. Maybe that's what made me more open to Hero my second time around, or at least more pensive.

Falling to Earth

2006-09-13T18:33:00.000-07:00

These are a series from a slideshow I happened across and loved.

More guilty pleasures

2006-09-10T19:05:00.000-07:00

So remember when I mentioned about how Chrissa and I started getting into The Simple Life?

I have another confession.

I love South Park.

Trey Parker and Matt Stone are twisted, disgusting individuals but they sure can make you laugh. I've probably watched a dozen episodes in my life and I always laugh and I always feel guilty about laughing. I can't figure out why I like it. It's not that it's crass--because that usually turns me off. I think it's 1) the 2-dimensional artwork, 2) their voices, 3) and Cartman.

Cartman is one of the best characters ever created. He is so obnoxious that you have to like him. And he is an evil genius.

In memoriam

2006-09-08T17:53:00.000-07:00

Seeing as how it's a couple of days from the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks...

On September 11th, at 8:46:30 a.m., Eastern Daylight Time, a Boeing 767 loaded with 24,000 gallons of jet fuel smashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center, setting in motion a series of events which would kill 3,000 people.

"Why would someone do this?"

The country was in chaos, we wandered in a daze. We were afraid, we were confused. We wanted revenge. Everyone knew it was Muslims. Americans and even Canadians went out and attacked Muslims, burned mosques ... and even a Hindu temple. If they had a turban, they were the enemy.

President Bush promised us on the same day of the attacks: "The search is under way for those who have perpetrated these evil acts ... we will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these attacks and those who sheltered them."

He was of course referring to Afghanistan. Were there any Afghanis involved in the attacks? No. Did it really matter? No. The Taliban had sheltered bin Laden, therefore they were a good target. America could not afford to be seen as weak. We were no Ozymandius.

The war machine started up. Media began immediately to demonize the Taliban. We read articles about religious oppression, saw documentaries on forced veiling. All true. But what was the media propaganda really telling us? Let's not feel bad for Afghanistan. We're going to liberate them (not that we cared about liberating them before September 11th). Two years later the war machine ramps up to invade Iraq, and for the same reason. Liberation.

Talibani Afghanistan and Baathist Iraq were truly two of the most oppressive nations in the world, carrying out human rights violations and atrocities on a genocidal scale. It is sorrowful that people have to live under that kind of fear. But it's been four years since we entered Afghanistan, three years since we entered Iraq. Are these people better off? Is the world any safer? Are terrorists giving up?

The question we asked the day of the attacks is the right one: "Why would someone do this?" Why do people from these obscure nations feel it necessary to travel all the way around the world and kill their selves and kill us? We are good people. We don't want to be involved in their problems. Let them be Muslim. Let us buy our Gucci bags and go to the movies and see fireworks on the 4th of July. We're not hurting anyone.

But you look at a European country like Norway, with its high standard of living and healthy lifestyle. They buy their Gucci bags and go to the movies and watch fireworks on June 7th. Why is no one attacking them?

Because Norway isn't supporting tyrannical governments in the Middle East. Norway doesn't try its hand at nation building and forced democracy. Norway doesn't hamstring UN efforts to make peace in Palestine or in Africa. Norway isn't the world's largest supplier of arms to thugs and dictators. Norway doesn't give a billion dollars a year to Israel and Egypt. And Norway doesn't condemn a population to starvation and depravity just because they don't like its president.

I love America, but I don't love what we do. We do not always wear a white hat or ride a white horse, though we think we do. Our intentions are most often self-centered and our actions are typically bullying. So the question we have to ask ourselves, five years from the attacks, is this: "If we're acting exactly the same way we did from 1944 until now, can we expect the results to change?"

The Greeks had a sanity test where a man was given a bucket and led to a stream that was filling up a pool. He was asked to drain the pool using the bucket. If the man tried to scoop out the water, he was considered insane. If he tried to dam the stream first, he was sane. I think we're bailing water here with all of our efforts at security and policy. It's only a matter of time before someone strikes us again.

