Two musicians with two very different styles died this week. You might not have heard of them (well, you've probably heard of the one, even if you haven't heard his songs.) They were both important in my musical education.
Lemmy Kilmister, from Motorhead, is the more famous of the two. Motorhead was a huge influence on many heavy metal musicians, and many bands have covered one of their biggest hits, Ace of Spades. I was never a big metalhead, but I had friends who were and I heard plenty.
Around the same time I was discovering heavy metal I became aware of a more laidback musical style, reggae, that would stick with me for longer. One of the first reggae songs I remember hearing was "Ghost Town" by The Specials. I'm surprised I haven't included it in earlier reggae posts. Their drummer, John Bradbury, just died.
Both of these guys were fairly old and still playing music. They'll be remembered.
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Tell Me Who You Vote For, And I Will Tell You Who You Are
Sigh. How did a sleazy reality star become the Republican party's leading candidate? Well, they did run a B-movie actor in 1980...
I'd like to ask Trump's supporters: what do you like about him? What does "make America great again" mean? At least, to you? What is bad about it now? What time period would you go back to? As for me, as much of a history buff as I am I don't want to go back- I want to go forward. But you want to go back. "We want our country back." You know, the one you miss so much- where you could make fun of colored people, and fire fags, and burn women at the stake for talking back.
I mean, are they just ignorant? No gay or Muslim or black friends, so they are unaware of that great big world outside of their inbred neighborhood? I'm sure that's part of the truth. But it's not just ignorance that drives his supporters- it's selfishness, paranoia, xenophobia. " Yeah, I know a black guy, but I don't like him" (Or- "he's one of the good ones.") "I know a Muslim guy but I don't trust him." "I know a gay guy but don't think he deserves special rights" (i.e., the ones I have...)
To the Trump supporters who say "he says what he's thinking, he doesn't pull any punches, he's a straight talker unlike all these other politicians who just tell you what you want to hear." You do understand that he's a politician who's telling you what you want to hear, correct? And since you want to hear that nastiness, I am going to assume you are a nasty person.
Trump is all flash, no substance. He always has been. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and has done nothing useful for the country or world. And he's a dick. I don't know what people like about that. He talks a big game. He likes to stir stuff up. He's divisive. And as bad as he is as a candidate, he would be a far worse president. Someone who doesn't stop his supporters from beating people up now will, given more power, encourage them to attack more people. He is a jerk. If you support him, I will assume you are one too.
There are plenty of Republicans who can't stand him, and are speaking out against him, and I respect that. But who would they prefer? Cruz? Huckabee? Fiorina? There are a few "moderate" Republicans, Kasich/Rubio/Bush. Do you want them?
To Republicans who don't support him now, my question is: Will you vote for him if he wins the nomination? Is he what you really want? Do you hate Hillary so much that you would hold your nose and vote for this doofus?
I'm not a huge fan of Hillary; I'm not a huge fan of politicians in general. However, when I weigh the choices, the outcome is clear. Look at foreign policy- I think Clinton would generally continue Obama's foreign policy, which has been middling but not awful. I think Trump would piss off our allies and enemies all at once (aside from maybe being buddy-buddy with Putin.) Frankly, I think she would be tougher, and better, at foreign policy than Trump. Domestically, I also see her staying the course for the most part, and him being a fucking nutcase. Economically, he would ruin this country. He has ruined plenty of companies and people. He is a self-centered bastard. Again, a lot of politicians are, but he has proven in the past, jeez, four decades that he has been in the public eye, that he is more self-centered, and more of a bastard, than most.
Sunday, December 20, 2015
Religion, pt 1: In The Beginning
Verily, though I'm not very religious I know a lot about religion.
As a kid I went to church with many of my friends, who were of various (Christian) sects. My parents weren't religious, but they encouraged us to experience different churches and cultures. At holidays and some other times we went to church with family, which meant Methodist and Roman Catholic services. My friends were Baptist, Mormon, Catholic, etc., and I went to church with them a lot. As I got older I was exposed to other religions (Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism) and went to Unitarian Universalist churches. UUers are technically Christians, but it is a very non-dogmatic sect. In general, I was encouraged to think for myself. I read assorted texts, I ended up taking comparative religion classes in high school and college, and I thought about things a lot. I still think often about the meaning of life, etc., and experience spiritual moments in various places. I am most definitely not a fan of organized religion in general, but I find a lot to like in the teachings of many religions. I have had my most profound religious/spiritual experiences not in churches but in nature. Looking at the wonders around us, or imagining our place in the universe, makes me feel the divine more deeply than any sermon.
And I do think there's something out there (well, and in here, and everywhere.) I think there's a force for good in the universe, or at least a "motivating force." I don't think of it as having a very concrete form or name; Richard Bach referred to it as The Great Is. That kind of accounts for the idea of omnipresence, and omnipotence, and karma, and a lot of other concepts in mainstream religions. I don't see a guy with a white beard sitting on clouds making things happen, or answering prayers. It's more of a force in everything, or not even that much of a separation- it's not in everything, it IS everything.
Sometimes, of course, it's hard to see much evidence of any "force for good" in this world. Bad things happen, to good people. Some explain this away as "well, they did something wrong, or weren't faithful enough." I call bullshit on that "he deserved it, even if we can't tell why" attitude. And don't get me started on Pat Robertson and his ilk, who spout vicious things about "gays causing hurricanes" and whatnot. Their brand of religious leadership, and of religion in general, are what drives people away from organized religion. And they don't seem to see how much they have in common with the vile fundamentalists of other religions, but they are all the same; just the targets of their hate differ (well, sometimes differ.)
Sorry for that digression. I believe we should treat others as we would like to be treated; that seems to be a common thread in many religions' teachings, but forgotten by many of their followers. I don't believe in heaven or hell, except as they exist in our lives. I don't think you should act good now so that you can get rewarded later, or to avoid punishment. You should be decent because it's the right thing to do. And we do create "hells" for ourselves, and others, right here on earth. Anyway, you never know how long you have, so you should do what you can now. I've seen too many promising people taken away too soon.
Some of the best people I've known have been religious. And some of the best have been non-religious. I don't think decency or morals have anything to do with religion, or whether you call yourself religious. Some of the worst people I've known, and in history, have been religious, or at least claimed that mantle for themselves (and used it was a weapon, and excuse, to do nasty things.)
I recently saw a quote: "The Lord uses the good ones, and bad ones use the Lord." And among my other beliefs, I believe that strongly. If you tell me how religious you are, and that you do things because of your religion, I am suspicious of you. And if you tell me I should do things because of your religion, well, you can probably guess what I think of that. I do not think other people should follow my spiritual beliefs. They work for me; they won't necessarily work for you. Let me live by them. Don't expect me to follow yours.
Look: let's all respect each others' views and beliefs, but not try to impose them on anyone. I appreciate the good in this world, the amazing people, and the wonders of nature. I try to treat people decently. I try to live the best life I can. I hope you do too.
Humankind has not woven the web of life.
We are but one thread within it.
Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves.
All things are bound together.
All things connect.
Chief Seattle, 1854
As a kid I went to church with many of my friends, who were of various (Christian) sects. My parents weren't religious, but they encouraged us to experience different churches and cultures. At holidays and some other times we went to church with family, which meant Methodist and Roman Catholic services. My friends were Baptist, Mormon, Catholic, etc., and I went to church with them a lot. As I got older I was exposed to other religions (Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism) and went to Unitarian Universalist churches. UUers are technically Christians, but it is a very non-dogmatic sect. In general, I was encouraged to think for myself. I read assorted texts, I ended up taking comparative religion classes in high school and college, and I thought about things a lot. I still think often about the meaning of life, etc., and experience spiritual moments in various places. I am most definitely not a fan of organized religion in general, but I find a lot to like in the teachings of many religions. I have had my most profound religious/spiritual experiences not in churches but in nature. Looking at the wonders around us, or imagining our place in the universe, makes me feel the divine more deeply than any sermon.
And I do think there's something out there (well, and in here, and everywhere.) I think there's a force for good in the universe, or at least a "motivating force." I don't think of it as having a very concrete form or name; Richard Bach referred to it as The Great Is. That kind of accounts for the idea of omnipresence, and omnipotence, and karma, and a lot of other concepts in mainstream religions. I don't see a guy with a white beard sitting on clouds making things happen, or answering prayers. It's more of a force in everything, or not even that much of a separation- it's not in everything, it IS everything.
Sometimes, of course, it's hard to see much evidence of any "force for good" in this world. Bad things happen, to good people. Some explain this away as "well, they did something wrong, or weren't faithful enough." I call bullshit on that "he deserved it, even if we can't tell why" attitude. And don't get me started on Pat Robertson and his ilk, who spout vicious things about "gays causing hurricanes" and whatnot. Their brand of religious leadership, and of religion in general, are what drives people away from organized religion. And they don't seem to see how much they have in common with the vile fundamentalists of other religions, but they are all the same; just the targets of their hate differ (well, sometimes differ.)
Sorry for that digression. I believe we should treat others as we would like to be treated; that seems to be a common thread in many religions' teachings, but forgotten by many of their followers. I don't believe in heaven or hell, except as they exist in our lives. I don't think you should act good now so that you can get rewarded later, or to avoid punishment. You should be decent because it's the right thing to do. And we do create "hells" for ourselves, and others, right here on earth. Anyway, you never know how long you have, so you should do what you can now. I've seen too many promising people taken away too soon.
Some of the best people I've known have been religious. And some of the best have been non-religious. I don't think decency or morals have anything to do with religion, or whether you call yourself religious. Some of the worst people I've known, and in history, have been religious, or at least claimed that mantle for themselves (and used it was a weapon, and excuse, to do nasty things.)
I recently saw a quote: "The Lord uses the good ones, and bad ones use the Lord." And among my other beliefs, I believe that strongly. If you tell me how religious you are, and that you do things because of your religion, I am suspicious of you. And if you tell me I should do things because of your religion, well, you can probably guess what I think of that. I do not think other people should follow my spiritual beliefs. They work for me; they won't necessarily work for you. Let me live by them. Don't expect me to follow yours.
Look: let's all respect each others' views and beliefs, but not try to impose them on anyone. I appreciate the good in this world, the amazing people, and the wonders of nature. I try to treat people decently. I try to live the best life I can. I hope you do too.
Humankind has not woven the web of life.
We are but one thread within it.
Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves.
All things are bound together.
All things connect.
Chief Seattle, 1854
Sunday, December 13, 2015
We're Jammin'
I've touched on my love for reggae and ska before, and lately I've been into it more. My interest waxes and wanes, but never goes away. Clapton's cover of "I Shot the Sheriff" was probably the first reggae-ish song I heard, but jeez, there were a lot of songs in the '70s and '80s that were influenced by ska and reggae. The Police were very into those sounds; think of "Can't Stand Losing You," "Message In A Bottle,"or "Walking On The Moon"- reggae is front and center, even if at the time I didn't know what to call it. There was The Clash, of course, and there were others bringing reggae into the mainstream- Paul Simon with "Mother and Child Reunion," even Led Zeppelin. I quickly moved on to Bob Marley and Jimmy Cliff, and then got into ska, and the rest is history.
Musical Youth- Pass The Dutchie
A sanitized cover of "Pass the Kutchie" by the Mighty Diamonds, an early reggae group. I heard this a lot when it came out in 1982, and it, along with other songs of that era, brought reggae into the mainstream for me and others.
Eddie Grant- Electric Avenue
A big hit, again in 1982.
The Police- Walking on the Moon
One of many Police songs with strong reggae influences.
Led Zeppelin- D'yer Mak'er
I would have had no idea this was essentially a reggae song, and I bet most early listeners were oblivious too. But it helped plant seeds, and the roots infiltrated pop pretty quickly.
