It's Halloween, a time when all the button-down men can dress like the fairy-princesses they always wanted to be and business-suit women can wear their naughty nurse and maid costumes, safe in the illusion that really it's just for pretend.
Ever since having children, I've been costume challenged, in large part because having kids means you either no longer get invited to your friends' knock down, drag out, drunk to the gills parties or you get invited but can no longer let it all hang out at your friends' knock down, drag out, drunk to the gills parties. Either way, it seriously inhibits the costume-creativity ambitions.
Back in the day, I went to a party as Andy Warhol (easy: black jeans, a black turtleneck, and a silver wig...oh yeah, and I was about twenty pounds lighter) and also to one as Sickboy from Trainspotting. I really enjoyed that one. I even picked up a heroin habit so it would be more realistic.
This year I plan to dress up as "dad home from work" and hand out candy to the delightful passers-by, many of whom in my neighborhood believe it's acceptable to wear jeans and t-shirt as your costume, use a plastic Safeway shopping bag as your candy bag, and trick-or-treat well into your thirties. I have in fact entertained one group that consisted of about eight children and one mother (or accompanying adult) in which the mother not only asked for candy for herself but also reeked of alcohol. The ones who get out of that one will either look back upon their childhoods with humor or hatred; the ones who don't will repeat it.
30 October 2007
Again, is anyone really surprised?
Now here's a big surprise for everyone, I'm sure. Dick Cheney goes hunting at private hunting clubs, where he can enjoy the thrill of hunting down fierce creatures like quail and dove and maybe pheasant. It's really dangerous stuff (if you're in Cheney's line of fire, that is). But apparently this particulare hunting club in upstate New York is causing a stir because in a garage on the club's grounds there hung a Confederate flag. Al Sharpton is all over this detail, which is good timing for him, especially after Ta-Nehisi Coates laid the beatdown on him over the weekend, labelling him "irrelevant."
But it's stupid, and it misses the point. Cheney has so much plausible deniability in this particular incident, that it makes Sharpton look even more like the fool. It's possible Cheney wasn't within eyesight of the garage, or that the garage doors were closed at the time. Who really cares? The larger point is that these private enclaves are nothing but hotbeds of regressive behavior, whether it's in hidebound racist and sexist behavior or simple elitism. And they're the places Cheney feels at home. Cheney doesn't need to know that his hosts that particular day were true throwback yee-haw Confederate flag waving white supremacists. He just knows that they're his kind of people. You know, the kind who applaud his principled stand against establishing Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and against a resolution to free political prisoner Nelson Mandela. They understand each other...
So the point isn't whether this little rod and gun club proudly displays the Confederate flag (and in this case it seems they keep it hidden in the garage) in the proud remembrance of all the noble New York regiments who fought to keep slavery legal, but rather to note that you would probably be hard pressed to find a single "private hunting club" that didn't include at least one less-than-covert member of the KKK or CCC or subscriber to the American Renaissance. These places are breeding grounds for the most socially backward members of American society, a place where wealth, power, and right-wing quasi-fascist viewpoints can congregate freely and shoot at things.
But it's stupid, and it misses the point. Cheney has so much plausible deniability in this particular incident, that it makes Sharpton look even more like the fool. It's possible Cheney wasn't within eyesight of the garage, or that the garage doors were closed at the time. Who really cares? The larger point is that these private enclaves are nothing but hotbeds of regressive behavior, whether it's in hidebound racist and sexist behavior or simple elitism. And they're the places Cheney feels at home. Cheney doesn't need to know that his hosts that particular day were true throwback yee-haw Confederate flag waving white supremacists. He just knows that they're his kind of people. You know, the kind who applaud his principled stand against establishing Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and against a resolution to free political prisoner Nelson Mandela. They understand each other...
So the point isn't whether this little rod and gun club proudly displays the Confederate flag (and in this case it seems they keep it hidden in the garage) in the proud remembrance of all the noble New York regiments who fought to keep slavery legal, but rather to note that you would probably be hard pressed to find a single "private hunting club" that didn't include at least one less-than-covert member of the KKK or CCC or subscriber to the American Renaissance. These places are breeding grounds for the most socially backward members of American society, a place where wealth, power, and right-wing quasi-fascist viewpoints can congregate freely and shoot at things.
29 October 2007
Out of the woodwork
I never really knew how many people from Boston were around DC. For fourteen years I've lived in our nation's capital and never noticed it. However, now everywhere I turn, there's a Boston Red Sox cap or sweatshirt. It's like a plague.
Sure, they were by far my favorite post-season team, but I'm not exactly going out and buying a ballcap.