The Green Party

2006-08-31T22:43:00.000-07:00

The other day I was driving behind this hippy chick whose Honda Civic was plastered with 4-5 bumper stickers. Two of them stood out:

The first said: Go Vegan!
The second said: A hamburger stops a beating heart.

If you don't recognize it, A hamburger stops a beating heart is an allusion to the anti-abortion slogan, An abortion stops a beating heart.

So that got me thinking ... Many vegans and vegetarians don't eat meat for compassionate reasons: often a desire not to harm animals. Meanwhile, most liberals believe in Free Choice. So my question is this:

Do the majority of vegetarians support the right to choose over the right to life when it comes to human life? If so, how do they justify their beliefs?

Much Ado About Something

2006-08-29T19:18:00.000-07:00

Forbes published an article about a week ago by Michael Noer called "Don't Marry Career Women"... and angry lesbians everywhere have not been able to shut up about it!

Just kidding about the angry lesbians.

According to the article: "professional women are more likely to get divorced, more likely to cheat and less likely to have children. And if they do have kids, they are more likely to be unhappy about it."

As you can imagine this article has upset a lot of people: talk shows and blogs have been buzzing and Forbes' chief editor has been buried under a mountain of hate mail. Everyone is upset about the sexist and backwards-thinking article Forbes had the audacity to print.

Because of the backlash another Forbes columnist, Elizabeth Corcoran, gave her response the next day (to the side of Michael's article). Read it if you want but it's mostly anecdotal. A better response was posted in Slate where Jack Shafer examines the actual sociological studies.

Now, I'm not saying that the sociological findings are right. I don't know if career women are more likely to divorce or cheat on their husbands. But that's not what bothers me here. What bothers me is

1) The way Forbes was called "socially irresponsible" for publishing the findings.

I agree that media is often socially irresponsible, but not here. A magazine isn't irresponsible because it published something politically incorrect. In fact, I'd say the opposite is true: if a magazine censors itself out of fear of public opinion it lacks journalistic integrity.

2) How people felt public outcry can refute scientific findings.

The underlying premise of a scientific finding is that an objective observer, faced with the same evidence, would come to the same conclusion. So if you hear a batch of statistics, the thing to do is to study how the poll was taken, what questions were asked, and how the conclusions were made. What you don't do is say, "I don't like that finding because it disagrees with my worldview. I will try and stifle the findings through my rage."

Once again, I'm not saying Michael Noer was right. But I do feel the public was wrong.

Coat hanger monopoly

2006-08-17T20:50:00.000-07:00

Chrissa's trying to get a coat hanger monopoly!

When I leave hangers out, she snaps them and throws them in the trash.

Her insidious plan, she says, is to throw away my left-out hangers, one-by-one, until she has all the hangers in the house! :O

...she's probably been planning this from Day One.

Moving pictures

2006-08-12T20:54:00.000-07:00

On the screen roll by the pictures
moving pictures, without sound
black and white, gray and white
moving pictures, without sound.
There's a projector turning, whirring,
projecting from a projector's booth
pictures formed from threads of whiteness
pictures woven from the night.
There's no body in the theater.
There's no eye to see the show--
only ticket stubs collected
only popcorn on the floor
only cups with smears of lipstick
only a battered paper bag
only a crayon box, discarded
only a straw and plastic lid
only a magazine, forgotten
only seats and empty seats
only an empty movie theater
only an empty movie theater
only an empty movie theater
only a picture.
Moving pictures.

A Heartbreaking Work

2006-08-07T13:52:00.000-07:00

Lord of the Flies is one of the most brilliant books of all time.

It's no wonder that it's studied in so many English classes: it's strong on plot, character and setting--all the elements of a great story. And unlike Shogun (a story strong on plot, character and setting) it also has importance. No offense, Dan.

Not every novel has importance. Some novels are just good stories. Like movies. Some have a message and others are merely entertaining. Lord of the Flies carries the same moral as Heart of Darkness: that Man is an animal. When you strip away our civilization and rules and laws and everything else that makes us well-behaved, we are dangerous, slinking animals.