Musical Youth- Pass The Dutchie
A sanitized cover of "Pass the Kutchie" by the Mighty Diamonds, an early reggae group. I heard this a lot when it came out in 1982, and it, along with other songs of that era, brought reggae into the mainstream for me and others.
Eddie Grant- Electric Avenue
A big hit, again in 1982.
The Police- Walking on the Moon
One of many Police songs with strong reggae influences.
Led Zeppelin- D'yer Mak'er
I would have had no idea this was essentially a reggae song, and I bet most early listeners were oblivious too. But it helped plant seeds, and the roots infiltrated pop pretty quickly.
Sunday, December 6, 2015
Divide and Conquer
The divisiveness in American politics and society is crazy. There has always been bickering, disagreement, and outright distrust between the two parties, and across the spectrum of views. But until the last 20 years or so there has been at least an ability and desire to work together. A willingness to compromise- not give up one's ideals or goals, but to work something out to keep the country moving forward. "I want this, you want that, we'll come to an agreement somewhere in the middle." Since the rise of Fox "News" and Rush Limbaugh, et al, many people and politicians refuse to accept anything short of everything they want. That doesn't work in real life. Not among individuals, not among groups, not among nations. It's not solely conservatives who refuse to compromise at all, but let's face it, it's mostly them. They want to talk, for example, about how "divisive" Obama is. He is not. They don't agree with him, and they get pissed off and refuse to do anything he wants. That's not him being divisive- that's them. I guess he's polarizing, maybe, but not purposely divisive. Conservative "outrage" about every single thing he does, even when it's things they would normally support? That's what's divisive. They want to divide us, make it us against them. Democrats against Republicans, Christians against Muslims, black against white. That world of division, fear, self-righteousness? That's a conservative world.
The rise of talk radio, Tea Party nutballs, and big money in politics have made our differences into divisions. We demonize each other. We don't talk to each other. For example, I have mostly weeded conservatives out of my Facebook feed. I do not want to see the nasty, angry, often false things that far too many conservatives post. I certainly don't want to see apologists for traitors, as with the Confederate flag issue. I don't want to see people defending the shooting of children (cf. Tamir Rice and many others.) I am conservative on some issues. I am glad to read, and talk about, conservative ideas with reasonable people. I love conversations that get deep into stuff like that, about reality. But I am fed up with the reposts of things that are blatantly false, and are often moralizing on top of that. I have kicked people who post stuff like that off my page, and often also out of my life. If you keep telling me Obama is buying up all the ammo so you can't have it, and getting ready to take all the guns, and the UN is going to take over, well, you're crazy. And frankly, I've dialed back or booted some liberals too. I don't want to see wacko right-wing things, or wacko left-wing things, all day. Say something stupid and I will probably call you out on it; keep saying stupid stuff and I will boot you. If you hold uninformed, unreasoned views on things, or think violence is okay (left-wing or right-wing,) or repeat things that are not true (and don't try find out if they're true,) I don't have time for you. I'll kick you off my FB page, and I probably don't even want to talk to you in person. And for the next year, I will probably be unfriending people online and in real life over their support for Trump or any other idiot
And that's sad. I try to talk to them, reason with them, but I don't have the patience to do it forever. The thing is, that hurts us. It hurts our society and country. We get into an echo chamber, don't see what other people think, don't engage with them and move forward. Which leads to a vicious circle that just makes things worse. We've lost something important. I feel like I've lost something. If I don't have conservative friends who I can talk to in a reasonable way, how will I be able to think clearly? How will I learn if I don't hear new things?
We don't have to be divided. We need to engage. I am not optimistic about our ability to do that. I don't know if we've had a failure in our education system, or just too many people who refuse to think critically, or this is all just part of a natural cycle, but it's bad. And I look at the current presidential candidates, and I see it getting worse. I don't see anyone on the Republican side even trying to bring us together. And while the Democratic candidates at least try to do that, I don't see many conservatives capable of listening, and thinking clearly.
The rise of talk radio, Tea Party nutballs, and big money in politics have made our differences into divisions. We demonize each other. We don't talk to each other. For example, I have mostly weeded conservatives out of my Facebook feed. I do not want to see the nasty, angry, often false things that far too many conservatives post. I certainly don't want to see apologists for traitors, as with the Confederate flag issue. I don't want to see people defending the shooting of children (cf. Tamir Rice and many others.) I am conservative on some issues. I am glad to read, and talk about, conservative ideas with reasonable people. I love conversations that get deep into stuff like that, about reality. But I am fed up with the reposts of things that are blatantly false, and are often moralizing on top of that. I have kicked people who post stuff like that off my page, and often also out of my life. If you keep telling me Obama is buying up all the ammo so you can't have it, and getting ready to take all the guns, and the UN is going to take over, well, you're crazy. And frankly, I've dialed back or booted some liberals too. I don't want to see wacko right-wing things, or wacko left-wing things, all day. Say something stupid and I will probably call you out on it; keep saying stupid stuff and I will boot you. If you hold uninformed, unreasoned views on things, or think violence is okay (left-wing or right-wing,) or repeat things that are not true (and don't try find out if they're true,) I don't have time for you. I'll kick you off my FB page, and I probably don't even want to talk to you in person. And for the next year, I will probably be unfriending people online and in real life over their support for Trump or any other idiot
And that's sad. I try to talk to them, reason with them, but I don't have the patience to do it forever. The thing is, that hurts us. It hurts our society and country. We get into an echo chamber, don't see what other people think, don't engage with them and move forward. Which leads to a vicious circle that just makes things worse. We've lost something important. I feel like I've lost something. If I don't have conservative friends who I can talk to in a reasonable way, how will I be able to think clearly? How will I learn if I don't hear new things?
We don't have to be divided. We need to engage. I am not optimistic about our ability to do that. I don't know if we've had a failure in our education system, or just too many people who refuse to think critically, or this is all just part of a natural cycle, but it's bad. And I look at the current presidential candidates, and I see it getting worse. I don't see anyone on the Republican side even trying to bring us together. And while the Democratic candidates at least try to do that, I don't see many conservatives capable of listening, and thinking clearly.
Sunday, November 29, 2015
Drumroll, please...
Through the wonders of modern technology, Miss Mox and I recently found out what color baby clothes we need to buy:
Pink.
Yes, we are progressive, and this kid will get to be whoever she wants, but when she's little she will definitely be dressing up in "traditional" colors for awhile. Of course, Miss Mox is not a girly girl and I am not a Jersey Shore macho idiot, so that's about as far as gender roles will go. She can play with dolls or bulldozers, or both, or neither. She will definitely be read to, and hopefully be a voracious reader like her parents. She will watch sports with her mom, go to air museums with her dad, play with animals and eat good food. When she grows up she can be whatever she wants. We are parsing out which physical characteristics we hope she has, but we know she will be stubborn and will be a smartass because those genes seem to be dominant in our families. Hopefully we can handle those two qualities...
We have a name picked out, and the room that will be hers was already painted purple. We have lots to do around the house, and lots of mental prep because HOLY CRAP WE'LL BE PARENTS SOON! Luckily we have family and friends to help.
Seeing the sex, and that she is healthy, on the ultrasound was supercool. We are lucky to live in an era of advanced medicine, and to have many good doctors and facilities nearby (plus, of course, good insurance.) We do worry about her health (and mine- I already creak when I bend down and try to stand up...) We worry about money, and schools, and safety. But we are in a good situation, and I know Miss Mox is a great partner- in life, and parenting. Another adventure...
Pink.
Yes, we are progressive, and this kid will get to be whoever she wants, but when she's little she will definitely be dressing up in "traditional" colors for awhile. Of course, Miss Mox is not a girly girl and I am not a Jersey Shore macho idiot, so that's about as far as gender roles will go. She can play with dolls or bulldozers, or both, or neither. She will definitely be read to, and hopefully be a voracious reader like her parents. She will watch sports with her mom, go to air museums with her dad, play with animals and eat good food. When she grows up she can be whatever she wants. We are parsing out which physical characteristics we hope she has, but we know she will be stubborn and will be a smartass because those genes seem to be dominant in our families. Hopefully we can handle those two qualities...
We have a name picked out, and the room that will be hers was already painted purple. We have lots to do around the house, and lots of mental prep because HOLY CRAP WE'LL BE PARENTS SOON! Luckily we have family and friends to help.
Seeing the sex, and that she is healthy, on the ultrasound was supercool. We are lucky to live in an era of advanced medicine, and to have many good doctors and facilities nearby (plus, of course, good insurance.) We do worry about her health (and mine- I already creak when I bend down and try to stand up...) We worry about money, and schools, and safety. But we are in a good situation, and I know Miss Mox is a great partner- in life, and parenting. Another adventure...
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Non Sequitur
"It does not follow." Congrats to the Republicans for yet another inappropriate response. Radicals in Paris kill people, and you decide to ban Syrian refugees from coming here. Those refugees are fleeing Syria, fleeing the violence caused by ISIS. In what alternate reality does it make sense to turn them away? Just like attacking Iraq because of 9/11- one does not follow from the other. Please, explain the connections, in detail. After the horrible attacks in Paris, here's what the French are doing: accepting more refugees. They understand what is going on over there. We don't. Cue blaming the French for being victims, and calling them weak. Of course, that has probably already started...
The French are attacking ISIS too, bombing in Syria and hitting extremist cells throughout Europe. France is not weak. The French are way tougher than they are given credit for. I've seen the police in Paris- you don't want to piss them off. And the French military has been strong for centuries. Remember when they helped us win our Revolution? Remember theirs, and Napoleon? Yes, they were in bad shape after years of trench warfare in WW1, and got rolled over quickly at the start of WW2, but so did pretty much everyone else. If the U.S. had had to fight Germany in 1940 we would have lost too. Given the chance, though, the French recovered, and fought well till the end of the war. Since then, they have been strong (even if they sometimes stay out of situations where there is no need to fight- something we could learn a bit about...)
As for ISIS, they are awful people. We need to fight them (and we are, and have been,) not those who are trying to get away from them. I still call them ISIS; I'm just used to it. But I love that others use “Daesh,” an Arabic abbreviation, because apparently it pisses the militants off. And I like ISIL, since it is more descriptive, and tweaks conservatives with no knowledge of history or geography.
Look- there is risk anywhere, anytime. The risk from accepting Syrian refugees is incredibly low. The risk from traveling, to France anyway, is very low. (Syria... I'm going to wait awhile.) I am much more worried about being attacked by a disgruntled ex-employee where I work. Or a paranoid, ignorant current employee. The day after the Paris attacks, I was talking with a coworker about security at the plant. Our company increased security after 9/11; I doubt anyone could get in undetected. I feel pretty safe there. This guy does not. He said “What about the ones that are already here?” I was confused for a minute; did he mean refugees, or even terrorists, already in the U.S.? Nope, he meant Muslims working at our company. For real? That is his worry? That Ahmed, who has been there two years and who I have had great conversations with about politics and, more often, food, is going to turn out to be a terrorist? That Muammar, who prays five times a day and is the friendliest person you'll ever meet, is somehow violent? I worry more about the guy who asked the question: a disheveled gun-nut, who is afraid of something he knows nothing about, is well-armed, and is always negative, whether he's talking about work, the weather, his wife, whatever.
Things happen in the world. We need to react to them by using reason, not emotion. Facts, not soundbites from Fox. What happened in Paris was awful, and its consequences are playing out right now. Something bad will happen next week, and next year. We need to remember that we are people, and not animals- lashing out at refugees because you don't like them will not prevent the real terrorists from doing something else. Stop being afraid. Keep living life as it should be lived.
The French are attacking ISIS too, bombing in Syria and hitting extremist cells throughout Europe. France is not weak. The French are way tougher than they are given credit for. I've seen the police in Paris- you don't want to piss them off. And the French military has been strong for centuries. Remember when they helped us win our Revolution? Remember theirs, and Napoleon? Yes, they were in bad shape after years of trench warfare in WW1, and got rolled over quickly at the start of WW2, but so did pretty much everyone else. If the U.S. had had to fight Germany in 1940 we would have lost too. Given the chance, though, the French recovered, and fought well till the end of the war. Since then, they have been strong (even if they sometimes stay out of situations where there is no need to fight- something we could learn a bit about...)