Speaking of which, I've owned ballcaps from exactly three teams my entire life: the Oakland A's (don't ask me why, but I loved the A's since childhood...the early 1990's steroid scandals kind of soured me on them though), the Pittsburgh Pirates, and the Chicago Cubs (it was a white with blue stripes old timer ballcap...wish I still had it).
26 October 2007
Friday fall traditional.
This Saturday everyone's talking about the Penn State v. Ohio State game in Happy Valley. Ohio State enters the game undefeated and ranked #1, having taken a tour of small Ohio colleges for three of their wins, but also compiling a 4-0 record in the Big Ten so far, albeit against Northwestern, Minnesota, Purdue, and Michigan State. Additionally, they've beaten Washington. They finish their schedule against Penn State, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Michigan. So clearly they were front-loaded with cupcakes and now they're hitting the meat of the schedule, although you have to say that given the up and down performances of the teams on the list, Michigan is probably the best of the four teams remaining.
Saturday's game is in Happy Valley, though, and the Nittany Lions also happen to be the last team to beat Ohio State during the regular season, so the line is a surprising -3.5 points for OSU. I would like to have been there, but the bad weather and my bad cold and certain events in town are keeping me away, so the television will have to do. For Penn State to win this game, QB Morelli has to keep his head and some sort of run game has to get established.
Now onto the rest of the top 25 (acc. to the BCS):
1. Ohio State v. #25 Penn State. PSU surprises everyone by forcing four turnovers in a win.
2. BC already beat #11 VTech.
3. LSU is idle.
4. Arizona State v. #21 Cal. The PAC-10 has been eating its own this year. Cal takes down ASU.
5. Oregon v. #12 USC. Ducks fall to Trojans.
6. Oklahoma is idle.
7. WVU v. Rutgers. WVU slaughters the Knights.
8. See #2 above.
9. Kansas v. Texas A&M. Look to A&M to topple Kansas from the unbeatens.
10. South Florida v. #23 Connecticut. Some things just shouldn't be, like these two teams in the top 25. South Florida will see to it that Connecticut is gone next week.
11. Florida v. #18 Georgia. The best thing that could happen here is that both teams get into a brawl and the players are all expelled from their universities and the teams cease to exist. In light of the dim chance of that happening, I'm going with Florida over Georgia.
12. See #5 above.
13. Missouri v. Iowa State. Missouri wins big.
14. Kentucky v. Mississippi State. It's been tough at MSU. A win over Kentucky helps.
15. Virginia v. NC State. Virginia wins.
16. South Carolina v. Tennessee. As Florida coach, Spurrier was fond of saying, "You can't spell Citrus without UT," expressing the lesser-bowl fate of the team he dominated back then. South Carolina will win this game, but it will be a close fight.
17. Hawaii v. New Mexico State. Hawaii wins again.
18. See #11 above.
19. Texas v. Nebraska. Nebraska rights its ship with a win over Texas.
20. Michigan v. Minnesota. In a battle of two Big 10 teams that lost to I-AA teams this year, Michigan absolutely clobberfies Minnesota.
21. See #4 above.
22. Auburn v. Mississippi. No problem for Auburn here. Auburn wins big.
23. See #10 above.
24. Alabama is idle.
25. See #1 above.
Saturday's game is in Happy Valley, though, and the Nittany Lions also happen to be the last team to beat Ohio State during the regular season, so the line is a surprising -3.5 points for OSU. I would like to have been there, but the bad weather and my bad cold and certain events in town are keeping me away, so the television will have to do. For Penn State to win this game, QB Morelli has to keep his head and some sort of run game has to get established.
Now onto the rest of the top 25 (acc. to the BCS):
1. Ohio State v. #25 Penn State. PSU surprises everyone by forcing four turnovers in a win.
2. BC already beat #11 VTech.
3. LSU is idle.
4. Arizona State v. #21 Cal. The PAC-10 has been eating its own this year. Cal takes down ASU.
5. Oregon v. #12 USC. Ducks fall to Trojans.
6. Oklahoma is idle.
7. WVU v. Rutgers. WVU slaughters the Knights.
8. See #2 above.
9. Kansas v. Texas A&M. Look to A&M to topple Kansas from the unbeatens.
10. South Florida v. #23 Connecticut. Some things just shouldn't be, like these two teams in the top 25. South Florida will see to it that Connecticut is gone next week.
11. Florida v. #18 Georgia. The best thing that could happen here is that both teams get into a brawl and the players are all expelled from their universities and the teams cease to exist. In light of the dim chance of that happening, I'm going with Florida over Georgia.
