Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Hi -
Thanks for the recent responses to some of these older posts; for some reason I get them via email, but they don't seem to appear on the blog itself. In any event, as a public service announcement, I should mention that while I've not been posting here for months, I am posting on my Facebook page. Feel free to visit (it's not "friend-only") and check out everything from the occasional bit of commentary to the latest pictures of our housecats, etc.
Thanks -
Phobrek
Thanks for the recent responses to some of these older posts; for some reason I get them via email, but they don't seem to appear on the blog itself. In any event, as a public service announcement, I should mention that while I've not been posting here for months, I am posting on my Facebook page. Feel free to visit (it's not "friend-only") and check out everything from the occasional bit of commentary to the latest pictures of our housecats, etc.
Thanks -
Phobrek
Thursday, November 4, 2010
party crashing
I was commenting on friend & hero ntodd's blog post in which he makes a quick reflection on the electoral process he's just endured. Todd (easily one of the smartest people I've ever met, and a best friend since college) ran for a position in the Vermont state congress as an independent; in this, his first race for office, he lost, but one can only imagine how big a learning experience it has all been.
Anyway, one consideration has been about our two-party system, and the huge odds stacked against an independent or "3rd-party" candidate. On Nov. 2nd, I found myself voting straight-up democrat, sadly ignoring independent/3rd party candidates altogether. Just the idea that our state might vote in another Republican scared me into feeling desperate. It didn't matter what democrat it was, I was going to vote for the candidate most likely to beat the wingnut.
While independent candidates can win races, our two-party system is so strong and entrenched that it prevents just about every great candidate from being considered. But who gets to decide the parties' platforms? The Tea-Party nutjobs that won their elections generally ran as Republicans, not independents. They've tugged the party even further to the right (over the edge). And of course, the Dems have been pulled to the right for the past 3 decades. But, Dennis Kucinich is a Democrat, and he's ultra-progressive compared to most of the rest of the party (on the national front at least). For my friend Todd, the label of Democrat might be an uncomfortable fit, but, these labels can be changed, and at least used.
The moneyed interests that control our government (through their purchased representatives) will resist the attempts of true progressives from crashing either major party. But with enough support from actual people that will actually vote, a major party candidacy can be taken. The question is, how (besides playing on people's emotions, fears, hatred, ignorance, and so on)? For a progressive that truly wants to improve this world, it would rely on how well he or she could inform the public about their own issues, and for them to see that the standard politicians they're electing aren't working on their behalf.
I think that a new model for a progressive politician should include the willingness and ability to make a huge initiative of just informing the public on the issues, their details, nuances, and most importantly, of the agendas involved of those making decisions that are powerfully affecting our lives. Ideally the news media would perform this service, but so often I find the need to turn to internet sources (such as blogs, activist sites, and videos/documentaries, which are often hard to find). The endless lies and manipulations must be countered by endless information, and the Democrats have failed miserably in this department for years now.
If a progressive candidate can communicate to people effectively, giving them fact over fiction, explanation over exploitation, and tirelessly (emphasis on that word), then the people might be persuaded to vote for someone that sincerely cares about them and their world. In our structured political landscape, taking on the label of Democrat - as lame as it can be - could be the key for an independent. Dragging the power of the Democratic party back to the left may be the only way to save this country, and that can only be done if enough people understand our own issues; hell, for some, if they can even get a grip on reality.
(For a look at my pal Todd, check out one of his local TV panel discussions. It's 10 minutes long, and the first 7 minutes is spent listening to others droning along without saying anything. Then Todd speaks. The man is smart. And he has a beard.)
Anyway, one consideration has been about our two-party system, and the huge odds stacked against an independent or "3rd-party" candidate. On Nov. 2nd, I found myself voting straight-up democrat, sadly ignoring independent/3rd party candidates altogether. Just the idea that our state might vote in another Republican scared me into feeling desperate. It didn't matter what democrat it was, I was going to vote for the candidate most likely to beat the wingnut.