As for ISIS, they are awful people. We need to fight them (and we are, and have been,) not those who are trying to get away from them. I still call them ISIS; I'm just used to it. But I love that others use “Daesh,” an Arabic abbreviation, because apparently it pisses the militants off. And I like ISIL, since it is more descriptive, and tweaks conservatives with no knowledge of history or geography.
Look- there is risk anywhere, anytime. The risk from accepting Syrian refugees is incredibly low. The risk from traveling, to France anyway, is very low. (Syria... I'm going to wait awhile.) I am much more worried about being attacked by a disgruntled ex-employee where I work. Or a paranoid, ignorant current employee. The day after the Paris attacks, I was talking with a coworker about security at the plant. Our company increased security after 9/11; I doubt anyone could get in undetected. I feel pretty safe there. This guy does not. He said “What about the ones that are already here?” I was confused for a minute; did he mean refugees, or even terrorists, already in the U.S.? Nope, he meant Muslims working at our company. For real? That is his worry? That Ahmed, who has been there two years and who I have had great conversations with about politics and, more often, food, is going to turn out to be a terrorist? That Muammar, who prays five times a day and is the friendliest person you'll ever meet, is somehow violent? I worry more about the guy who asked the question: a disheveled gun-nut, who is afraid of something he knows nothing about, is well-armed, and is always negative, whether he's talking about work, the weather, his wife, whatever.
Things happen in the world. We need to react to them by using reason, not emotion. Facts, not soundbites from Fox. What happened in Paris was awful, and its consequences are playing out right now. Something bad will happen next week, and next year. We need to remember that we are people, and not animals- lashing out at refugees because you don't like them will not prevent the real terrorists from doing something else. Stop being afraid. Keep living life as it should be lived.
Sunday, November 15, 2015
To The Left, Quick March
Now, I know the name of this blog makes people think I'm liberal. And I am, on many issues, but I'm conservative on plenty; and I'm not far-left on the majority of issues. I know, I know, Ronald Reagan is now considered a socialist apostate by "true conservatives," so even if I was to the right of him I'd be considered a liberal. But I consider myself a slightly-left-leaning moderate, and an independent voter. I research all the candidates, and all the arguments for issues, before deciding. I hate party-line voting, and those little flyers with all the candidates for a particular party. I like it when politicians, on either side, go against the "true believers" once in awhile. I like talking to people who actually think about issues, and have nuanced views, and are aware that there can be multiple "right" ways of looking at things.
I'd be more conservative if the conservatives were more reasonable, more fact-based. The crazier mainstream conservatives get, the more I lean left. The fact that Donald Trump is considered a viable Republican candidate says something about where conservatives stand right now. Obama and Clinton are moderates, which is obvious when you watch what they say and do. That they are considered screaming liberals by conservatives says something about how far the right has moved over the last few decades.
Here's where I stand on a few issues. Again, definitely left-leaning, but overall still moderate.
Abortion- It should be safe, legal, and rare. I don't think anyone wants more abortions. But to say that it should be illegal even in cases of rape, incest, or threats to the mother's health is as abhorrent to me as, say, China's old one-child policy. There is a middle ground, and it is roughly where we are now, with legal abortion but also plenty of sex ed and contraception available so that there are as few as possible. Of course, Republicans want to get rid of sex ed and contraception, so, hm...
Environment- I am glad that we are (slowly) moving toward renewable power. We have a long way to go, and in the meantime we need to use oil, coal, and nuclear power to get by. But subsidies for those dirty forms of energy should be gradually reduced, as we increase subsidies for renewables till they can stand on their own to supply more of our needs. This, along with climate change, is a national security issue, so you would think conservatives would support these changes. But no, they want cheap gas no matter the cost to health (and to human lives, here and abroad.)
Gun control- Again, I figure we are close to where we need to be. I don't think all guns should be confiscated; there are very few people who want to do that, despite the fear-mongering of gun nuts. I think almost anyone should be able to get, well, almost anything. But there should be registration, people with violent criminal records or severe mental health issues should not be allowed to buy guns, everyone should go through a background check, and everyone should go through long training courses. I see this as a common sense position. The fact that some people think it is not says more about their state of mind than mine.
Regulation- "That government is best which governs least." But exactly what that "least" is may not be clear, and certainly it doesn't mean "not at all." We need regulations, for safety and health and to keep people's greed from letting them take advantage of others by, I don't know, reselling junk bonds. I don't want any more regulation than necessary, but I know how important regulation is. Aviation, highways, food, etc.- sometimes things need to be tightly regulated. You would think conservatives, with their fetish for law and order, would understand stuff like this. But, nope.
Religion- Freedom of religion is a cornerstone of our democracy, and is in the first amendment to the Constitution. But freedom to practice your religion does not mean that everyone has to follow it. Worship as you wish, and live by your religion. Don't try to impose it on others. One of the amazing things about American democracy is that we don't have an official religion. The Founders made sure of it. Please respect their judgment.
War- I support some interventions abroad. I also support the troops during and after, unlike many Republicans, who cut funding for the VA, etc., but want more and more spending for military hardware and more and more military adventures any time someone looks at us sideways. I don't think we should get involved everywhere, but there are times and places where we need to defend our interests, or where we have the ability to help (for example, in Indonesia and Haiti.)
Welfare- Most people on welfare, food stamps, etc., need it, only use it briefly, and are working while they use it. Don't call them lazy, or act like you don't know how much getting rid of it would hurt kids and the elderly. Yes, I think anyone who can work should work, on or off of welfare. And there is a little fraud, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater- work to get rid of the fraud and make the system better. Should we get rid of the military because there is fraud? Or insurance? Of course not- you fix the problem, without destroying the necessary part.
Well. That's just a few issues, but you can get some idea of where I stand. Am I a bleeding-heart liberal? Middle of the road? Let me know. Of course, if you call me a libtard you will get blocked immediately, for a couple of reasons, but other than that I do want to hear what you think.
I'd be more conservative if the conservatives were more reasonable, more fact-based. The crazier mainstream conservatives get, the more I lean left. The fact that Donald Trump is considered a viable Republican candidate says something about where conservatives stand right now. Obama and Clinton are moderates, which is obvious when you watch what they say and do. That they are considered screaming liberals by conservatives says something about how far the right has moved over the last few decades.
Here's where I stand on a few issues. Again, definitely left-leaning, but overall still moderate.
Abortion- It should be safe, legal, and rare. I don't think anyone wants more abortions. But to say that it should be illegal even in cases of rape, incest, or threats to the mother's health is as abhorrent to me as, say, China's old one-child policy. There is a middle ground, and it is roughly where we are now, with legal abortion but also plenty of sex ed and contraception available so that there are as few as possible. Of course, Republicans want to get rid of sex ed and contraception, so, hm...
Environment- I am glad that we are (slowly) moving toward renewable power. We have a long way to go, and in the meantime we need to use oil, coal, and nuclear power to get by. But subsidies for those dirty forms of energy should be gradually reduced, as we increase subsidies for renewables till they can stand on their own to supply more of our needs. This, along with climate change, is a national security issue, so you would think conservatives would support these changes. But no, they want cheap gas no matter the cost to health (and to human lives, here and abroad.)
Gun control- Again, I figure we are close to where we need to be. I don't think all guns should be confiscated; there are very few people who want to do that, despite the fear-mongering of gun nuts. I think almost anyone should be able to get, well, almost anything. But there should be registration, people with violent criminal records or severe mental health issues should not be allowed to buy guns, everyone should go through a background check, and everyone should go through long training courses. I see this as a common sense position. The fact that some people think it is not says more about their state of mind than mine.
Regulation- "That government is best which governs least." But exactly what that "least" is may not be clear, and certainly it doesn't mean "not at all." We need regulations, for safety and health and to keep people's greed from letting them take advantage of others by, I don't know, reselling junk bonds. I don't want any more regulation than necessary, but I know how important regulation is. Aviation, highways, food, etc.- sometimes things need to be tightly regulated. You would think conservatives, with their fetish for law and order, would understand stuff like this. But, nope.
Religion- Freedom of religion is a cornerstone of our democracy, and is in the first amendment to the Constitution. But freedom to practice your religion does not mean that everyone has to follow it. Worship as you wish, and live by your religion. Don't try to impose it on others. One of the amazing things about American democracy is that we don't have an official religion. The Founders made sure of it. Please respect their judgment.
War- I support some interventions abroad. I also support the troops during and after, unlike many Republicans, who cut funding for the VA, etc., but want more and more spending for military hardware and more and more military adventures any time someone looks at us sideways. I don't think we should get involved everywhere, but there are times and places where we need to defend our interests, or where we have the ability to help (for example, in Indonesia and Haiti.)
Welfare- Most people on welfare, food stamps, etc., need it, only use it briefly, and are working while they use it. Don't call them lazy, or act like you don't know how much getting rid of it would hurt kids and the elderly. Yes, I think anyone who can work should work, on or off of welfare. And there is a little fraud, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater- work to get rid of the fraud and make the system better. Should we get rid of the military because there is fraud? Or insurance? Of course not- you fix the problem, without destroying the necessary part.
Well. That's just a few issues, but you can get some idea of where I stand. Am I a bleeding-heart liberal? Middle of the road? Let me know. Of course, if you call me a libtard you will get blocked immediately, for a couple of reasons, but other than that I do want to hear what you think.
Sunday, November 8, 2015
Wait, What Did He Say?
Song lyrics are sometimes suggestive, or people think they are (like
"Louie Louie.") I am always amused by the double entendres in some
songs, and I guess I better get this out of my system before we have a
kid running around listening to everything...
Robert Johnson- Phonograph Blues
Going more or less chronologically, this is the earliest recorded one that I know of, though I'm sure there are many earlier suggestive songs.
Lil Johnson- Get 'Em From The Peanut Man
Just heard this the other day on the radio, and it inspired me to put these together.
Aerosmith- Big Ten Inch
Originally a blues song by Bull Moose Jackson, this got a lot of airplay when Aerosmith covered it.
AC/DC- Big Balls
Also much-played, this one is, well, more lascivious than most.
Denise LaSalle- Lick It Before You Stick It
Hardly even suggestive, this just comes out and says it...
Robert Johnson- Phonograph Blues
Going more or less chronologically, this is the earliest recorded one that I know of, though I'm sure there are many earlier suggestive songs.
Lil Johnson- Get 'Em From The Peanut Man
Just heard this the other day on the radio, and it inspired me to put these together.
Aerosmith- Big Ten Inch
Originally a blues song by Bull Moose Jackson, this got a lot of airplay when Aerosmith covered it.
AC/DC- Big Balls
Also much-played, this one is, well, more lascivious than most.
Denise LaSalle- Lick It Before You Stick It
Hardly even suggestive, this just comes out and says it...
Sunday, November 1, 2015
A Time For Every Purpose
My company wants me to work more. It's an interesting job, and I have a lot to learn, and some of it just can't be done during a regular workday, when we're doing the normal routine and putting out fires. I'm trying to get them to teach me some stuff during the shift, during slow times, but it's not happening often. I don't mind a little more overtime, but I do not want to live there. When I took the job I knew there'd be a little overtime, but they said I wouldn't have to come in all the time. Of course now they're pushing for more and more.