Now. I'm not saying that I agree with Conrad or Golding. I'm not saying that pessimism is the only message. What I'm saying is that I can't think of a single book that more effortlessly combines the symbolic with the literal. The pig's head is Satan. Simon is our conscience. Ralph is us. The conch is law. And Piggy is civilization, rational but annoying.

LotF is subtle. Its symbolism isn't obnoxious--but it is apparent.

Alright, consider the gauntlet thrown.

The Curse of the Black Sequel

2006-07-20T17:03:00.000-07:00

We saw Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest a couple of weeks ago and we were pretty disappointed.

Why am I disappointed? Sequels are supposed to suck, right?

If a sequel's NOT ENOUGH like the first one, people will say "It wasn't at all as good as the
first one." If it's TOO MUCH like the first one, people will say it was a re-hash. And then
there's a long history of movie series gone bad:

Category 1: BAD SEQUELS

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Star Wars: Episodes I-III
Rocky 3 & 5
Die Hard 2: Die Harder
Alien^3
Mad Max 3: Beyond Thunderdome
Rambo 2 & 3
Jaws 2, 3, 4...
Batman Returns, et cet
The Sum of All Fears

Category 2: GOOD SEQUELS

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Star Wars: Episodes V & VI
Rocky 2 & 4
Die Hard with a Vengeance
Aliens
Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior
Patriot Games & Clear and Present Danger

In fact, there are only four good series that I can think of without any crappy or semi-crappy sequels:

Harry Potter
Lord of the Rings
Lethal Weapon
Anne of Green Gables

To conclude: Some sequels suck. Even when a sequel sucks, they can sometimes pull the series out of the toilet (ex. Indiana Jones). Sometimes a series can be really good and they take it too far (ex. Mad Max). And sometimes they should have stopped after the first one (ex. Rambo: First Blood).

Joey

2006-07-05T13:58:00.000-07:00

pla·gia·rize ( P ) Pronunciation Key (plj-rz)v. pla·gia·rized, pla·gia·riz·ing, pla·gia·riz·es v. tr.
2. To appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from (another).

I'm a plagiarist. In old Latin, that meant kidnapper. But I'm using it in the modern sense. A discussion on Dan's blog has forced me to come clean about something. Dan invented a comic back in junior high called "The Misadventures of Joey". His hero, Joey, was this little guy with three hairs on his head. Joey was (I assume) a pen-and-ink representation of himself, only even more caustic and cynical than polite society allowed Dan to be.

Dan and I wrote a Choose Your Own Adventure story about Joey called Warehouse-o'-Doom. The story had nothing to do with a warehouse...and two choices always available were:

a) Eat a tamale
b) Shoot yourself

Dan has since incorporated Joey as his logo on his blog (you'll have to check it out in the top left and bottom right of his blog...since my browser had a hard time capturing them)

I have also incorporated Joey. I've altered him just a tad to where the similarity is less pronounced...but not enough that Dan couldn't sue me someday. I typically draw it as a little icon after my signature:

Chrissa then plagiarized my plagiarization and draws after her name:

We even have a plagiarization for our dog, Champ:

So we are one big thieving family. All trying to be more like Dan. So it's kind of cool...when you think about it. What is it: imitation is the most sincere form of flattery?

Guilty pleasures

2006-07-03T13:42:00.000-07:00

I'm ashamed to admit it. Or, maybe I'm not. Chrissa and I watched The Simple Life last night...and loved it.

Maybe it's that we JUST got cable television again (after nearly 2 years of basic cable or rabbit ears) and we have no self-control. Maybe it's that we are hooked on the reality TV fad. Or maybe it was that it was late and I was paying more attention to the shopping list I was writing up (a bad idea, apparently: I spent $104 on 2 weeks worth of groceries!)

For anyone who hasn't seen it, DON'T. It is junk television. But it is really hilarious. At one point of the show, Chris turned to me and said: "I wish I were Paris Hilton."