12. See #5 above.
13. Missouri v. Iowa State. Missouri wins big.
14. Kentucky v. Mississippi State. It's been tough at MSU. A win over Kentucky helps.
15. Virginia v. NC State. Virginia wins.
16. South Carolina v. Tennessee. As Florida coach, Spurrier was fond of saying, "You can't spell Citrus without UT," expressing the lesser-bowl fate of the team he dominated back then. South Carolina will win this game, but it will be a close fight.
17. Hawaii v. New Mexico State. Hawaii wins again.
18. See #11 above.
19. Texas v. Nebraska. Nebraska rights its ship with a win over Texas.
20. Michigan v. Minnesota. In a battle of two Big 10 teams that lost to I-AA teams this year, Michigan absolutely clobberfies Minnesota.
21. See #4 above.
22. Auburn v. Mississippi. No problem for Auburn here. Auburn wins big.
23. See #10 above.
24. Alabama is idle.
25. See #1 above.
Being sick can make time for reading otherwise worthless columnists
Another thing I did while I was sick was sit around and read the paper. Thoroughly. In fact, I read two papers. Thoroughly. Because we get both the Washington Post and now recently the New York Times home deliveries. We'd cancelled the Times delivery back in the dark days of dissertation deadlines, when both papers often sat wrapped and stacked in not so neat clear and blue plastic piles in our front hallway. Ahem. Now in the heady days of post-doctoral bliss (and indeed that "we" a few sentences back is not royal, it's plural) both papers come thumping on the doorstep (generally) before seven a.m.
So I was reading the editorial page of the Post, when I noticed that one of their numerous conservative columnists was pushing yet another piece of ill-framed and unwieldly arguments across a few columns like so much shit rolling through the gutter. Yes, it was Michael Gerson opining on James Watson, our addled Nobel laureate of DNA code-cracking fame. What a coincidence, I thought, since I'd written about Dr. Watson about a week previously. Gerson was Bush's chief speechwriter for about five years and is largely responsible for the ridiculous scare phrases that Bush used to justify his illegal invasion of Iraq back in 2003 (remember the "don't let the smoking gun be a mushroom cloud" bullshit? pure Gerson). He cut his teeth working for the rabidly anti-egalitarian "Heritage Foundation," and somehow the Post allows him to spew filth twice a week on their pages.
Gerson of course didn't see Watson's gaffe as a problem for the usual consumers of racist eugenicist claptrap, but rather a problem for "liberalism":
Sure, you could argue that Gerson, behind his straw man argument, is really scared that more genetic research will lead to attempts to "perfect" the race (like many of us, he's probably seen Gattaca), not that it hasn't been tried before. Those attempts generally come from the conservative side of the table, you know, the ones who at one time or another are trying to keep immigrants from the "wrong places" out of the country because they'll "mongrelize" America, or who tried to keep anti-miscegenation laws on the books to maintain the "purity" of the white race.
However, Gerson tries to slip it by us one more time, arguing that because progressives trust in science so much yet believe in egalitarianism (which again he sees as somehow opposing one another), they might yield to the temptation of creating a master race:
Unfortunately in today's world, most of us realize that it's the progressives in this country who tirelessly work to protect the rights of the downtrodden (physical, economic, or otherwise) already in this country. It takes real chutzpah for a neocon like Gerson to tell progressives they should side with "human equality"; after all, it's Gerson whose rhetoric has been essential to dehumanize Arabs (especially Iraqis) and to ensure the linguistic success of Bush's hubristic war of political eugenics, attempting to install democracies from the barrels of guns.
I have a seriously hard time trying to take seriously moral advice from a man so closely linked to the most corrupt, blood-stained, morally bankrupt administration in the US with the exception of Richard Nixon (and maybe Andrew Jackson).
So I was reading the editorial page of the Post, when I noticed that one of their numerous conservative columnists was pushing yet another piece of ill-framed and unwieldly arguments across a few columns like so much shit rolling through the gutter. Yes, it was Michael Gerson opining on James Watson, our addled Nobel laureate of DNA code-cracking fame. What a coincidence, I thought, since I'd written about Dr. Watson about a week previously. Gerson was Bush's chief speechwriter for about five years and is largely responsible for the ridiculous scare phrases that Bush used to justify his illegal invasion of Iraq back in 2003 (remember the "don't let the smoking gun be a mushroom cloud" bullshit? pure Gerson). He cut his teeth working for the rabidly anti-egalitarian "Heritage Foundation," and somehow the Post allows him to spew filth twice a week on their pages.
