|
Friday, May 06, 2005A few days ago, we took a few shots at those on the far-right that went into a tizzy over Laura Bush's remarks at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. We stand by our comments about those who got the orneriest over the remarks, but should pass along that the Traditional Values Coalition is disavowing any connection with those who prattled about emasculation of the President, etc., in this press release.(info forwarded by guytak) 
posted by gbarto at 11:48 PM Thursday, May 05, 2005Bodies in motion...Do Japanese people run funny? Or do Japanese animators just not kn0w how to draw people running? Interesting thoughts at Chizumatic entry 20050504.
posted by gbarto at 9:31 PM On purported bias at Google, a commenter at Bill Quick's site noted: This morning I was at (gasp) Ann Coulter's web site (please don't tell anyone). Evidently, Coulter is not aware that Google has tweaked their Google ads on her site-- they are anti-Bush google ads. How creative. I am sure there are some google folks laughing about that one in the bars after work. There have been the news problems, and the search results for Bush that are tweaked, the LGF posts, etc. But the Coulter thing has finally hit me. I am officially searching for a new search site. It will not be easy as many of the other sites, such as Ice Rocket, are still trying to get it right. I have sent email to google before about Google News and got a response like, "we strive to include as many news sources as possible" yada, yada, yada. Want to suggest a site: source-suggestions@google.comThe Google folks may be laughing. I'll bet Ann Coulter is too, though. If you want to spank both Google and the lefties, visit Anne - and Google - early and often. What could be better than to drive up Anne's revenues while draining the leftists' ad budget - money wasted on an unreceptive audience. Google, the corporation, should be watching this. Not because they're good people who aspire only to being fair. But because they're a business. Word gets out that "targeted" ads are being seen and clicked principally by antagonists of the advertisers and Google's business model is out the window.
posted by gbarto at 9:14 PM Book review: What God Wants by Neale Donald Walsch At the outset we are advised that this book is quite possibly unbelievable and dangerous. In Saudi Arabia, yes. In a land where Deepak Chopra sells in the millions? Maybe not. In fact, one wishes that the author would refrain from sexing up his book as something the grownups don't want you to read and stick to his message. What of Walsch's message? It's a two-part riff blending Chopra's field of all possibilities and Dyer's power of intention. Not to say that he's stolen anything - he's actually drawing on a unity theology that dates back a hundred years. But those who have read Chopra and Dyer will find an awful lot seems familiar. At the same time, Walsch does have a fresh presentation that's worth a look. According to Walsch, the biggest problem we're facing today isn't indifference to God. It's confusion about what He wants. So, what does God want? Walsch seems pretty certain God doesn't want Crusades, Inquisitions or 9/11s. In fact, he's pretty dubious that the Creator of the Universe could get a whole lot out of any of our more bizarre or intensely violent efforts to win His favor. If 9/11 was an effort to do His will, it's pretty small potatoes compared to the forces unleashed by the tsunami. Tower of Babel anyone? I won't reveal what God wants - hate to spoil the book - but I will suggest that a) if God wants something, He can probably get it and 2) if God's as marvelous as they say He is, it probably isn't anything as petty as the slavish adoration of thinking creations who renounced this gift from Him the better to be devoted. So, why do we get all mixed up figuring out what God wants? Walsch says the problem is our separation from God - specifically our failure to realize that this separation is nonsense. Look at the things we tell ourselves: We're banished from the Garden of Eden. No place in heaven for rich men. God's angry about this, punishing you for that. Not happy? You need God in your life. Oh, by the way, God is everywhere in everything. Close your eyes and pray and He's there. Look back on the worst parts of your life and you'll see a second set of footsteps - God walking beside you. Yada, yada, yada. So what's the scoop? Is He always there? Or did He take his thunderbolts and go home? Not to go Freudian (Walsch doesn't), but our problem is that we took the God the Father stuff too literally and started reenacting the same drama reconciling security and individuality with Him that we go through before we learn to walk. And this is not appropriate because God is not human. What is God? Chopra says He is the field of all possibilities. That's one way of describing the only force in the universe capable of creating something out of nothing and then permeating every last bit of the creation He's made. Where is God? It looks like He's everywhere. Except of course that He's waiting for us in heaven, but only if we're good... If you want to find God in the rocks and trees, that's hunky dory, but if you start finding him in people, watch out. Only a lunatic would suggest the ultimate result of God being everywhere: That He's even in us, and more bizarrely, that we're in Him (John 14:20). Or, more to the point, that we are facets of Him (John 10:32- ?). Assuming that God is everywhere, that we're part of Him, that He isn't separate from us and all that other good stuff, where does Walsch's astonishing book leave us? Well, it looks like if God wants anything, it's what we want for each other since we're aspects of Him and He is everything and not being separate from Him we can't give Him anything that He doesn't already have... It gets tangled. But when you boil down what Walsch has to say, it goes like this: Do unto others as they would do unto you, for as you do even unto the least among you, you do unto Him. Shocking stuff, eh? Still, worth a read, if only to take your focus back to the idea that God is love and away from our too common use of Him on high to work our will by threatening separation from Him for those who don't do what we want.