"WHAT? No way," I said. "Would you really want to be a stuck up, bratty, self-engrossed, tall blond socialite?"

"Well," she replied, "I would change a few things."

Not me. There is NOTHING about Paris Hilton's life that I find attractive except for her money. She is the superficiality poster girl.

I were a trust child or celebrity, I would pack my bags and become a recluse living in France, like Johnny Depp. Why live in Hollywood and put up with the obnoxious crowds and paparazzi? I feel bad for Jennifer Aniston, Brad Pitt, and (sort of) Angelina Jolie...but why put up with it?

Of course, there are cool aspects of having your jet-set friends come over and hang out for weeks at your manor...or throwing lavish parties on your yacht. Sure. I'm not saying that if I were a celeb I wouldn't want to have a few celebrity friends; but I'd want to hang out with Poet Laureates and starving artists...not Nicole Richie and Paris Hilton.

*Note: I enjoy hanging out with my non-Poet Laureate friends and amateur starving artists as well.

Little wars

2006-06-21T13:27:00.000-07:00

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." --Bertrand Russell

I have mixed feelings about the war. I had reservations about invading Iraq but I was also bothered all through the 90s by the impact of the UN's trade sanctions and Saddam's brutality on the Iraqi people. I feel that some of what the military does over there is incredible and doesn't get enough air time by the media--and yet I'm extremely bothered by some of the autrocities we've also done, our civil-military authority's cover ups of these events, and our lack of planning and foresight for an end-state.

But no matter my sympathies for both sides, there's one thing I can't sympathize with. There's an organization out of Kansas called the Westboro Baptist Church that feels it's appropriate to protest at funerals of slain soldiers. The WBC's best-known slogan is "God Hates Fags". They feel the reason America is losing troops is because it loosened the restrictions on homosexuals being in the service. The WBC (which is un-affiliated with the Baptist conventions) is also anti-Catholic, anti-Semitic, etc.

The WBC attends soldiers' funerals and holds up signs that read "Thank God for Dead Soldiers," among other things. These people are absolute low-lifes.

So a group of Harley-Davidson riders called the Patriot Guard Riders--many of them veterans--have taken it upon themselves to serve as escorts at these funerals. They line the streets with their Harleys and American flags, roar their engines to drown out the cries of the protesters, and even made a wall of riders holding flags to block out the view of the WBC protesters.

I'm very impressed with the PGR--even more so that they don't resort to violence. I'm not trying to change anyone's views on the war, mine included. But I just wanted it known that there are some good people out there wearing leather and sporting tatoos besides Hulk Hogan.

Crouching censor

2006-06-15T21:21:00.000-07:00

Dan's comment on my last post reminded me of something. In it he brought up Hero, a Chinese movie which came out in 2002.

From a Western standpoint Hero follows in the footsteps of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (even though Crouching Tiger wasn't the first of its kind in Asian cinema, it was the first successful [undubbed] Chinese fight movie in the U.S. in nearly a decade and it opened the way for movies like Hero and House of Flying Daggers.)

I had mixed feelings about Crouching Tiger. On the one hand, it was gorgeous. It had incredible music, scenery, and cinematography. Its acting was superb and its fight scenes well done. On the other hand, the fights were too long and the movie's message ambiguous.

For this reason I approached Hero with trepidation--only worsened since the movie starred Jet Li. I'm sure Jet Li is a great martial artist, but you'd never know since he uses wires to do his stunts. Whatever appreciation you have for his fighting abilities is downplayed by the way he flies around like Mary Martin playing Peter Pan. Even so, Hero was marvelously choreographed. I'll give it that: Hero was better for its fighting while Crouching Tiger was better for its plot.

My real hang up with Hero was that its director was Zhang Yimou. Yimou was, I once felt, one of China's most important directors. He made a number of impressive movies prior to Hero, including Ju Dou, Raise the Red Lantern, To Live, and Not One Less. Each of these had an underlying political message critical of the Chinese government which led to him being punished and censored in China. Despite this he continued making political movies.