My job is not my life. I have a life, and lots to do. I have a wife/friend/partner-in-crime who I can't wait to get home to. I, and we, have stuff to do on weekends. We have a kid on the way, and I want to give him or her as much time as possible. Working more gets me more money (and we have plenty of baby things to spend money on,) but money is not everything. Time is money, and I don't have enough time. Money comes and goes; time just goes. After my grandparents died a while back I started thinking about my own mortality. I wish they were still here, and want to make the time I have as good as I can. Then when I lost my dad too young, and then my brother far too young... Life is short, no matter how much time you have. Even if you have 90 years, that's not enough. You need to enjoy life while you can. Appreciate the small things, make time for them and the big things, and find a balance between work and other necessary tasks, and the really important stuff.
My job is not my life. I have a life, and lots to do. I have a wife/friend/partner-in-crime who I can't wait to get home to. I, and we, have stuff to do on weekends. We have a kid on the way, and I want to give him or her as much time as possible. Working more gets me more money (and we have plenty of baby things to spend money on,) but money is not everything. Time is money, and I don't have enough time. Money comes and goes; time just goes. After my grandparents died a while back I started thinking about my own mortality. I wish they were still here, and want to make the time I have as good as I can. Then when I lost my dad too young, and then my brother far too young... Life is short, no matter how much time you have. Even if you have 90 years, that's not enough. You need to enjoy life while you can. Appreciate the small things, make time for them and the big things, and find a balance between work and other necessary tasks, and the really important stuff.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
They Say It's Your Birthday
Today is Miss Mox's birthday. She says she doesn't want anything, so I have no big plans, but the day will be wide open and we will do whatever she wants (not sure how that is different than most days...)
Obviously we're thinking a lot about another birthday. Our baby will be born in April, when many other family members have theirs. Plus that's close to Easter, and it'll be spring so things will be being born all over the natural world.
Whatever we end up doing I hope she has a great day. This will be an eventful year for her, for me, and for our new family member.
Obviously we're thinking a lot about another birthday. Our baby will be born in April, when many other family members have theirs. Plus that's close to Easter, and it'll be spring so things will be being born all over the natural world.
Whatever we end up doing I hope she has a great day. This will be an eventful year for her, for me, and for our new family member.
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Early Primary Thoughts
Who would I vote for? And who do I think the nominees will be? I have no idea of the answer to the second question yet, and I barely have the first narrowed down a bit.
On the Democratic side, Biden is old, grieving, and just has no big positives for me. Hillary is smart, and a good leader. And hated by many, typically for things that aren't even true. Sanders is popular, but tarred with the label socialist (which people reflexively avoid, without understanding it.) How about Hillary/Bernie? The combo doesn't hurt her, since those who hate her won't care who her VP is, and it might help her win over some others. They both have decent ideas for the future, and seem to actually think, and understand reality.
Which brings us to the Republicans. I don't see much evidence of reality-based thinking among them. I still think Trump is a plant, a caricature of crazy Republicans who is doing his best to hurt them. Cruz is a cynical asshole. The others break down into lunatics and potential winners. Still, even Rubio and Bush, who are held up as the reasonable ones, have said ridiculous things and would be bad for the country.
We need someone who understands the world we live in, and wants to make it and our country better. The Supreme Court matters. Climate change matters. Foreign affairs matter. Show me a Republican who would do the right thing in any of those areas, and we can talk. See who's left in the clown car. I'll wait.
On the Democratic side, Biden is old, grieving, and just has no big positives for me. Hillary is smart, and a good leader. And hated by many, typically for things that aren't even true. Sanders is popular, but tarred with the label socialist (which people reflexively avoid, without understanding it.) How about Hillary/Bernie? The combo doesn't hurt her, since those who hate her won't care who her VP is, and it might help her win over some others. They both have decent ideas for the future, and seem to actually think, and understand reality.
Which brings us to the Republicans. I don't see much evidence of reality-based thinking among them. I still think Trump is a plant, a caricature of crazy Republicans who is doing his best to hurt them. Cruz is a cynical asshole. The others break down into lunatics and potential winners. Still, even Rubio and Bush, who are held up as the reasonable ones, have said ridiculous things and would be bad for the country.
We need someone who understands the world we live in, and wants to make it and our country better. The Supreme Court matters. Climate change matters. Foreign affairs matter. Show me a Republican who would do the right thing in any of those areas, and we can talk. See who's left in the clown car. I'll wait.
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Baby Makes Three. Well, Seven.
Miss Mox and I are going to be parents. Look out world! We had been trying, or not not trying, for awhile. It was still a surprise. We are happy, and shocked. It will mean big changes, lots to do and lots to spend.
We've talked about it for awhile, and just decided to see what happened. And eventually, something happened... We still haven't told the dogs and cat. We have names picked out, and pretty well finalized. We tried to find ones with meaning for us and our families. And that would fit on forms with our combined last name...
We're excited to be bringing a baby into the world, though a bit worried since there are so many problems- racism, violence, general ignorance, etc. We will do our best to raise him or her well, with an open mind and caring heart. I am sure this kid will be a smartass, and a reader. And more than likely a bacon eater.
I couldn't have found a better partner in life, or one who would be a better parent. We have very similar philosophies about childraising and education. She thinks I will be the pushover and she will be the disciplinarian, and she is mostly right.
I will try to keep up on this blog, but well, things are going to change. I probably won't be on here as much once the baby gets here, and I'm sure the topics will change a bit. In the meantime, I will try not to say "holy crap, I'm going to be a dad!" At least, not very often.
New addition/edition on the bookshelf...
We've talked about it for awhile, and just decided to see what happened. And eventually, something happened... We still haven't told the dogs and cat. We have names picked out, and pretty well finalized. We tried to find ones with meaning for us and our families. And that would fit on forms with our combined last name...
We're excited to be bringing a baby into the world, though a bit worried since there are so many problems- racism, violence, general ignorance, etc. We will do our best to raise him or her well, with an open mind and caring heart. I am sure this kid will be a smartass, and a reader. And more than likely a bacon eater.
I couldn't have found a better partner in life, or one who would be a better parent. We have very similar philosophies about childraising and education. She thinks I will be the pushover and she will be the disciplinarian, and she is mostly right.
I will try to keep up on this blog, but well, things are going to change. I probably won't be on here as much once the baby gets here, and I'm sure the topics will change a bit. In the meantime, I will try not to say "holy crap, I'm going to be a dad!" At least, not very often.
New addition/edition on the bookshelf...
Monday, October 12, 2015
Nuts
There are some things I haven't written much about even though they are important, and important to me. I write about my interests and passions, but I don't always have the time or energy to put together a good piece, whatever the subject. Sometimes I can't find the right words, or others have already said things better than I can. For some examples, take a look at what this guy says, or this lady writes- I almost always agree with them, and they are both better writers than I am.
There's something going on that is important, and that I think about pretty much every day- because it happens every single day. We keep having mass shootings in the U.S., particularly school shootings. Those are the worst. Bad enough when someone shoots up their workplace, where everyone is an adult and you can at least relate to the grudges that can develop. Doesn't excuse the awfulness, but it's still not as bad as kids, or teenagers, or college students getting killed. And we don't do a damn thing about it. Even bringing up the possibility of making it a little harder to get guns is, to some people, apparently treason. And their answer, aside from getting upset at those who dare to suggest we try to make things better, is to put forward the idea that we actually need more guns to make things safer.
I think these people watch too much TV. I think they really believe that "if I was there I could have taken out the shooter!" I think they are fucking morons. More guns are not going to help. People are stupid and crazy as is; look at other drivers, or the news. Picture the lady who shot up the Home Depot parking lot, then picture thousands more like her, taking the law (and everyone's lives) in their hands. There should not be guns in every classroom. Think of the accidents, the arguments, the idiocy that would lead to. Think about the "good guy" getting mistaken for a bad guy and getting shot by the police, or other "helpful" vigilantes.
Look, most people in favor of gun control don't want to get rid of all guns. I think we need maybe slightly fewer guns, slightly more regulation, and WAY more education. If gun owners (and dare I say, drivers) were trained as well as pilots, there would be fewer accidents. If gun ownership required the bare minimum of training we give drivers, much less pilots, a lot of these tragedies would be eliminated.
But oh, "we can't regulate guns because of the 2nd Amendment!" Bull. Shit. As I've written before, gun control does not mean confiscation. Regulation does not mean infringing on the right to own a gun. And the first clause in that amendment does matter, despite NRA attempts to ignore it.
Add to this mix of idiots presidential candidates who don't know what they're talking about. Ben Carson says he would have stopped the Oregon shooting. Big talk from a coward, who (if this even happened) said he was threatened with a gun at a restaurant- and promptly offered up someone else to be shot. And "if the Jews had guns..." Well, they did, in Warsaw, and died by the thousands. Bravely, but pointlessly. And the Poles and French had guns, and that stopped the Germans?
This utter lack of understanding of history, and of human nature, is what gets us into messes like this. People need to study up a bit more, and drop the macho posturing. We can't eliminate mass shootings. We can reduce them. If we want to. I do not believe conservatives want to.
There's something going on that is important, and that I think about pretty much every day- because it happens every single day. We keep having mass shootings in the U.S., particularly school shootings. Those are the worst. Bad enough when someone shoots up their workplace, where everyone is an adult and you can at least relate to the grudges that can develop. Doesn't excuse the awfulness, but it's still not as bad as kids, or teenagers, or college students getting killed. And we don't do a damn thing about it. Even bringing up the possibility of making it a little harder to get guns is, to some people, apparently treason. And their answer, aside from getting upset at those who dare to suggest we try to make things better, is to put forward the idea that we actually need more guns to make things safer.
I think these people watch too much TV. I think they really believe that "if I was there I could have taken out the shooter!" I think they are fucking morons. More guns are not going to help. People are stupid and crazy as is; look at other drivers, or the news. Picture the lady who shot up the Home Depot parking lot, then picture thousands more like her, taking the law (and everyone's lives) in their hands. There should not be guns in every classroom. Think of the accidents, the arguments, the idiocy that would lead to. Think about the "good guy" getting mistaken for a bad guy and getting shot by the police, or other "helpful" vigilantes.
Look, most people in favor of gun control don't want to get rid of all guns. I think we need maybe slightly fewer guns, slightly more regulation, and WAY more education. If gun owners (and dare I say, drivers) were trained as well as pilots, there would be fewer accidents. If gun ownership required the bare minimum of training we give drivers, much less pilots, a lot of these tragedies would be eliminated.
But oh, "we can't regulate guns because of the 2nd Amendment!" Bull. Shit. As I've written before, gun control does not mean confiscation. Regulation does not mean infringing on the right to own a gun. And the first clause in that amendment does matter, despite NRA attempts to ignore it.
Add to this mix of idiots presidential candidates who don't know what they're talking about. Ben Carson says he would have stopped the Oregon shooting. Big talk from a coward, who (if this even happened) said he was threatened with a gun at a restaurant- and promptly offered up someone else to be shot. And "if the Jews had guns..." Well, they did, in Warsaw, and died by the thousands. Bravely, but pointlessly. And the Poles and French had guns, and that stopped the Germans?
This utter lack of understanding of history, and of human nature, is what gets us into messes like this. People need to study up a bit more, and drop the macho posturing. We can't eliminate mass shootings. We can reduce them. If we want to. I do not believe conservatives want to.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
School Days
A couple of weeks ago Miss Mox and I went to my high school reunion. I won't say how many years it has been since I graduated, but it has been 10 or so since I went back to visit. The school has changed a lot. In fact, the part where my actual classes were held is gone. The rest of the place has been heavily modified. The gym is still there, but the library has moved, and the commons area where we had morning meetings and just hung out or studied is now offices. The track has been updated- no more gravel in your palms if you trip over a hurdle.
It's still a great school, and I'm glad I had the chance to both attend and to return. I was the only person from my class there (it was homecoming weekend, so people from other classes came too.) I got to see a few people I knew way back when, and a few of my teachers. The next day we had lunch with an old friend of mine, and dinner with a friend of my brother's. Miss Mox got to see some embarrassing pictures of me, which I will not share. You can never really go back, but it's nice to look back once in awhile and see where you were, and how things have changed.