Gerson of course didn't see Watson's gaffe as a problem for the usual consumers of racist eugenicist claptrap, but rather a problem for "liberalism":
Oh. Well, maybe I can accept it so far, since you could read Gerson as tacitly acknowledging that it's only a problem for liberals because conservatives already agree with Watson's racist argument. But you only have to read a little further before you realize that Gerson has actually just set up a straw man argument that he labels "liberalism," and he doesn't even do a very good job of it:Watson is not typical of the scientific community when it comes to his extreme social application of genetics. But this controversy illustrates a temptation within science -- and a tension between some scientific views and liberalism.
The temptation is eugenics. Watson is correct that "we already accept" genetic screening and selective breeding when it comes to disabled children.
This creates an inevitable tension within liberalism. The left in America positions itself as both the defender of egalitarianism and of unrestricted science. In the last presidential election, Sen. John Kerry pledged to "tear down every wall" that inhibited medical research. But what happens when certain scientific views lead to an erosion of the ideal of equality?OK. Not hard to spot the first one, right? That little slip between "unrestricted science" and Kerry's attitude toward medical research. Gerson would probably have us believe that Kerry was looking to bring back Josef Mengele as head of NIH. The second one though is more important, and it's that moronic conflation, so common among conservatives, of "equality" and "identity." To ask for equal rights is not to assert that everyone is identical down to every last molecule of their bodies. Of course you could scientifically ascertain that some people are taller, some are shorter, some are stronger, some are weaker, but one doesn't go about handing out political rights based on such distinctions.
Sure, you could argue that Gerson, behind his straw man argument, is really scared that more genetic research will lead to attempts to "perfect" the race (like many of us, he's probably seen Gattaca), not that it hasn't been tried before. Those attempts generally come from the conservative side of the table, you know, the ones who at one time or another are trying to keep immigrants from the "wrong places" out of the country because they'll "mongrelize" America, or who tried to keep anti-miscegenation laws on the books to maintain the "purity" of the white race.
However, Gerson tries to slip it by us one more time, arguing that because progressives trust in science so much yet believe in egalitarianism (which again he sees as somehow opposing one another), they might yield to the temptation of creating a master race:
Watson and many scientists assert a kind of reductionism -- a belief that human beings are the sum of their chemical processes and have no value beyond their achievements and attributes. But progressives, at their best, have a special concern for the different, the struggling and the weak. When it comes to eugenics, they face not only a tension but a choice -- and they should choose human equality over the pursuit of human perfection.Ahhh, he shows some real concern over the plight of the progressive, which is nice, except he's the only one who ever asserted there was a danger of progressives advocating for genetic manipulation to "weed out" the potential weaklings, etc. (seriously, Michael, it's pretty clunky to shove eugenics into the progressives' laps, as if that's a big progressive talking point -- keeping in mind that I do cede to him that back in the teens and twenties many individuals aligned with the capital P Progressives, like Margaret Sanger, were enamored of eugenics). Mainly, eugenics has been wielded by the conservative movement, who in the US argued that feeble-minded immigrants and their biological inferiority made them susceptible to Bolshevism. I kid you not -- a political outlook linked to one's genetics.
Unfortunately in today's world, most of us realize that it's the progressives in this country who tirelessly work to protect the rights of the downtrodden (physical, economic, or otherwise) already in this country. It takes real chutzpah for a neocon like Gerson to tell progressives they should side with "human equality"; after all, it's Gerson whose rhetoric has been essential to dehumanize Arabs (especially Iraqis) and to ensure the linguistic success of Bush's hubristic war of political eugenics, attempting to install democracies from the barrels of guns.
I have a seriously hard time trying to take seriously moral advice from a man so closely linked to the most corrupt, blood-stained, morally bankrupt administration in the US with the exception of Richard Nixon (and maybe Andrew Jackson).
25 October 2007
Not gone, just missing.
Friends. Dear internet imaginary friends. Dear ghosts.
From Sunday until today I have been unusually sick. I have been to the doctors and the doctors (OK, to be accurate one doctor, one med student, one nurse, one radiation technician, and one lab tech who took blood) have told me it's some sort of viral infection. Get plenty of fluids. Get plenty of rest. Which I did. Normally, on sick days I can get plenty of my own stuff done -- read books, finish petty paperwork, straighten up the house, run errands -- but not this time around. About the only productive thing I managed to do for most of the time was watch one movie -- Almodovar's The Flower of My Secret -- and it was a nice diversion, so thank you NetFlix.
Yesterday I was still feeling ill, but by afternoon had recovered enough to get interested in this dusty stack of metal and wood and plastic in my basement. I hadn't messed with the guitars in a while, and in fact I'd forgotten just how damned beautiful the bass guitar that I've owned for twenty years is. So I took a picture of it. Check it out.