While independent candidates can win races, our two-party system is so strong and entrenched that it prevents just about every great candidate from being considered. But who gets to decide the parties' platforms? The Tea-Party nutjobs that won their elections generally ran as Republicans, not independents. They've tugged the party even further to the right (over the edge). And of course, the Dems have been pulled to the right for the past 3 decades. But, Dennis Kucinich is a Democrat, and he's ultra-progressive compared to most of the rest of the party (on the national front at least). For my friend Todd, the label of Democrat might be an uncomfortable fit, but, these labels can be changed, and at least used.
The moneyed interests that control our government (through their purchased representatives) will resist the attempts of true progressives from crashing either major party. But with enough support from actual people that will actually vote, a major party candidacy can be taken. The question is, how (besides playing on people's emotions, fears, hatred, ignorance, and so on)? For a progressive that truly wants to improve this world, it would rely on how well he or she could inform the public about their own issues, and for them to see that the standard politicians they're electing aren't working on their behalf.
I think that a new model for a progressive politician should include the willingness and ability to make a huge initiative of just informing the public on the issues, their details, nuances, and most importantly, of the agendas involved of those making decisions that are powerfully affecting our lives. Ideally the news media would perform this service, but so often I find the need to turn to internet sources (such as blogs, activist sites, and videos/documentaries, which are often hard to find). The endless lies and manipulations must be countered by endless information, and the Democrats have failed miserably in this department for years now.
If a progressive candidate can communicate to people effectively, giving them fact over fiction, explanation over exploitation, and tirelessly (emphasis on that word), then the people might be persuaded to vote for someone that sincerely cares about them and their world. In our structured political landscape, taking on the label of Democrat - as lame as it can be - could be the key for an independent. Dragging the power of the Democratic party back to the left may be the only way to save this country, and that can only be done if enough people understand our own issues; hell, for some, if they can even get a grip on reality.
(For a look at my pal Todd, check out one of his local TV panel discussions. It's 10 minutes long, and the first 7 minutes is spent listening to others droning along without saying anything. Then Todd speaks. The man is smart. And he has a beard.)
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Iraq in Hell
I've been watching some documentaries by John Pilger lately; if you've seen a few British docus, you've probably seen him or at least heard his voice.
Today's selection: 2003's "Breaking the silence - Truth and lies in the war on terror."
Here's the moment where you just have to watch and imagine this has nothing to do with you. Pilger is speaking with Undersecretaries of Defense Douglas Feith and John Bolton (individually, but they're editied together).
JP: Why is it wrong for dictators and terrorists to kill innocent civilians, and right - or excusable - for the United States to do exactly the same?
DF: Well, the United States doesn't do it, and if we did it it would be as reprehensible as the terrorists.
JP: The United States doesn't kill innocent civilians?
DF: Uh, NO, the United States doesn't target civilians.
JP: Hm... Those of us on the outside who look at September the 11th, where 3,000 people died in that tragedy, but then look at the thousands who've died since, wonder about double standards, here. Would you address that?
DF: I think that the um ... I think that the numbers you're talking about are are are questionable, but let's leave aside your numbers but -
JP: Why are they questionable?
DF: I don't accept your assertion that we've killed thousands of uh uh innocent people, but let me give it to you -
JP: There's a lot of studies, and examination of facts on the ground that suggest indeed thousands; I mean in Iraq at the moment, there are studies that are talking about 10,000, but I don't want to get into numbers, but certainly "thousands" seems a fair figure.
DF: I uh I uh don't know that that's true. And I don't accept the assertion.
(Switch to walrus-man John Bolton:)
JB: Well I think that Americans like most people are mostly concerned about their own countrymen. I don't know how many Iraqi civilians were killed but I can assure you that the numbers, that the absolute minimal that it's possible in modern warfare. One of the stunning things about the quick coalition victory is how little damage was done to Iraqi infrastructure, and how low Iraqi casualties were.
JP: Well that's quite high, if it's 10,000 civilians.