I learned there to always be learning, to be open to new experiences and people, to never set your beliefs in stone. I learned to respect others, no matter how different they are. I already knew the value of history, but I learned a lot more about it there, and how to learn about it. I still keep in touch with a few of my fellow students, and a few teachers. It was good to go back. But I am always looking forward. And I have a great companion for the future, no matter what it brings.
It's still a great school, and I'm glad I had the chance to both attend and to return. I was the only person from my class there (it was homecoming weekend, so people from other classes came too.) I got to see a few people I knew way back when, and a few of my teachers. The next day we had lunch with an old friend of mine, and dinner with a friend of my brother's. Miss Mox got to see some embarrassing pictures of me, which I will not share. You can never really go back, but it's nice to look back once in awhile and see where you were, and how things have changed.
I learned there to always be learning, to be open to new experiences and people, to never set your beliefs in stone. I learned to respect others, no matter how different they are. I already knew the value of history, but I learned a lot more about it there, and how to learn about it. I still keep in touch with a few of my fellow students, and a few teachers. It was good to go back. But I am always looking forward. And I have a great companion for the future, no matter what it brings.
Sunday, October 4, 2015
They Don't Write 'Em Like That Anymore
At work the other day we were talking about old rock songs, for some reason. When things are slow, we talk about a lot of things. One of the guys grew up near Cleveland and mentioned the Micheal Stanley Band, a local band that had some hits. I didn't recognize the name, but boy did I recognize some of the songs. I grew up farther west in Ohio but we heard lots of stuff from Cleveland and Detroit. When you only have three local TV channels, picking up some from farther away is a big deal; same with radio. We listened to whatever we could find.
This Town- maybe it's just an Ohio thing, but everywhere you went you would hear this song, modified to fit the town you were in. "This town is my town- Toledo!" It has a very '80s sound, but I still hear it occasionally. It made it into the top 40, barely.
He Can't Love You Like I Love You- another very minor hit, but one I instantly recognized. Maybe they just played these things in Ohio or the Midwest, but to me, it is very evocative of teenage weekends.
This Town- maybe it's just an Ohio thing, but everywhere you went you would hear this song, modified to fit the town you were in. "This town is my town- Toledo!" It has a very '80s sound, but I still hear it occasionally. It made it into the top 40, barely.
He Can't Love You Like I Love You- another very minor hit, but one I instantly recognized. Maybe they just played these things in Ohio or the Midwest, but to me, it is very evocative of teenage weekends.
Sunday, September 27, 2015
Pop Music
Iggy Pop- if you know who he is, you know how important someone can be musically without really being a star. He's certainly a star to me, but sadly, he's not as well known as he should be. Over the years he has recorded some of my favorite songs. Perhaps the best known is Candy, sung with a member of the B-52s, and of course he did the title track for Repo Man (a movie that also should be better known.) He's still performing and doesn't seem to age. Here are a few songs you might find interesting.
Lust For Life- a punk anthem, a philosophy, and a fun song.
Repo Man- played as an instrumental over the opening titles of the movie, the song has some great lines.
Candy- a bit of a departure for him, but still cool.
Now I Wanna Be Your Dog- as close to a love song as he gets. Okay, Candy is closer...
Lust For Life- a punk anthem, a philosophy, and a fun song.
Repo Man- played as an instrumental over the opening titles of the movie, the song has some great lines.
Candy- a bit of a departure for him, but still cool.
Now I Wanna Be Your Dog- as close to a love song as he gets. Okay, Candy is closer...
Sunday, September 20, 2015
I See A Chemtrail Out My Window Right Now! What Am I Breathing????
When I was a little kid I would watch the skies for planes (still do.) I wondered how something so small in the sky could be so big on the ground, and how something so fast seemed to be moving so slowly. And I wondered why sometimes I saw just a silver-gray dot, with maybe a hint of glare off a window, while other times there were great big white trails following the plane. Eventually I learned what causes those contrails, and saw plenty more, in real life and in movies and newsreels about World War Two, where great fleets of planes would blanket the sky (and where those trails were avoided when possible because they made it easy for enemies to find the planes.)
Basically, planes will leave trails because just like your car's exhaust, plane exhaust is hot and wet. Now picture it coming out in a cool, dry area of the sky, and poof! You have a little cloud. Whether they actually form, and exactly what they look like and how long they last, depends on the actual conditions where the plane is.
Some time in the '90s, some people became convinced that part of what we see in the sky is a vast conspiracy to poison us, maybe brainwash us. They said what we see are really "chemtrails," poisonous substances spread by the military, or secret airline projects, and that they were covering the globe with chemicals. Now I am open-minded, but also skeptical. You have to show me facts before I will believe something bizarre. Not that bizarre things can't be true, just that I tend to live by Occam's Razor, and of course Sagan's rule that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." And I have always been watching the skies, and along the way I've hung out a lot at airports, even worked at them, and gotten my pilot's license. So, unlike some other things that are the subject of conspiracy theories I know quite a bit about this particular topic.
(I'm going to ignore, for the purposes of this post, the fact that chemicals are indeed sprayed from planes to fight pests, and fertilize crops, and seed clouds. All these things happen, but they are pretty common, and presumably not conspiracies.)
Now, I do not doubt that our government has done things without our knowledge, and experimented on us. Tuskegee, nuclear bomb tests, and all sorts of other instances of such misbehavior mean I would not put it past them to try to alter the weather, or use chemicals on us for other reasons. But if you want to convince me that it is not just possible but is actually happening, I'm going to need a little proof. I have read articles about this (and written letters to the editor in response.) I have debated people about it online. I have seen a lot of pseudo-scientific garbage thrown around supposedly proving that chemtrails exist. I have seen uncountable pictures and videos supposedly of chemtrails but clearly showing normal contrails. Hey, when you don't understand something, it's easy to jump to conclusions about what it is. And with our increasing lack of historical perspective, and short attention spans fed by cable news and the internet, it's easy to just look out the window and make instant assumptions about what we see, instead of putting it in context and thinking for a moment about what it is likely to be. But I am still disappointed to find presumably-intelligent people convinced that any time a plane flies over it is dropping deadly chemicals.
All of the "evidence" I've been shown has been normal aviation occurrences. Those who actually spend time in the sky, or lots of time observing it, are baffled by the willingness of some to believe in chemtrails, and by their zealousness in refusing to accept facts. Contrails occur whenever the atmospheric conditions support them, and can vary quite a bit. They can be short or long, skinny or wide, disappear almost instantly or last for hours (sometimes even causing a thin layer of clouds.) You might see two planes flying at the same time, with only one leaving contrails. Why? Because, though you might not be able to tell, they are flying at different altitudes. The atmosphere, and the weather, are not as uniform and obvious as you might think. Winds and temperatures can vary greatly as you go up. Which leads us to one of the assumptions of chemtrail believers: that whatever is being sprayed is drifting down on us, for whatever purpose. Look, if something is sprayed at 30,000 feet, even 10,000 feet, it is not going to come straight down on you. In those vertical miles, the winds are blowing in different directions at different altitudes, and whatever it is will be dispersed, or at the very least drift way off target.
There is talk of patterns, of concentrations of chemtrails over cities, etc. "There's no other reason for this!" Except that there is. Obviously planes congregate around cities for takeoff and landing. But also, they often fly over or near cities due to the way navigation systems are set up. Planes don't just fly around willy-nilly; they typically go along established routes from point to point. Small planes not so much, and as GPS becomes more entrenched we will move to a system of more-direct navigation. But for now, airliners and military flights follow "highways in the sky."
Some will say "but there are so many more of them now! Something must be going on!" Indeed- there is something going on. Air travel is far more common nowadays, mainly because it's a lot cheaper. Yeah, I hate paying $400 to go somewhere, but adjusted for inflation that's actually low. Flying used to be reserved for special occasions, and fairly high-up business travelers. Now almost anybody can go, partly due to deregulation. Also partly due to airlines cramming more and more seats in, so that your knees now touch your chest.
Conspiracy theorists will say the military and airlines are doing this spraying, for whatever reasons the believers come up with at the moment. Hey, the military might be able to keep something this big a secret. Pilots and other aviation employees, not so much. They talk. A lot. They have a lot of time to kill. And another thing: airlines do not like excess weight, so how would they carry tanks of whatever substance makes these things?
There is talk of contrails looking different nowadays, and maybe they do. Up into the '70s most jets used turbojet engines; since then, we've gone to turbofans. Basically, they are more efficient jet engines with fairly different designs. I don't know enough about engine design to guarantee that this makes contrails come out a little differently, but I wouldn't be surprised.
As with anything else, if you don't know much about a subject, and take what little you do know out of context, you are not going to come to accurate conclusions. I try not to make assumptions based on inadequate evidence. The "evidence" for chemtrails consists of a lot of misinterpreted facts. I know quite a bit about aviation, and the weather, and when I see the pictures and videos they pass off as proof of chemtrails I have to laugh at how little they know about both. It's normal stuff, but if you pass it through a lens of ignorance and paranoia it might look different.
Basically, planes will leave trails because just like your car's exhaust, plane exhaust is hot and wet. Now picture it coming out in a cool, dry area of the sky, and poof! You have a little cloud. Whether they actually form, and exactly what they look like and how long they last, depends on the actual conditions where the plane is.
Some time in the '90s, some people became convinced that part of what we see in the sky is a vast conspiracy to poison us, maybe brainwash us. They said what we see are really "chemtrails," poisonous substances spread by the military, or secret airline projects, and that they were covering the globe with chemicals. Now I am open-minded, but also skeptical. You have to show me facts before I will believe something bizarre. Not that bizarre things can't be true, just that I tend to live by Occam's Razor, and of course Sagan's rule that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." And I have always been watching the skies, and along the way I've hung out a lot at airports, even worked at them, and gotten my pilot's license. So, unlike some other things that are the subject of conspiracy theories I know quite a bit about this particular topic.
(I'm going to ignore, for the purposes of this post, the fact that chemicals are indeed sprayed from planes to fight pests, and fertilize crops, and seed clouds. All these things happen, but they are pretty common, and presumably not conspiracies.)
Now, I do not doubt that our government has done things without our knowledge, and experimented on us. Tuskegee, nuclear bomb tests, and all sorts of other instances of such misbehavior mean I would not put it past them to try to alter the weather, or use chemicals on us for other reasons. But if you want to convince me that it is not just possible but is actually happening, I'm going to need a little proof. I have read articles about this (and written letters to the editor in response.) I have debated people about it online. I have seen a lot of pseudo-scientific garbage thrown around supposedly proving that chemtrails exist. I have seen uncountable pictures and videos supposedly of chemtrails but clearly showing normal contrails. Hey, when you don't understand something, it's easy to jump to conclusions about what it is. And with our increasing lack of historical perspective, and short attention spans fed by cable news and the internet, it's easy to just look out the window and make instant assumptions about what we see, instead of putting it in context and thinking for a moment about what it is likely to be. But I am still disappointed to find presumably-intelligent people convinced that any time a plane flies over it is dropping deadly chemicals.
All of the "evidence" I've been shown has been normal aviation occurrences. Those who actually spend time in the sky, or lots of time observing it, are baffled by the willingness of some to believe in chemtrails, and by their zealousness in refusing to accept facts. Contrails occur whenever the atmospheric conditions support them, and can vary quite a bit. They can be short or long, skinny or wide, disappear almost instantly or last for hours (sometimes even causing a thin layer of clouds.) You might see two planes flying at the same time, with only one leaving contrails. Why? Because, though you might not be able to tell, they are flying at different altitudes. The atmosphere, and the weather, are not as uniform and obvious as you might think. Winds and temperatures can vary greatly as you go up. Which leads us to one of the assumptions of chemtrail believers: that whatever is being sprayed is drifting down on us, for whatever purpose. Look, if something is sprayed at 30,000 feet, even 10,000 feet, it is not going to come straight down on you. In those vertical miles, the winds are blowing in different directions at different altitudes, and whatever it is will be dispersed, or at the very least drift way off target.