The picture really doesn't do it justice. It's a beautiful birdseye maple and quite solid. It's not for sale.
19 October 2007
Friday toss-ups.
Friday generally means that I do a college football post. Why not? It's a weekend of some really tough games to call, and with South Florida going down to Rutgers already, we could have another huge shakeup of the top 10. By the way, these are BCS rankings, since that's the way ESPN listed them.
1. Ohio State v. Michigan State. Ohio State finally has to play a school that has or once had a real football program, but it's Michigan State. Look for a close 1st half and a big Ohio State second half. OSU wins.
2. USF already lost to Rutgers.
3. Boston College is idle.
4. LSU v. #17 Auburn. Man this is a tough call. I think LSU will win, though, in a low scoring game.
5. Oklahoma v. Iowa State. Oklahoma will maim, maul, and mutilate Iowa State.
6. South Carolina v. Vanderbilt. South Carolina isn't Georgia. Vandy will be out of this game early.
7. Kentucky v. #15 Florida. UK ranked above UF in football? What a brave new world that has such rankings in it. Florida will take Kentucky down.
8. Arizona State is idle.
9. WVU v. Mississippi State. I'm having trouble with this one. It's in Morgantown, so I'm going with the Mountaineers.
10. Oregon v. Washington. Oregon wins this one.
11. Va Tech is idle.
12. Cal v. UCLA. Cal wins this one.
13. Kansas v. Colorado. Wonder why an undefeated Kansas team isn't in the top 10? After Colorado beats them, you won't wonder.
14. USC v. Notre Dame. Do you have to ask? USC has something to prove. USC wins big.
15. See #7 above.
16. Missouri v. #24 Texas Tech. Texas Tech's stay in the top 25 will be short. Missouri wins.
17. See #4 above.
18. Hawaii is idle.
19. Virginia v. Maryland. UMD wins this one.
20. Georgia is idle.
21. Tennessee v. Alabama. Tough call. I say 'Bama wins a shootout.
22. Texas v. Baylor. Continuing their cakewalk schedule, Texas will decimate Baylor.
23. Cincinnati v. Pitt. Pitt wins this one.
24. See #16 above.
25. Michigan v. Illinois. I'd love to see Illinois take out the Wolverines. It can happen, but I fear I'm voting more with heart than head. In the end, I say Michigan escapes with a win.
Other weekend action:
PSU v. Indiana. PSU wins in Indiana, setting up a showdown with unbeaten and top ranked Ohio State in Happy Valley on October 27th.
1. Ohio State v. Michigan State. Ohio State finally has to play a school that has or once had a real football program, but it's Michigan State. Look for a close 1st half and a big Ohio State second half. OSU wins.
2. USF already lost to Rutgers.
3. Boston College is idle.
4. LSU v. #17 Auburn. Man this is a tough call. I think LSU will win, though, in a low scoring game.
5. Oklahoma v. Iowa State. Oklahoma will maim, maul, and mutilate Iowa State.
6. South Carolina v. Vanderbilt. South Carolina isn't Georgia. Vandy will be out of this game early.
7. Kentucky v. #15 Florida. UK ranked above UF in football? What a brave new world that has such rankings in it. Florida will take Kentucky down.
8. Arizona State is idle.
9. WVU v. Mississippi State. I'm having trouble with this one. It's in Morgantown, so I'm going with the Mountaineers.
10. Oregon v. Washington. Oregon wins this one.
11. Va Tech is idle.
12. Cal v. UCLA. Cal wins this one.
13. Kansas v. Colorado. Wonder why an undefeated Kansas team isn't in the top 10? After Colorado beats them, you won't wonder.
14. USC v. Notre Dame. Do you have to ask? USC has something to prove. USC wins big.
15. See #7 above.
16. Missouri v. #24 Texas Tech. Texas Tech's stay in the top 25 will be short. Missouri wins.
17. See #4 above.
18. Hawaii is idle.
19. Virginia v. Maryland. UMD wins this one.
20. Georgia is idle.
21. Tennessee v. Alabama. Tough call. I say 'Bama wins a shootout.
22. Texas v. Baylor. Continuing their cakewalk schedule, Texas will decimate Baylor.
23. Cincinnati v. Pitt. Pitt wins this one.
24. See #16 above.
25. Michigan v. Illinois. I'd love to see Illinois take out the Wolverines. It can happen, but I fear I'm voting more with heart than head. In the end, I say Michigan escapes with a win.
Other weekend action:
PSU v. Indiana. PSU wins in Indiana, setting up a showdown with unbeaten and top ranked Ohio State in Happy Valley on October 27th.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)