JB: Well I think that it's quite low if you look at the size of the military operation that was undertaken.
(Switch back to Feith:)
DF: It's practically an inevitability in war that there are going to be innocent people that get hurt no matter how much care a professional military, a properly-behaved military, puts into avoiding damage into non-combatants and into civilian infrastructure.
(Pilger stares at Feith over the top rims of his glasses.)
JP: Mr. Feith, that sounds fine, sitting here in Washington. But in Iraq, and in Afghanistan, which is my most recent experience, that's not how it looks at all -
Unknown military representative, off-screen: May I interrupt for a moment, I apologize sir, would you stop tape please for one moment?
Unknown: Thank you very much, let me know when you've stopped tape.
JP: Excuse me -
Unknown: I'm sorry I'm doing this purposefully, sir, have we stopped tape?
JP: Are you serious?
Unknown: I was not under the impression, sir...
(end of interview)
That was seven years ago. Today, Iraq Body Count (which only counts civilians that are reported in English-language/translated newspapers and television) has documented figures of 98,585 - 107,594 "civilian deaths from violence" since the start of the war. Counts that take more into account have wildly ranging estimates that top even a million deaths.
Sunday (two days ago, Halloween) was massive, with 64 civilians dying, most of them in an attack on a church. Earlier today (Tuesday, 11/2/2010) there was a series of coordinated bombings in Shi'ite neighborhoods across Baghdad, killing at least 117 (and wounding 322) more.
(FYI: Numbers of civilians killed in Afghanistan range from 8,991 - 28,583, though reporting has been even more scattered than in Iraq.)
Today's selection: 2003's "Breaking the silence - Truth and lies in the war on terror."
Here's the moment where you just have to watch and imagine this has nothing to do with you. Pilger is speaking with Undersecretaries of Defense Douglas Feith and John Bolton (individually, but they're editied together).
JP: Why is it wrong for dictators and terrorists to kill innocent civilians, and right - or excusable - for the United States to do exactly the same?
DF: Well, the United States doesn't do it, and if we did it it would be as reprehensible as the terrorists.
JP: The United States doesn't kill innocent civilians?
DF: Uh, NO, the United States doesn't target civilians.
JP: Hm... Those of us on the outside who look at September the 11th, where 3,000 people died in that tragedy, but then look at the thousands who've died since, wonder about double standards, here. Would you address that?
DF: I think that the um ... I think that the numbers you're talking about are are are questionable, but let's leave aside your numbers but -
JP: Why are they questionable?
DF: I don't accept your assertion that we've killed thousands of uh uh innocent people, but let me give it to you -
JP: There's a lot of studies, and examination of facts on the ground that suggest indeed thousands; I mean in Iraq at the moment, there are studies that are talking about 10,000, but I don't want to get into numbers, but certainly "thousands" seems a fair figure.
DF: I uh I uh don't know that that's true. And I don't accept the assertion.
(Switch to walrus-man John Bolton:)
JB: Well I think that Americans like most people are mostly concerned about their own countrymen. I don't know how many Iraqi civilians were killed but I can assure you that the numbers, that the absolute minimal that it's possible in modern warfare. One of the stunning things about the quick coalition victory is how little damage was done to Iraqi infrastructure, and how low Iraqi casualties were.
JP: Well that's quite high, if it's 10,000 civilians.
JB: Well I think that it's quite low if you look at the size of the military operation that was undertaken.
(Switch back to Feith:)
DF: It's practically an inevitability in war that there are going to be innocent people that get hurt no matter how much care a professional military, a properly-behaved military, puts into avoiding damage into non-combatants and into civilian infrastructure.
(Pilger stares at Feith over the top rims of his glasses.)
JP: Mr. Feith, that sounds fine, sitting here in Washington. But in Iraq, and in Afghanistan, which is my most recent experience, that's not how it looks at all -
Unknown military representative, off-screen: May I interrupt for a moment, I apologize sir, would you stop tape please for one moment?