There is talk of patterns, of concentrations of chemtrails over cities, etc. "There's no other reason for this!" Except that there is. Obviously planes congregate around cities for takeoff and landing. But also, they often fly over or near cities due to the way navigation systems are set up. Planes don't just fly around willy-nilly; they typically go along established routes from point to point. Small planes not so much, and as GPS becomes more entrenched we will move to a system of more-direct navigation. But for now, airliners and military flights follow "highways in the sky."
Some will say "but there are so many more of them now! Something must be going on!" Indeed- there is something going on. Air travel is far more common nowadays, mainly because it's a lot cheaper. Yeah, I hate paying $400 to go somewhere, but adjusted for inflation that's actually low. Flying used to be reserved for special occasions, and fairly high-up business travelers. Now almost anybody can go, partly due to deregulation. Also partly due to airlines cramming more and more seats in, so that your knees now touch your chest.
Conspiracy theorists will say the military and airlines are doing this spraying, for whatever reasons the believers come up with at the moment. Hey, the military might be able to keep something this big a secret. Pilots and other aviation employees, not so much. They talk. A lot. They have a lot of time to kill. And another thing: airlines do not like excess weight, so how would they carry tanks of whatever substance makes these things?
There is talk of contrails looking different nowadays, and maybe they do. Up into the '70s most jets used turbojet engines; since then, we've gone to turbofans. Basically, they are more efficient jet engines with fairly different designs. I don't know enough about engine design to guarantee that this makes contrails come out a little differently, but I wouldn't be surprised.
As with anything else, if you don't know much about a subject, and take what little you do know out of context, you are not going to come to accurate conclusions. I try not to make assumptions based on inadequate evidence. The "evidence" for chemtrails consists of a lot of misinterpreted facts. I know quite a bit about aviation, and the weather, and when I see the pictures and videos they pass off as proof of chemtrails I have to laugh at how little they know about both. It's normal stuff, but if you pass it through a lens of ignorance and paranoia it might look different.
Sunday, September 13, 2015
9/11, plus a few days and years.
9/11 was the other day, and I read, watched, and listened to plenty of memorials about it. I didn't have the time or energy to write anything. But I was thinking about it. I've written about my experiences on 9/11 before. It was inspiring to see us pull together as a country after that, even as a planet- so much support, so much kindness, so much resolve to overcome the trauma and make the world a better place.
That lasted for awhile. But even at the start, some people were saying "fuck all Muslims, they did this to us!" Those voices were a bit tamped down, but grew ever-stronger. Some of us realized that we needed to find the specific people who planned the attacks, bring them to justice, not just make it a crusade against Muslims in general. But we got off track. We lost bin Laden at Tora Bora, then moved on to Iraq for unrelated reasons. I was disappointed in the direction both our government and some of our populace took. We had a moment of solidarity. Bush at worst threw it away, or at best let it slip through our fingers. We had a great moment for America, but it didn't last long.
I remember looking out the window in the days after the attacks and being heartened to see the flag still flying. I remember going to the airport and not being let near the planes, wondering what would happen next. I remember not hearing much from the government in the first few days after the attacks, and then seeing Bush speaking from some Air Force base out west looking bedraggled and confused. Not very reassuring.
It's not all Bush's fault of course. It's us, it's our tendency to turn on one another, to respond out of fear instead of hope. To ignore reality, and attack people who are different. American traits, and human ones, that sometimes cause me to doubt whether our species will ever really learn, and grow. But I remember the times we've risen above, and I hope we can do it again.
That lasted for awhile. But even at the start, some people were saying "fuck all Muslims, they did this to us!" Those voices were a bit tamped down, but grew ever-stronger. Some of us realized that we needed to find the specific people who planned the attacks, bring them to justice, not just make it a crusade against Muslims in general. But we got off track. We lost bin Laden at Tora Bora, then moved on to Iraq for unrelated reasons. I was disappointed in the direction both our government and some of our populace took. We had a moment of solidarity. Bush at worst threw it away, or at best let it slip through our fingers. We had a great moment for America, but it didn't last long.
I remember looking out the window in the days after the attacks and being heartened to see the flag still flying. I remember going to the airport and not being let near the planes, wondering what would happen next. I remember not hearing much from the government in the first few days after the attacks, and then seeing Bush speaking from some Air Force base out west looking bedraggled and confused. Not very reassuring.
It's not all Bush's fault of course. It's us, it's our tendency to turn on one another, to respond out of fear instead of hope. To ignore reality, and attack people who are different. American traits, and human ones, that sometimes cause me to doubt whether our species will ever really learn, and grow. But I remember the times we've risen above, and I hope we can do it again.
Antmusic
Growing up, I listened to all kinds of music. Probably "classic rock" from the '60s and '70s the most, but as the '80s started I got more into alternative rock, punk, new wave. Adam Ant was big back then. His music wasn't deep, but it was different, and catchy. Here are a few that still stick in my head
Antmusic
Stand and Deliver
Goody Two Shoes
Good Sex Rumples The Clothing
Antmusic
Stand and Deliver
Goody Two Shoes
Good Sex Rumples The Clothing
Sunday, September 6, 2015
Jerk Clerk
I am disappointed that Kim Davis and her supporters have so little respect for others. She thinks she has the right to her beliefs, which is true, but also thinks everyone else should live by her beliefs. And let's be clear: she is free to live by her beliefs, as everyone else is. Of course, her beliefs seem to include the right to impose her religion on others, so hey, maybe she really is being discriminated against... See, I'm glad we live in America. We each have as much freedom as possible, only limited when it imposes on others. She can get married four times, twice to the same guy, and while I will roll my eyes at her and ask if she's sure it's a good idea, if I were a county clerk and she came in for a license I would not refuse to let her have it. She is not being forced to marry a woman; but she feels it's fine to force others to follow her religion. I will defend her right to her beliefs, but I will not defend her when she tries to force those beliefs on the rest of us. Just like I'm not going to defend anyone else doing that, whatever their religion. I am particularly put off by the tendency of conservative judges and clerks to be jerks on this issue, refusing to issue any licenses in order to avoid having to issue them to gay couples. It's immature, like a kid saying "it's my toy, and I'm not letting anyone else play with it."
She could have resigned. That would have been the brave thing to do, to keep her dignity, to make a stand. But that's not what she wants- she wants the attention, she wants to be a "martyr," and she wants the money she will make by (possibly) keeping her job and (definitely) getting book deals and all sorts of other goodies from the idiots who support her and the cynics who are using her to make their own piles of cash.
Look, gay marriage is not part of the "central teachings of Jesus." Putting your spin on an issue he said nothing about, while ignoring his very clear opposition to divorce, his commandment not to judge, etc., makes you a hypocrite. We are not a "Christian nation." The founders made sure no religion was in the government. I don't want anyone- Christian, Muslim, whatever- to make rules based on their religion. You know conservatives would be livid if a Muslim were doing something like this. Allowing this would be a bad precedent.
I am disappointed in her, I am surprised she has so many supporters, and I am disgusted by the politicians like Cruz and Huckabee who are using this as a political tool, saying there is a "war on Christianity" when there clearly is not. Not being able to impose your views on others doesn't mean you are being persecuted. Disagreed with, yes. Kept from being an ass, yes. None of us should have the right to force others to live by our own beliefs. I shouldn't be able to do that to you, and I don't want to do that to you. Of course, someone will say "they're imposing their gay liberal agenda on us!" Well, no. They are asking to be treated equally. Telling you that you have to accept others is not forcing you to do anything. You are free to not marry someone of your own sex. You are free to grumble and to post idiotic comments online. Go ahead and live your life that way, and let others live theirs. I will treat you with dignity, but I expect you to return the favor. It's as if conservatives see tolerance as a bad word- "How dare you insist that I let you live your life!" Everyone should be treated equally and with respect. Conservatives don't seem to be able to do that. How sad.
This is funny though:
She could have resigned. That would have been the brave thing to do, to keep her dignity, to make a stand. But that's not what she wants- she wants the attention, she wants to be a "martyr," and she wants the money she will make by (possibly) keeping her job and (definitely) getting book deals and all sorts of other goodies from the idiots who support her and the cynics who are using her to make their own piles of cash.
Look, gay marriage is not part of the "central teachings of Jesus." Putting your spin on an issue he said nothing about, while ignoring his very clear opposition to divorce, his commandment not to judge, etc., makes you a hypocrite. We are not a "Christian nation." The founders made sure no religion was in the government. I don't want anyone- Christian, Muslim, whatever- to make rules based on their religion. You know conservatives would be livid if a Muslim were doing something like this. Allowing this would be a bad precedent.
I am disappointed in her, I am surprised she has so many supporters, and I am disgusted by the politicians like Cruz and Huckabee who are using this as a political tool, saying there is a "war on Christianity" when there clearly is not. Not being able to impose your views on others doesn't mean you are being persecuted. Disagreed with, yes. Kept from being an ass, yes. None of us should have the right to force others to live by our own beliefs. I shouldn't be able to do that to you, and I don't want to do that to you. Of course, someone will say "they're imposing their gay liberal agenda on us!" Well, no. They are asking to be treated equally. Telling you that you have to accept others is not forcing you to do anything. You are free to not marry someone of your own sex. You are free to grumble and to post idiotic comments online. Go ahead and live your life that way, and let others live theirs. I will treat you with dignity, but I expect you to return the favor. It's as if conservatives see tolerance as a bad word- "How dare you insist that I let you live your life!" Everyone should be treated equally and with respect. Conservatives don't seem to be able to do that. How sad.
This is funny though:
Sunday, August 30, 2015
Trumped Up
I've never liked Donald Trump, so obviously I will not be voting for him. I do kinda hope he gets the Republican nomination; he has been doing a great job of making the Republicans look bad, and the longer he keeps that up the better.
I remember hearing about him in the '80s: a scuzzy, flashy real estate developer. Not a self-made man, he inherited the family business. (Shame on his parents for raising him so poorly.) He bankrupted people, got a crappy reality show, and got into politics as a "birther." So, he's basically a jerk. He makes money for himself, and to hell with everyone else. Is that who we want to run the country?
He is crass, shallow, and self-centered. In other words, a model Republican. He's okay with beating up immigrants, and in general attacking anyone who dares disagree with him as a loser. Plus, he can't afford a decent haircut (or he's just surrounded with yes-men who tell him he looks great.)
"Make America Great Again." Really? It's great now. What do you have against America? Why are you attacking America? Love it or leave it! But seriously, what is wrong with America? Is it better healthcare? Fewer wars? Lower unemployment? Lower deficits? Or is it the black guy in office, and all those damned women and immigrants? Sorry, but the "stay off my lawn" crotchety old men are fading out. The country is getting better and stronger, through diversity and tolerance among other things. I know 'tolerance' is a dirty word to conservatives, but it's better for our country.
His supporters call him strong, and honest. I don't see bullying as a sign of strength. As for honesty, he's a liar, and "saying what you think" is admirable in general, but when what you think is that you are an amazing person and everyone else is just weak, well, he could use a little more "keep it to yourself."
I remember hearing about him in the '80s: a scuzzy, flashy real estate developer. Not a self-made man, he inherited the family business. (Shame on his parents for raising him so poorly.) He bankrupted people, got a crappy reality show, and got into politics as a "birther." So, he's basically a jerk. He makes money for himself, and to hell with everyone else. Is that who we want to run the country?
He is crass, shallow, and self-centered. In other words, a model Republican. He's okay with beating up immigrants, and in general attacking anyone who dares disagree with him as a loser. Plus, he can't afford a decent haircut (or he's just surrounded with yes-men who tell him he looks great.)