posted by gbarto at 6:23 PM No Louie Louie! According to the Herald-Palladium, the Benton Harbor school system is in an uproar over the band's plans to play "Louie Louie." The Superintendent says no, the students say it's too late to learn a new song. I may be confused, but if this is the Benton Harbor I know, what the 8th grade band plays is hardly the most pressing issue for their school district. 5 whacks for the parent who pitched a fit, 5 for the sup who took the bait.
posted by gbarto at 6:14 PM Wednesday, May 04, 2005As a French teacher - who needs a job teaching French - I find this sort of thing interesting:Berlitz language lessons cost around $70/unit (45 minutes) Berlitz language instructors are paid around $8/unit ($12/hour) Wonder if it's line with other language academies. Quite a discrepancy. I think if I needed a teacher, I'd put a poster on a telephone pole outside the building. By the way, the TurkeyGal teaches there, so I'm pretty sure about the pay. Don't know about lesson prices though. That's pretty hush-hush. Anyone from Berlitz with different information or an explanation is welcome to space to correct the record. E-mail me at the link on the side. Update: Doublechecking, I came across this, this, this, this (unrelated, but a funny joke at the end) and this. Strange how few sites that weren't operated by Berlitz had anything complimentary to say about teaching for them.
posted by gbarto at 6:44 PM Here's the last word on the Laura Bush/horse thing. Not for younger readers.
posted by gbarto at 5:04 PM America's purpose... Cicero and Verbum Ipsum are hashing it out. I like this formulation: ... governments exist primarily to protect the lives, liberty, and property of their citizens. That is the purpose for which they are established....Amen. Cicero doesn't see things quite the same way. There's a shorter formulation, though: "Governments exist to protect our free will and that which we derive from the exercise of our dominion." Not sure what Cicero would take from that formulation.
posted by gbarto at 4:36 PM More Laura: This bit on The Corner gets to another issue in the Laura Bush monologue: Did the "milking the steed" bit imply bestiality? Or stupidity? The Harvard professor Tom Lehrer used to tell a joke about the famous professor of animal husbandry who rose to the top of his profession before they caught him at it one day... ... but in rural Northern Michigan, where I grew up, "milking the bull/goat/steed" was the punchline to a half-dozen city-slicker/traveling salesman jokes, and the humor was not about implied bestiality, but about the kick you had coming if you grabbed 'im you know where.
posted by gbarto at 4:03 PM Patterico is talking about a "conventional" option on judicial nominees. We're talking about a Sense of the Senate resolution, if I'm not mistaken. I definitely think that if the GOP uses this, it ought to put it in these mundane terms. I also think the GOP should make explicit that it is not taking a binding vote that could ever be interpreted as advise and consent, instead asserting that the true aim is to send a signal to the executive as to whether the nomination should be pursued or withdrawn. And here's the real non-nuclear option: Arlen Specter takes the floor to announce a resolution expressing "the Sense of the Senate that the President should withdraw his nominee." What do the Dems do? Demand that the Senate consider no such option? Or let a measure calling for the nominee's withdrawal be defeated.