Unknown: Thank you very much, let me know when you've stopped tape.
JP: Excuse me -
Unknown: I'm sorry I'm doing this purposefully, sir, have we stopped tape?
JP: Are you serious?
Unknown: I was not under the impression, sir...
(end of interview)
That was seven years ago. Today, Iraq Body Count (which only counts civilians that are reported in English-language/translated newspapers and television) has documented figures of 98,585 - 107,594 "civilian deaths from violence" since the start of the war. Counts that take more into account have wildly ranging estimates that top even a million deaths.
Sunday (two days ago, Halloween) was massive, with 64 civilians dying, most of them in an attack on a church. Earlier today (Tuesday, 11/2/2010) there was a series of coordinated bombings in Shi'ite neighborhoods across Baghdad, killing at least 117 (and wounding 322) more.
(FYI: Numbers of civilians killed in Afghanistan range from 8,991 - 28,583, though reporting has been even more scattered than in Iraq.)
Saturday, October 30, 2010
The Walking Dead
Watched the pre-air of the pilot for The Walking Dead last night, a new series based on the comic of the same name. It debuts Halloween night, and you've gotta see it. If future episodes are anywhere as good as the pilot, this will be one of TV's best series of recent years. No joke. Not just an ongoing zombie flick, not just genre, or action, but excellent writing and acting; some scenes were genuinely moving. Check the lengthy trailer and get excited!
Shillin'
Just FYI, if you order something from CafePress in the future, consider using my referral - they'll give you a coupon code for a free mini-poster (whatever that is) and me $10.
Mind you, they always have other coupons on their site for 15% off this or that, so I won't be hurt if you don't bother. Oh, and I plan on uploading designs of mine, so, when I do, feel free to check 'em out.
Or don't.
"It's casual." - catchphrase of my brother John for a brief period in the mid-80's
Mind you, they always have other coupons on their site for 15% off this or that, so I won't be hurt if you don't bother. Oh, and I plan on uploading designs of mine, so, when I do, feel free to check 'em out.
Or don't.
"It's casual." - catchphrase of my brother John for a brief period in the mid-80's
Live in scenic Woostah!
For rent: 2nd-floor, 2-bedroom apartment in the middle of Worcester, Massachusetts (Becker/WPI/Elm Park area). $875/month, includes heat/hot water. Available December 1st, possibly sooner!
Also for Dec. 1st, we're seeking two housemates for a large 4-bedroom vegetarian-only household on the 1st floor of same house (this would be with me and cool, calm, collected Noah). One room is large, $385/month, one smaller $345/month (prices include heat/hot water; electric and internet cost about $30/month; no cable). Cat ok. Actually, cat a plus. We're losing our cats when Jace & Reb move out!
Also for Dec. 1st, we're seeking two housemates for a large 4-bedroom vegetarian-only household on the 1st floor of same house (this would be with me and cool, calm, collected Noah). One room is large, $385/month, one smaller $345/month (prices include heat/hot water; electric and internet cost about $30/month; no cable). Cat ok. Actually, cat a plus. We're losing our cats when Jace & Reb move out!
Tron: Legacy
Daft Punk has done the score for the new IMax Tron: Legacy flick. Looks and sounds brilliant.
Metro 2033
Playing Metro 2033: Awesome shooter. For whatever reason my favorite FPS games are 1) running around in the ruins of a post-apocalyptic world and 2) shooting Nazis, and in Metro 2033 you get to do both.
The Assassination of Dr. Tiller
(Originally posted to facebook 10/26/10)
In place of Rachel Maddow's show last night, my heroine had on a documentary (which she narrated) about last year's assassination of Kansas late-term abortion provider Dr. George Tiller. It's an excellent but brief film (45-50 minutes or so) and really deserves watching. I especially appreciated that three of his former patients spoke out and described their situations in which they'd had to seek their operations. It helps to illustrate that these are terrible, extreme cases, that these women are already devastated by what they've got to do. A woman continues her pregnancy that far into the process because she has decided to have the child, to have the foetus become a child, to have her (emphasis on that possessive) body create. It's when her life becomes endangered, or the discovery that the child is not going to survive, or survive very poorly, that such tragic action must be taken so late. For a doctor, this has to be both heartbreaking and yet a vital procedure, and those that continue to provide these services under such constant harassment, to the point of receiving endless death threats (and for some, even being shot by these "Christian" terrorists) are heroes.