"Make America Great Again." Really? It's great now. What do you have against America? Why are you attacking America? Love it or leave it! But seriously, what is wrong with America? Is it better healthcare? Fewer wars? Lower unemployment? Lower deficits? Or is it the black guy in office, and all those damned women and immigrants? Sorry, but the "stay off my lawn" crotchety old men are fading out. The country is getting better and stronger, through diversity and tolerance among other things. I know 'tolerance' is a dirty word to conservatives, but it's better for our country.
His supporters call him strong, and honest. I don't see bullying as a sign of strength. As for honesty, he's a liar, and "saying what you think" is admirable in general, but when what you think is that you are an amazing person and everyone else is just weak, well, he could use a little more "keep it to yourself."
Sunday, August 23, 2015
Blondie
I've got a lot going on this week, so although I have more to say about religion I need more time to work on that. Plus Miss Mox and I just got a garage door opener to replace our iffy one. Does that mean I'm domesticated? Anyway, lots going on. For now, let's go with a quick music post. I have been thinking about stuff I listened to growing up. There was Cheap Trick, which we saw last week. How about some Blondie, a sort of early punk/new wave group who had some big hits with more mainstream stuff?
The Tide Is High- we'll start off very mellow. I like her harder stuff, but this is a cool song.
Call Me- so very early '80s.
One Way Or Another- again, very of its era, but timeless.
Ring Of Fire- you know I like my covers, especially covers of Johnny Cash...
The Tide Is High- we'll start off very mellow. I like her harder stuff, but this is a cool song.
Call Me- so very early '80s.
One Way Or Another- again, very of its era, but timeless.
Ring Of Fire- you know I like my covers, especially covers of Johnny Cash...
Sunday, August 16, 2015
Religion- Chapter 1.
I have been thinking about trying to do some posts about religion, about my views, and religion in the news, etc. I will get to them sometime, and will always comment on dumb things like the court clerk who doesn't want to issue marriage licenses to gay couples (after getting divorced several times herself.) There's just too much to talk about, but I have to start somewhere. So here goes.
Some people say "you can't have morals without religion." There's a Penn Jillette quote:
"The question I get asked by religious people all the time is, without God, what’s to stop me from raping all I want? And my answer is: I do rape all I want. And the amount I want is zero. And I do murder all I want, and the amount I want is zero. The fact that these people think that if they didn’t have this person watching over them that they would go on killing, raping rampages is the most self-damning thing I can imagine. "
Look- if it takes religion to make you be a decent person, then by definition you aren't a decent person to begin with. If you need someone to tell you what to do, well, as an adult, at least, you are not a decent person. I'm not saying religious people aren't moral, or that there aren't good lessons to be taken from religions. But if you need the threat of hell, or some higher authority, to keep you from doing bad things, that's an admission about yourself. You're saying you believe yourself to be a bad person. (You're implying that you think everyone is.) You don't think you can control your emotions or actions without some exterior force restraining you. That's sad, and scary. It's saying how weak you are. You're saying you would kill or steal or rape without your religious guidelines and beliefs. Which makes you a shitty person. I hope that's not true about you. I know it's not true about me. Most of us don't need fear, or rules from authority, to be decent people. And if you need them, cool, use them! Please! But don't insist that I need them too, or that I must follow your particular sect's rules or else I'm immoral. I'm not. Well, not any more than most people. I mean, I break the speed limit often. I have stolen, and lied, and failed to do things I should have done (which is often as bad as actively doing things I shouldn't.) But I'm a pretty decent person. And hey, most people are, and most religious people are. But there are a lot of loudly religious, self-righteous people who turn out to have done some pretty shitty things. Which says to me that religion does not give you morals, either.
The beliefs I have, the morals I have, are a result of how I was raised and of my life experiences. I have been to lots of churches, read the Bible and other religious texts, done a lot of thinking and talking and living. I know how to live properly, for me. You have come to your morals and beliefs in pretty much the same way, believe it or not. And you should live properly for you. Just don't expect me to rigidly follow your rules. In fact, don't expect any of the rest of us to follow your rules. We live in the United States of America, which is not a theocracy (thank God!) and not a "Christian nation." Go back and study your history a bit until you understand that.
Your religion applies to you. That's it. Don't try to apply it to the rest of us. You'll be lucky to get your family to follow along (let me know how that goes.) And if you think your religion applies to society, to the country as a whole, think again. I'll be as clear as I can: Your religion does not apply to me. No matter what yours is- Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, whatever. No matter what mine is. Your religion applies to you. Not to me. Live your religion, practice it. Go for it- revel in your traditions and culture and beliefs, and what you will and won't do. I think that's great (and wish more people would actually actively follow their religion's rules rather than just pay lip service.) I respect your right to your beliefs. But I don't think anybody should (or should want to) use their religion to deny someone else a marriage license, or birth control, or to refuse to make a cake, or to withhold medical treatment, just because they disagree with them, or dislike them, or think they're sinners, or however else you phrase your beliefs. I think Christians in particular have a very good example of how to love one another, how to treat one another, to not judge, and to help others. The way some "Christians" act today, refusing to do some of the things I listed above, is disgusting. They tend to be fundamentalists, and apparently feel that they are allowed to judge, and that they are above blame, and that others should follow the rules as they interpret them. Religion should be used to increase love, rather than hate. I am very disappointed in people of any faith who refuse to treat others as human beings.
Some people say "you can't have morals without religion." There's a Penn Jillette quote:
"The question I get asked by religious people all the time is, without God, what’s to stop me from raping all I want? And my answer is: I do rape all I want. And the amount I want is zero. And I do murder all I want, and the amount I want is zero. The fact that these people think that if they didn’t have this person watching over them that they would go on killing, raping rampages is the most self-damning thing I can imagine. "
Look- if it takes religion to make you be a decent person, then by definition you aren't a decent person to begin with. If you need someone to tell you what to do, well, as an adult, at least, you are not a decent person. I'm not saying religious people aren't moral, or that there aren't good lessons to be taken from religions. But if you need the threat of hell, or some higher authority, to keep you from doing bad things, that's an admission about yourself. You're saying you believe yourself to be a bad person. (You're implying that you think everyone is.) You don't think you can control your emotions or actions without some exterior force restraining you. That's sad, and scary. It's saying how weak you are. You're saying you would kill or steal or rape without your religious guidelines and beliefs. Which makes you a shitty person. I hope that's not true about you. I know it's not true about me. Most of us don't need fear, or rules from authority, to be decent people. And if you need them, cool, use them! Please! But don't insist that I need them too, or that I must follow your particular sect's rules or else I'm immoral. I'm not. Well, not any more than most people. I mean, I break the speed limit often. I have stolen, and lied, and failed to do things I should have done (which is often as bad as actively doing things I shouldn't.) But I'm a pretty decent person. And hey, most people are, and most religious people are. But there are a lot of loudly religious, self-righteous people who turn out to have done some pretty shitty things. Which says to me that religion does not give you morals, either.
The beliefs I have, the morals I have, are a result of how I was raised and of my life experiences. I have been to lots of churches, read the Bible and other religious texts, done a lot of thinking and talking and living. I know how to live properly, for me. You have come to your morals and beliefs in pretty much the same way, believe it or not. And you should live properly for you. Just don't expect me to rigidly follow your rules. In fact, don't expect any of the rest of us to follow your rules. We live in the United States of America, which is not a theocracy (thank God!) and not a "Christian nation." Go back and study your history a bit until you understand that.
Your religion applies to you. That's it. Don't try to apply it to the rest of us. You'll be lucky to get your family to follow along (let me know how that goes.) And if you think your religion applies to society, to the country as a whole, think again. I'll be as clear as I can: Your religion does not apply to me. No matter what yours is- Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, whatever. No matter what mine is. Your religion applies to you. Not to me. Live your religion, practice it. Go for it- revel in your traditions and culture and beliefs, and what you will and won't do. I think that's great (and wish more people would actually actively follow their religion's rules rather than just pay lip service.) I respect your right to your beliefs. But I don't think anybody should (or should want to) use their religion to deny someone else a marriage license, or birth control, or to refuse to make a cake, or to withhold medical treatment, just because they disagree with them, or dislike them, or think they're sinners, or however else you phrase your beliefs. I think Christians in particular have a very good example of how to love one another, how to treat one another, to not judge, and to help others. The way some "Christians" act today, refusing to do some of the things I listed above, is disgusting. They tend to be fundamentalists, and apparently feel that they are allowed to judge, and that they are above blame, and that others should follow the rules as they interpret them. Religion should be used to increase love, rather than hate. I am very disappointed in people of any faith who refuse to treat others as human beings.
Sunday, August 9, 2015
Don't Forget To Dance
A few days ago I heard "You Really Got Me" by The Kinks on the radio. It's hard to believe it came out in 1964. Their sound holds up really well. I've liked them for years, and I'm surprised I haven't done a post about them already. They had catchy songs with interesting, sometimes charged lyrics. Everyone knows "Lola," but here are a few other of my favorites.
Well Respected Man- subversive for its time.
Apeman- I first heard this on a movie soundtrack; it has a reggae lilt and great lyrics.
Paranoia- Pulls a bit from "Lola" and a couple of their other songs; hard to believe this is the same band that did the two songs we just heard, though...
Come Dancing- Evocative story, and one of their last hits.
Well Respected Man- subversive for its time.
Apeman- I first heard this on a movie soundtrack; it has a reggae lilt and great lyrics.
Paranoia- Pulls a bit from "Lola" and a couple of their other songs; hard to believe this is the same band that did the two songs we just heard, though...
Come Dancing- Evocative story, and one of their last hits.
Sunday, August 2, 2015
Lovin' It
I was in San Francisco recently to see one of the last Dead shows, and then the other day I was reading an early interview with Jerry Garcia where he mentioned going to a Lovin' Spoonful concert.* I knew I had heard their stuff but couldn't think of the songs, so as Miss Mox says, I asked Madame Google... And holy crap! I know all their hits and even a few others. Very much part of the San Francisco sound, and the start of psychedelia, they sound like they were having a lot of fun.
Rain On The Roof/Summer In The City- two very different songs- very different feel, from the same band.
You Didn't Have To Be So Nice- I had no idea what this was from the title, but once I heard it...
Do You Believe In Magic?- And the hits keep coming...
Daydream- Alright, last one. Jeez, I wish I were back in Frisco.
*Actually, he and others said seeing the Lovin' Spoonful (while on acid) was what made them move from folk and jug band music to electric rock. So, we have this band to thank for a whole helluva lot more than a few pleasant songs. Oh, and did you know the lead singer did the theme for "Welcome Back, Kotter"?
Rain On The Roof/Summer In The City- two very different songs- very different feel, from the same band.
You Didn't Have To Be So Nice- I had no idea what this was from the title, but once I heard it...
Do You Believe In Magic?- And the hits keep coming...
Daydream- Alright, last one. Jeez, I wish I were back in Frisco.
*Actually, he and others said seeing the Lovin' Spoonful (while on acid) was what made them move from folk and jug band music to electric rock. So, we have this band to thank for a whole helluva lot more than a few pleasant songs. Oh, and did you know the lead singer did the theme for "Welcome Back, Kotter"?
Sunday, July 26, 2015
Tripping
The last few weeks have been a whirlwind. Miss Mox and I have been to three states, scattered all across the country, and are enjoying a short break before another trip. We need a vacation from vacations. We were in Austin for her blog conference, to see friends, and to eat barbecue. Then it was San Francisco, for the first of the last Dead shows. There, we hung out with friends, enjoyed the show, and did a little sightseeing. I think I took Miss Mox to her first aviation museum, which she enjoyed more than I expected. Of course, we're both history buffs. After a few days at home we were off again, to Chicago for one of the very last Dead shows. She relaxed at the hotel while my cousin and I enjoyed the 4th of July concert. It was amazing, and from what I heard all the Chicago shows were. I'm glad to have been able to take my cousin to his first show, and the love of my life to hers. Then it was back home for a couple of weeks of catching up around the house and, sadly, working, before heading off to Chicago and Wisconsin to see friends and family and go to the big airshow in Oshkosh.