Hero also had a political message...only this time it came to the opposite conclusion. Jet Li, the nameless "hero" of the story, has the opportunity to assassinate the brutal warlord, the King of Qin who was fated to unify China. Only Jet Li doesn't carry out the assassination. He sees that the warlord's bloodshed is necessary...that even his own death is necessary...and that China's unity is more important. Applying this message to modern China, where dissidence is brutally crushed, it would seem that Zhang Yimou is advocating that his countrymen overlook their Chinese government's faults for the purpose of nationalism. He's backsliding on his previous revisionism: that a Chinese individual is important.

Maybe China's censors eventually got to Yimou or maybe he's become Hollywood-ized. I haven't seen House of Flying Daggers (also by Zhang Yimou). I'd be interested to hear if it comes to the same conclusion.

Listmania: The Best Movie Fight Scenes

2006-06-11T04:34:00.000-07:00

Listmania: The Best Movie Fight Scenes
One rule: The fight had to be with fists or a sword...no guns

No way I could limit it to just ten...

11) Return of the Jedi -- I thought I'd start with a classic. The final fight scene between Luke and Darth Vader.

10) Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon -- I didn't like this movie, but the fight scene between Michelle Yeoh and Ziyi Zhang in the weapons room was pretty awesome!

9) Grosse Pointe Blanke -- John Cussack, Benny the Jet, a bloody pen.

8) The Matrix -- The subway fight scene.

7) The Phantom Menace -- When Darth Maul fights two jedi with a double-bladed lightsaber. Sweet.

6) Gladiator -- The part in the woods when they're going to execute Maximus...oh yeah, and the rest of the movie.

5) Fight Club -- When Edward Norton beats himself up in front of his boss.

4) The Bourne Identity -- Matt Damon and a bloody pen (also the part in the American Embassy)

3) The Last Samurai -- Two parts: 1) Where Tom Cruise, weaponless, figures out an entire fight against 4-5 assassins before he carries it out, 2) The ninja attack

2) Snatch -- The final boxing match, where Brad Pitt goes horizontal

1) Rumble in the Bronx -- The 10-minute pool room fight scene, you end up feeling out of breath just watching it!

Honorable mentions: Braveheart (the final battle), The Road Warrior (final fight scene - it had too many guns to be able to count it), Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story (the 1-minute fight), Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade (the fight on the tank), The Lord of the Rings (the Boromir death scene--or any number of other scenes), and Raising Arizona (where John Goodman is fighting Nick Cage in the trailer home and they keep punching the walls and ceiling by accident)

Frozen money and wiretapping

2006-05-27T09:21:00.000-07:00

The main thing that's been on my mind lately is mine and Chrissa's new house. We've just set a closing date for Tuesday (one DAY before we have to be out of our apartment)! Otherwise, I feel like I've been going through a drought of logical thought...

Two quick thoughts on current events:

1) Representative William Jefferson, D-La, was recently busted by the FBI with $90,000 of bribe money wrapped up in foil in his freezer--money that was supposedly to be used to bribe a Nigerian government official to help a US telecommunications company do business in Nigeria.

What are the Democrats saying? That this was an abuse of Executive power against the Legislative power (FBI is under control of the President)...and an obvious attempt to make the Democrats look bad. If anyone made the Democrats look bad, it was Rep. Jefferson. The FBI was just doing their job.

See, this is what makes me mad about national politics: a large part of them are greasy, corrupt and officious. They maintain their stranglehold on America by bashing the other side. Take Tom DeLay, R-Tx, for instance...the former House Majority Leader. The guy is corrupt to the core and yet Republican congressmen fought tooth and nail to allow him to remain as House Majority Leader EVEN IF INDICTED of ethics violations.

Most of these guys wouldn't think what they're doing is wrong, most likely. It probably just seems like "smart politicking" to these guys: re-districting and looking out for American business, etc, etc.

It's time to clean shop.

2) The NSA was recently exposed for its networking of millions of phone numbers. I'm not quite sure of all the details, but I think what they were doing is looking for anomolies and patterns in overseas phone calls...and seeing who suspected terrorists called and who called them. And then they monitor.