I'd like to see more testimony from women who are willing to recount their experiences, though it's tougher than I can ever imagine to have to re-live such stories. Of the three women that speak in this documentary, one shows her face and gives her name (the other two went anonymous and had their backs turned when speaking). This shows her bravery and determination, I think, but the others were no less brave (or meaningful), and one spoke to the issue of her anonymity, making an interesting point: she didn't mind not showing her face, because she wanted people to know that she could be any woman. Any woman might one day have to endure what she did. I think that with the more cases we hear, the more we will understand that these situations are never - rather, they're the opposite of - simple or easy, emotionally, medically, or morally.
Afterthought: I wonder, if you took the number of women that have had abortions due to their own lives being endangered by their pregnancies, and then counted how many children they had after those surgeries (which kept them alive and hopefully as healthy as they could be), which number would be higher? I'd bet on the latter, but I'd also bet that these "Christians" (I add my fingered quotations because they're either not real Christians or are just really bad at it) wouldn't care.
People are so terrified of learning, lest something poke a hole in their beliefs. It's like they've built these primitive, windowless hovels in which they huddle, proud in their resilience. You could instead live in a modern home, with many rooms full of fascinating things. The problem with developing complexities is that there's more that can go wrong or break. A storm rages, windows break, your house gets all wet. But you dry your metaphoric tears, look at the damage, figure out why it happened, learn, and make things better. The primitive hovel-huddlers still get flooded once in a while anyway, but so often seem to just wait for the water to drain and pray it doesn't happen again. When I look out my metaphoric windows, it's not like I love everything I see; I see plenty of terrible things. Awareness is daunting, ignorance is bliss, and blah blah blah. I might not be a happy person, but my happiest moments have been worth the hell. And I'd rather be sad than ignorant; it's the ignorant that make me sad in the first place. If we could better educate people to the reality we live in, they'd help to make it a better reality.
Note: Are you registered to vote? If not, register ASAP, and vote on November 2nd! Unless you'd vote for a Republican or Tea Party type, in which case, ignore this note. And if you live in Massachusetts (like me) vote No x3 on the ballot initiatives!
In place of Rachel Maddow's show last night, my heroine had on a documentary (which she narrated) about last year's assassination of Kansas late-term abortion provider Dr. George Tiller. It's an excellent but brief film (45-50 minutes or so) and really deserves watching. I especially appreciated that three of his former patients spoke out and described their situations in which they'd had to seek their operations. It helps to illustrate that these are terrible, extreme cases, that these women are already devastated by what they've got to do. A woman continues her pregnancy that far into the process because she has decided to have the child, to have the foetus become a child, to have her (emphasis on that possessive) body create. It's when her life becomes endangered, or the discovery that the child is not going to survive, or survive very poorly, that such tragic action must be taken so late. For a doctor, this has to be both heartbreaking and yet a vital procedure, and those that continue to provide these services under such constant harassment, to the point of receiving endless death threats (and for some, even being shot by these "Christian" terrorists) are heroes.
I'd like to see more testimony from women who are willing to recount their experiences, though it's tougher than I can ever imagine to have to re-live such stories. Of the three women that speak in this documentary, one shows her face and gives her name (the other two went anonymous and had their backs turned when speaking). This shows her bravery and determination, I think, but the others were no less brave (or meaningful), and one spoke to the issue of her anonymity, making an interesting point: she didn't mind not showing her face, because she wanted people to know that she could be any woman. Any woman might one day have to endure what she did. I think that with the more cases we hear, the more we will understand that these situations are never - rather, they're the opposite of - simple or easy, emotionally, medically, or morally.