posted by gbarto at 2:54 PM We were hoping not to have to fuss with this one, but the story lingers so... what say the TurkeyBlog about Laura Bush's standup? Here's Instapunk, found at Instapundit. Our own thoughts? There are different kinds of comedy, one of them being a comedy of the absurd. If there were any danger that any of Laura's jokes had more than the faintest ring of truth about them, there might be a problem. But the performance we got involved Laura suggesting she was going to set the record straight about a few things, then doing exactly the opposite. Other than noting Pres. Bush's early bedtime and his lack of love for all things press, the First Lady said exactly nothing that you could take to the bank until after the "but seriously, folks" break. If you're a shy librarian from a small Southern town, there's going to be a certain thrill at telling a dirty joke in public, and the thrill on Laura's face was clear. So was that bit of nervousness that let you know that she was more excited about the idea of having given such a routine than she was about the idea of actually giving it - in the same way that Douglas Adams liked having written novels much better than he liked writing them. Laura Bush was not a jock shooting off one-liners in the locker room, but a nervous student-council president type telling a slightly racy story to warm up the room and assert that she could run with the cool kids. It's not surprising that certain conservatives of the family values stripe are upset. If your idea of sex is something faintly disgusting that the miracle of life barely compensates for, then any reference to sexuality that fails to repulse is a threat. And if you need biblical injunctions to keep your wife's respect for you intact, any suggestion that women could have minds of their own is emasculating. Fortunately, the President has some pretty big cojones. He told half the world to take a hike when they tried to mess up his plans in the Middle East. Are a few zingers from the First Lady really going to emasculate him? Bull. They seem, to the contrary, to have made him laugh. What the world learned, then, is that the President of the United States is just about as secure in his marriage - and even his sexuality and overall competence - as he is in the conviction that his is the right vision for the Middle East. Laura Bush's bit did scare the bejeezus out of frustrated neo-puritans with adequacy issues by its suggestion that a woman could actually speak out - and who knows what they might say if the threat of hell doesn't quietly bind them to husbands who don't actually earn their authority? But the rest of the world didn't go home wondering who actually wore the pants in the family. To the contrary, they saw that the President's a big enough man to enjoy a laugh or two at his expense, especially from someone whose affection for him is so evident.
posted by gbarto at 9:31 AM Monday, May 02, 2005To: The FraudstersRe: Your recent note You wrote: By now, we used many techniques to verify the accuracy of the information our users provide us when they register on the Site. However, because user verification on the Internet is difficult, eBay cannot and does not confirm each user's purported identity. Thus, we have established an offline verification system o help you evaluate with whom you are dealing with. [who you are dealing with (inf)/with whom you are dealing (frml)]I'm not one to criticize, but I hate to see good opportunities thrown away through carelessness. I have taken the liberty of highlighting grammatical and stylistic errors. Correcting these will make your presentation more believable, improving your response rate. I offer no corrective for the ease with which one can discover that your link does not go where it claims to. You must rely on the naïveté of respondents in regard to this matter. For a small fee, I will proofread your correspondence so that such errors can be avoided. Simply e-mail the passage you want proofed along with your name, address, phone number, credit card number, exp. date and the CVV (for verifications purposes only). Incidentally, while e-mail is cheap, failure to cross-reference e-mail lists with eBay members may lead to people with multiple e-mails getting multiple copies of your letter. This may increase suspicions, also reducing response rates. For further tips, again, please send all requests via e-mail along with your name, address, telephone number, credit card number, exp. date and CVV. Cordially, The Turkeyblog For the readers: With four or five websites, each with their own e-mails, I'm getting up to a dozen of these a day. Ah for the good old days of the Nigerian refugees!
posted by gbarto at 3:04 PM Kofi Annan today asserted that Iran should give up nuclear pursuits, but that in the interest of fairness, the West should provide nuclear fuel for the Iranians. He also said the U.S. and Russia should slash their nuclear arsenals. One wonders what the impact would have been had these statements been made by someone with moral authority. P.S. It looks like they're serious. Kojo just joined the board of a nuclear materials salvage contractor. P.P.S. Maybe not. But no one would be surprised if he had.
posted by gbarto at 2:57 PM Sunday, May 01, 2005Cicero doesn't sound too sure about the new Hitchhiker movie. I haven't gotten around to seeing it, but share his concern about fitting the story of the most remarkable book in history into an hour and a half.Loved the books, by the way, but especially in audio-book format, read by the author. Cicero is also skeptical about calls to appreciate the works of peasant artists in Brazil.
posted by gbarto at 11:33 PM |
Archives
|
Day By Day© by Chris Muir.Old TurkeyBlog here.