I would expect that the average, everday Joe Schmoe American doesn't need to be concerned about the NSA tapping their phonelines. I don't think the NSA cares what 900 numbers people call. Personally, I think this is a smart move.

Everytime I read about the NY police busting a group of would-be-terrorists before they carry out a bombing on the Metro...or hear about the FBI busting down a hillbilly's door a week before he was going to blow up the IRS building...I'm impressed that they had the right guys in the right places to stop those things from happening. If it weren't for security, we wouldn't enjoy the freedom we have to complain about their security measures and our right to privacy.

You take a stroll down in Tel Aviv and you'll see real security measures and you'll notice a real lack of privacy. But America is not practical. America is reactive. We like to be enraged at what we hear on the news between American Idol and House. That's what makes us American: we're mad as hell but we don't know why.

Well...I've got a movie to catch...

Pinocchio

2006-05-18T15:39:00.000-07:00

Anyone who knows me knows I love to tell stories, relate movies, or impart tidbits of trivia. It's something I like about myself but also something that drives me (and Chrissa) up the wall. I was reminded of this trait when I was writing my 99... (#89 and number #98)

Once when I was in college I started wondering how many of the stories I told were actually true. For a period of months I began stopping myself mid-story and apologizing, then writing it down so I could actually look it up later. I found out that about 1/2 the stories I told were "true" and that of those, only about 10% of the time did I get the details correct (like numbers).

Since that time I've gotten back into that habit: passing on triviata I definitely have heard but don't know of its truthfulness.

So I'm re-committing myself. No more telling stories for the next couple of months until I know they're true.

That being said, I would like to pass on a quick story that I used to share that - to my joy -turned out to be true:

Some of the best runners in the world are the Tarahumara--a group of indigenous Mexicans who live in the Sierra Madre Occidental mountains. They are so fit that they can hunt by running their prey to exhaustion. They call themselves "raramuri" (swift feet). They have competition races up to 150 miles. In one race, they dribble a wooden ball, soccer style. In another, they throw and catch wooden hoops while they run.

Most of them drink and smoke before a race, and run in ragged home-made sandles. They first came to international attention as runners in the 1928 Olympics marathon (where two of them finished the race complaining: "Too short, too short!")...and then on the ultra-marathon (i.e. 100-mile races) circuit in the early 1990s. A lot of world racers dislike the Tarahumara and there has been some controversy about their running.

That was a good bedtime story, Grandpa.

99...

2006-05-13T08:50:00.000-07:00

1. I jot down notes (journal topics, movies, etc.) on paper scraps ... and then lose them
2. For some reason I feel closure for just having written them down
3. I like scars

4. I can't stand even TOUCHING tunafish

5. 90% of the time I can't sleep using a pillow

6. My favorite color is grey

7. My favorite smell is fresh-cut grass

8. I get insomnia

9. When I do get insomnia I can't fall asleep unless I'm on the floor

10. My favorite drink is chocolate milk

11. I can't grow a beard or even a mustache

12. My first nightmare was being chased by a giant daddy longlegs across a white plain

13. My re-occuring nightmares are about sharks, frozen water, or snakes

14. One of my favorite TV shows is "Charmed" on the WB

15. My other favorites are "Mythbusters," "Ghosthunters," and "Rachel Ray"

16. I keep track of all the books I read (I've read over 700...not including children's books)

17. I would sleep with a fan on year-round

18. If I had a choice to fly or be invisible I would choose invisibility

19. If I could choose any career I'd be an author

20. I'm fascinated by snakes and like to pick them up (even though I was bitten once)

21. My favorite groups are "Pink Floyd," "Devotchka," "R.E.M.," and "Pearl Jam"

22. I'm 5'11" but everyone guesses I'm 6'1"

23. I like to eat strange foods

24. I've eaten rattlesnake, alligator, marinaded quail eggs, snails, cow tongue/liver/intestines, chicken feet, fish head, a marmot, uncooked clams, stomach soup, and rabbit fetus

25. I've gone nude repelling and love to skinny dip

26. I'm afraid of deep water but typically swim further out in the ocean than anyone else

27. I use clippers on my arms and legs -- so I don't look like a wooly mammoth

28. I once had a twig poke me in the eye and break off under my eyelid

29. When I was an infant I crawled into an oven, once, and fell out of a second story window onto concrete

30. I love deserts

31. I hate hot tubs

32. I have no fear of death

33. My closest brush with death was when I was on a plane that had an insulation fire and fell 1,000 feet (note: the oxygen masks may not inflate...)