Afterthought: I wonder, if you took the number of women that have had abortions due to their own lives being endangered by their pregnancies, and then counted how many children they had after those surgeries (which kept them alive and hopefully as healthy as they could be), which number would be higher? I'd bet on the latter, but I'd also bet that these "Christians" (I add my fingered quotations because they're either not real Christians or are just really bad at it) wouldn't care.
People are so terrified of learning, lest something poke a hole in their beliefs. It's like they've built these primitive, windowless hovels in which they huddle, proud in their resilience. You could instead live in a modern home, with many rooms full of fascinating things. The problem with developing complexities is that there's more that can go wrong or break. A storm rages, windows break, your house gets all wet. But you dry your metaphoric tears, look at the damage, figure out why it happened, learn, and make things better. The primitive hovel-huddlers still get flooded once in a while anyway, but so often seem to just wait for the water to drain and pray it doesn't happen again. When I look out my metaphoric windows, it's not like I love everything I see; I see plenty of terrible things. Awareness is daunting, ignorance is bliss, and blah blah blah. I might not be a happy person, but my happiest moments have been worth the hell. And I'd rather be sad than ignorant; it's the ignorant that make me sad in the first place. If we could better educate people to the reality we live in, they'd help to make it a better reality.
Note: Are you registered to vote? If not, register ASAP, and vote on November 2nd! Unless you'd vote for a Republican or Tea Party type, in which case, ignore this note. And if you live in Massachusetts (like me) vote No x3 on the ballot initiatives!
Friday, October 22, 2010
Smile, champ!
Christine O'Donnell is just the comedy gift that keeps on giving. It would be so fun to see Rachel interview O'Donnell some day... not that it would ever be allowed, but could she keep a straight face if it ever happened? I'm glad Coons knows his shit and can articulate it... imagining a Senator O'Donnell makes my mind feverish with images of Bizarro-world.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
rowrowrowyourcar
A car I'd actually buy and learn to drive if I had loads of cash. It also operates as a power generator w/a 110 A/C outlet! Got to write down the loc of this company's warehouse in case I survive the apocalypse.
Fresco quotes
I just watched the montage from the Fresco interview (below) and there's some of his better lines included. His take on competitive society mirrors my own: "Competition is dangerous, socially offensive, considered right and normal because you are brought up to that value system. What kind of competition did Jesus have?"
In discussing transportation (and cars and their safety measures as an analogy for our society and its laws and other guidance): "They are designed by cerebral insufficients! ... Eliminate cars and design a holistic transportation system."
In the end:
Larry King: No control of the population?
Jacque Fresco: Population control is dependent upon education. We feel an educated public needs no control.
I love the pairing of "holistic" and "transportation," or any technology. And I've got to remember to refer to people as "cerebrally insufficient." The man is an awesome Vulcan (with Spock's compassion).
In discussing transportation (and cars and their safety measures as an analogy for our society and its laws and other guidance): "They are designed by cerebral insufficients! ... Eliminate cars and design a holistic transportation system."
In the end:
Larry King: No control of the population?
Jacque Fresco: Population control is dependent upon education. We feel an educated public needs no control.
I love the pairing of "holistic" and "transportation," or any technology. And I've got to remember to refer to people as "cerebrally insufficient." The man is an awesome Vulcan (with Spock's compassion).
Let's meet for a coke
After airing Ginni (wife of Clarence) Thomas' voicemail to Anita Hill - asking her for an apology for what she did to them years ago - Olbermann plays a series of gag voicemails from other wretched folk also requesting apologies. Laughs!
Jacque Fresco Interview with Larry King, 1974
Here's a clip from the old Jacque Fresco interview I mentioned a few posts back. I love how damn earnest and impassioned this guy is. Imagine if people like him - as in, scientists hoping (and planning) for a peaceful future in which everyone's needs are met - ruled the world (or at least our country). Hey, I'm a dreamer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)