34. My favorite animal is the camel

35. My favorite flowers are dandylions

36. I'm a peacemaker

37. I don't like it when people play with my hair

38. But I love it when someone cuts my hair

39. My favorite cereal is Cinnamon Toast Crunch

40. Chrissa is my best friend

41. I've lived in Utah, Guatemala, Syria, Minnesota, Texas, Ohio and Alabama

42. The place I most want to travel to is Switzerland--Maine is second--Nepal third--Kenya fourth

43. My favorite scar is 1" long and on my shoulderblade

44. I got it when I was on a rope swing and it broke...20' above a thornbush

45. My favorite feels are camel fur under my bare feet, Champ (my dog) licking my feet, walking through wet grass, and touching the tops of Chrissa's feet (I think I see a theme)

46. I love to play pool but have no one to play with

47. I love to play chess ... ditto

48. From the age of 17, on a number of occasions I planned to run away

49. I played trombone for 3 years in high school and probably only practiced 4-5 times in that period

50. I took band because I liked band trips and enjoyed talking to Sheri Bauer (my stand partner)

51. Before marrying Chrissa I had kissed 7 girls

52. I am an atrocious singer

53. I only like to sing in the shower but even then I'm embarrassed

54. When I read Stephen King's "The Stand" I wished that it would actually happen

55. If I could meet any historical figure it would be Joseph Smith, Mohammad, Jesus, or Adam--not out of religious fervor...but to be able to prove/disprove first-hand

56. If I had to choose a non-religious figure it would be Thomas Jefferson, Socrates, Kant, or Goethe

57. My favorite thing about Chrissa is her sarcasm

58. My next favorite things are her orderliness and her dark hair/eyes

59. I speak Spanish and a little Arabic

60. I would go back to the Middle East tomorrow if I had the chance...but not with the military

61. Some of my fondest memories are of playing Role-Playing Games (RPGs) [e.g. Dungeons and Dragons] with my high school/college friends

62. I would still be playing them if I lived back in Utah

63. I like going commando

64. I left the Church when I was 24 and didn't return for two years

65. Given the choice to be "disfellowshipped," I requested to be "ex-communicated"

66. Without my knowing, the Church only disfellowshipped me

67. I had a crush on a girl from 4th to 12th grade and I never even asked her out

68. Later on I found out she liked me

69. My favorite SCENIC places are Wadi Rum, Jordan; "Ghost Rock" (on the mountain behind my parents' house); Chrissa's parents' house; Goblin Valley, Utah; El Amparo, Guatemala; the Outer Banks, North Carolina; Lake Into-the-Woods, Wyoming; and Lake Powell, Utah.

70. I've never broken a bone

71. I played soccer for 7 years and it's still my favorite sport

72. My ideal automobile would be a Land Rover or a Jeep Wrangler

73. I don't know a single thing about car repair/maintenance

74. I want a tatoo but I wouldn't want it to be permanent

75. I love playing nickle slots and Bingo and don't feel a twinge of guilt about it

76. I think the saddest album ever is Nine Inch Nails' "Downward Spiral"

77. I think the scariest songs are Tool's "Faaip De Oiad" and "Schism" ... and that piece by Philip Glass about the attack on Hiroshima

78. I love trains

79. If I could live anywhere in time it would be as a villager in 15th-16th C. Scotland or as a Plains Indian in 18th C. America

80. I wish I were left handed

81. I may be getting braces this month

82. I have a fake tooth in the front of my mouth

83. I first broke my teeth riding a skateboard at the age of 8

84. I'm a poet but haven't written poetry since 2002

85. My favorite pizza toppings are sausage, mushrooms and black olives

86. I've dyed my hair over a dozen times, and permed it once

87. I could get sunburned at midnight...I'm so white

88. Since January of this year I've become a flexitarian--and now I feel guilty eating meat as a dish

89. I can never remember numbers. If I tell you a statistic I'm probably making the number part of it up

90. I'm horrid with directions. I can get lost (and do) in my backyard. It drives Chrissa nuts

91. I don't like chocolate unless it has toffee, almonds or peanut butter

92. My favorite desserts are made by Rob Morris' mom

93. I think the most attractive actresses are hispanic. There are only 2-3 American actresses I find attractive

94. I like wearing foreign coins on a piece of string/leather

95. The only other "jewelry" I can stand wearing is my wedding ring--and only because it's wide, silver, and has no ornamentation (like Ed Harris' ring in "The Abyss")

96. I live in movies

97. My ideal home would be a yacht

98. I talk too much

99. I was born in Kirkland, Washington

Mountain man

2006-05-03T09:23:00.000-07:00

I've had a number of requests from people not to post religious topics anymore. If you're one of these people: don't feel bad and no worries! But, for now, that's the plan...

As most of you would probably agree, a blog comment box is not the best format to carry on religious discussions. You can't articulate thoughts or emotions in a few sentences. It's so easy to be misunderstood.

When I was young I wanted to be a mountain man.

Adaptation

2006-04-20T15:28:00.000-07:00

This is in response to the commentary in my last post.

Religion has survived science through adaptation.

Religion is the end result of thousands of years of evolution. What began as literal has become figurative. What was once truth is now metaphor: the earth wasn't made in 7 days. The earth hasn't existed 6,000 years. Lot's wife didn't turn into a pillar of salt. Lot didn't offer his daughters to be raped by the Sodomites. Abraham didn't plant an idolatrous grove. God didn't harden Pharaoh's heart against Moses. Satan didn't turn into a serpent. The Holy Ghost didn't turn into a dove. Christ did not mean that the thief would go straight to Paradise.

We redefine the Bible because religion is a living thing, while the Bible is stone. Religion holds to a few choice verses, rectifies others, and discards the rest. Religion can't tie itself to the Bible: it was written when people had a different understanding of the world. Even the Book of Mormon -- written less than 200 years ago -- cannot be read literally: King Lamoni with his "horses and chariots"...and the Nephites with their "swords."

So what can we do when faced with scriptural discrepancies? We can either read them metaphorically, distance ourselves from them, or call them mistranslations...or, in the case of the Book of Mormon examples, say that Joseph Smith was describing something for which he had no name (like a llama).

I've been told a thousand times before: you can't have faith if things made sense. "If you could prove it," people say, "you wouldn't need to believe." But as I've said before: there is no 'proof' until we die...Unless God is walking with us, there IS need for faith.

That being said...

If I don't think every troubling Biblical verse was mistranslated. If I think the Hebrews really believed that God created the earth in 7 days (or: 6) and that Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt (maybe explaining the salt formations on the Plains of Aram)...and that God could harden a man's heart without taking his agency....can I still believe in the Bible? Only if I believe in the fallibility of prophets. Even modern ones.

Gordon B. Hinckley, in a newspaper interview, was asked:

Q: [D]o Mormons believe that God was once a man?

A: I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.'' Now that's more of a couplet than anything else.

Did Gordon B. Hinckley lie? When asked in a separate interview about polygamy, Pres. Hinckley implied that we don't. Did he lie there? The writer of Genesis said that the earth was created before the sun. Was he wrong?

Do I have faith in the Book of Mormon or the Book of Abraham? Not really. Do I believe they're scriptures? Yes, in the same way other Mormons believe in the Bible (except that they're two books with different types of inaccuracies). If you follow the good principles, it is a scripture to pattern your life after. Now as for the rites and rituals (such as baptism) -- that's a discussion for another day.