Now we're catching our breath, and we have a lot to catch up on around here, and some house projects that have to get done. We're living life, but we need to slow down a bit. Hope you're all having a great summer!
Now we're catching our breath, and we have a lot to catch up on around here, and some house projects that have to get done. We're living life, but we need to slow down a bit. Hope you're all having a great summer!
Sunday, July 19, 2015
Flying Flags
If you know me, you know I love history and aviation. Aviation history, of course, is at the top of my history interests, but I have many, and have read a lot, have a history degree, and have worked (well, mostly volunteered) in museums. History is very important to me. That's one reason why the utter ignorance about the Confederate flag bugs me. People simply do not know what they're talking about and are upset about. I would blame Fox "News," but the problems go back much farther. Even before the "Lost Cause" fiction of the late 1800s, people were fooling themselves about the Civil War, and about American history and reality in general.
Would it surprise you to know there are connections between the controversy about that stained banner and aviation history? Well, there are, and I'll get to them in a minute.
First let's talk about a local tempest. I live in Ohio, and the board of the state fair decided not to allow sales of the Confederate flag. (We'll use that as shorthand, but whether we're calling it that, or the rebel flag, or the Confederate naval jack, or the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, or whatever else you want to bring into it, we all know damn well what particular symbol we're talking about, don't we?) Some people are outraged, of course. Now, they can still buy it elsewhere, and fly it wherever they like. The fair prohibits sale of other offensive items, such as those with nudity or profanity. I personally would not be bothered by those; you want to wear a shirt depicting nudity, or even go nude, I'm okay with it. (To some degree- I admit, the idea of some of the people I see at the fair showing even more skin repulses me.) Anyway, my point is that I understand that some things that don't bother me might bother others, and I'm okay with no one selling them at the fair, a family event. But oh, the idea of not selling a symbol of racists and traitors really winds people up. Miss Mox and I went round and round with these idiots. I've been told I don't know history. Come on, now. I've seen people state that the flag, and the Civil War, were not about slavery. Seriously, what fantasy, what alternate universe, are they living in? Some people said "just wait, they'll ban the American flag next! They'll outlaw MSNBC and BET and then you'll realize what it's like!" Okay... Hm. First, nothing is being banned. Second, sordid as U.S. history has been at many points, few find the Stars and Stripes offensive; and at least we, as a nation, are trying to move forward. Can that be said about the Confederates? Of course not. These Chicken Littles think the sky is falling, I guess because they think gay marriage is going to destroy the country, and not being able to buy their favorite racist symbol on every corner is a sign of Obama's imperial presidency, or some such utter paranoiac bullshit. Look, you've lost as many rights as Obama has taken away guns: zero.
Then there are the "preservationists," who say "they're erasing history!" Well, no, no one is, and as I hope you've guessed I am opposed to any such deletion of history. Of course, it's the people who support that flag who are trying to rewrite our history, and who want to ignore large portions of it. Their distorted view of history exists because of their ignorance, and they are upset that anyone is trying to shine light through their closed eyelids. Folks: educate yourselves. Read! Learn! Civil War history exists- in museums, libraries, on battlefields, and on my bookshelves. I don't need the traitor's banner on my wall to remind myself of history. I know a lot about the Civil War, have visited battle sites and museums in the south, and yet somehow I don't need a Confederate flag on my car to remind me of them. Preserving history, and glorifying treason and slavery, are two different things. Guess which one the Confederate flag supporters are doing? As I said above, I know aviation history very well. I have a shelf full of books about it, and more in storage awaiting more shelves. Many of those books are about World War 2 and often cover Nazi aircraft. I have at least one book solely about the Luftwaffe. I read them, and exercise my memory, without a swastika flag on the wall. Both those flags belong in museums, not waving in peoples' faces. We absolutely must not forget the worst that humanity has done. The thing is, the supporters of the Confederate flag really don't think slavery and secession are all that bad...
The other day I remembered another aviation connection to this "controversy." Years ago, a group of pilots in Texas decided to preserve airplanes from WW2. But not just sitting in museums- they wanted to keep them flying. A plane, or a car, or a piano, can teach some in a museum, but the real magic comes when planes are flown, cars are driven, instruments are played. So they pooled their resources and kept some planes flying. They called their collection the Confederate Air Force. I don't think they meant to be racist; I think it was a joke, like Swiss Navy, something that doesn't exist, couldn't exist. They were being silly, I guess. But eventually, they realized that name had bad associations, and dropped it in 2001. They were behind the times- 135 years or so late- but still ahead of the current Confederate flag supporters. The CAF still preserves history; in fact, that's their purpose. Changing the name didn't change that. It just showed they were aware of how the name was perceived, and that they had the decency to move on, unlike the neo-Confederates we're seeing lately. The CAF folks, now the Commemorative Air Force, want to preserve history too, and teach others about it. They just try not to be assholes while doing it.
Currently, some want to wave, honor, flaunt the Confederate battle flag. They say they're honoring Southern heritage. They're not- they're discrediting it. They say it's not racist. It is- it was designed as a symbol of white supremacy, and used as such often over the years. I want to remember, and learn from, even the worst things people have done. I don't want to honor those things. But hey- fly it if you want to. It is a handy visual locator of the biggest assholes, of the most ignorant among us. You're doing the rest of us a favor, really. You're showing your true colors. You might as well be wearing a sign that says "Traitor and Despicable Human Being." You say you want to honor Southern heritage? Do it by finding a symbol that doesn't represent the very worst parts of that heritage. Preserve history, and act like a decent person. I know it's hard, but maybe someday you'll be able to do both. You're not doing either right now.
Would it surprise you to know there are connections between the controversy about that stained banner and aviation history? Well, there are, and I'll get to them in a minute.
First let's talk about a local tempest. I live in Ohio, and the board of the state fair decided not to allow sales of the Confederate flag. (We'll use that as shorthand, but whether we're calling it that, or the rebel flag, or the Confederate naval jack, or the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, or whatever else you want to bring into it, we all know damn well what particular symbol we're talking about, don't we?) Some people are outraged, of course. Now, they can still buy it elsewhere, and fly it wherever they like. The fair prohibits sale of other offensive items, such as those with nudity or profanity. I personally would not be bothered by those; you want to wear a shirt depicting nudity, or even go nude, I'm okay with it. (To some degree- I admit, the idea of some of the people I see at the fair showing even more skin repulses me.) Anyway, my point is that I understand that some things that don't bother me might bother others, and I'm okay with no one selling them at the fair, a family event. But oh, the idea of not selling a symbol of racists and traitors really winds people up. Miss Mox and I went round and round with these idiots. I've been told I don't know history. Come on, now. I've seen people state that the flag, and the Civil War, were not about slavery. Seriously, what fantasy, what alternate universe, are they living in? Some people said "just wait, they'll ban the American flag next! They'll outlaw MSNBC and BET and then you'll realize what it's like!" Okay... Hm. First, nothing is being banned. Second, sordid as U.S. history has been at many points, few find the Stars and Stripes offensive; and at least we, as a nation, are trying to move forward. Can that be said about the Confederates? Of course not. These Chicken Littles think the sky is falling, I guess because they think gay marriage is going to destroy the country, and not being able to buy their favorite racist symbol on every corner is a sign of Obama's imperial presidency, or some such utter paranoiac bullshit. Look, you've lost as many rights as Obama has taken away guns: zero.
Then there are the "preservationists," who say "they're erasing history!" Well, no, no one is, and as I hope you've guessed I am opposed to any such deletion of history. Of course, it's the people who support that flag who are trying to rewrite our history, and who want to ignore large portions of it. Their distorted view of history exists because of their ignorance, and they are upset that anyone is trying to shine light through their closed eyelids. Folks: educate yourselves. Read! Learn! Civil War history exists- in museums, libraries, on battlefields, and on my bookshelves. I don't need the traitor's banner on my wall to remind myself of history. I know a lot about the Civil War, have visited battle sites and museums in the south, and yet somehow I don't need a Confederate flag on my car to remind me of them. Preserving history, and glorifying treason and slavery, are two different things. Guess which one the Confederate flag supporters are doing? As I said above, I know aviation history very well. I have a shelf full of books about it, and more in storage awaiting more shelves. Many of those books are about World War 2 and often cover Nazi aircraft. I have at least one book solely about the Luftwaffe. I read them, and exercise my memory, without a swastika flag on the wall. Both those flags belong in museums, not waving in peoples' faces. We absolutely must not forget the worst that humanity has done. The thing is, the supporters of the Confederate flag really don't think slavery and secession are all that bad...
The other day I remembered another aviation connection to this "controversy." Years ago, a group of pilots in Texas decided to preserve airplanes from WW2. But not just sitting in museums- they wanted to keep them flying. A plane, or a car, or a piano, can teach some in a museum, but the real magic comes when planes are flown, cars are driven, instruments are played. So they pooled their resources and kept some planes flying. They called their collection the Confederate Air Force. I don't think they meant to be racist; I think it was a joke, like Swiss Navy, something that doesn't exist, couldn't exist. They were being silly, I guess. But eventually, they realized that name had bad associations, and dropped it in 2001. They were behind the times- 135 years or so late- but still ahead of the current Confederate flag supporters. The CAF still preserves history; in fact, that's their purpose. Changing the name didn't change that. It just showed they were aware of how the name was perceived, and that they had the decency to move on, unlike the neo-Confederates we're seeing lately. The CAF folks, now the Commemorative Air Force, want to preserve history too, and teach others about it. They just try not to be assholes while doing it.
Currently, some want to wave, honor, flaunt the Confederate battle flag. They say they're honoring Southern heritage. They're not- they're discrediting it. They say it's not racist. It is- it was designed as a symbol of white supremacy, and used as such often over the years. I want to remember, and learn from, even the worst things people have done. I don't want to honor those things. But hey- fly it if you want to. It is a handy visual locator of the biggest assholes, of the most ignorant among us. You're doing the rest of us a favor, really. You're showing your true colors. You might as well be wearing a sign that says "Traitor and Despicable Human Being." You say you want to honor Southern heritage? Do it by finding a symbol that doesn't represent the very worst parts of that heritage. Preserve history, and act like a decent person. I know it's hard, but maybe someday you'll be able to do both. You're not doing either right now.
Sunday, July 12, 2015
Opinions And Assholes
Close-minded people, and particularly conservatives, tend to base their opinions on things not necessarily connected to reality. They tend to come up with their views, and then twist reality to try to fit it to them, or ignore huge portions of reality. That's one reason I don't like many conservatives. I think history matters, I think reality matters, I think both shape who we are as individuals and societies, and they do not think that.
A couple of recent examples from conversations I have had:
"Republicans have always been the civil rights leaders! That didn't change in the '60s; only two senators switched sides." Well, no. This is what you get from pulling a fact out of context, and twisting things to support your views. Yes, Lincoln was a Republican, and for a while after the Civil War the Republicans were indeed a reasonably principled party. That changed over time, and from the early 20th century on the two big parties went through gradual transformations. Many individuals and politicians switched parties in the '40s and '50s in response to civil rights issues. Only a few actively switched parties right around the 1964 Civil Rights Act debate, but after that the shift continued, with many switching and also with many officials losing reelection due to their views. Basically, the Republicans became anti-civil rights and the Democrats became pro-. There was a time when both parties were reasonable, and where bipartisanship was possible. Nowadays, with so many lunatics in the rank and file and rising up among elected officials, the Republican Party is a lost cause. The fact that conservatives have to look back to Lincoln, and a few people in the '60s, to find examples of civil rights advocates is telling.
There are many good articles about this "but Republicans are the good guys!" nonsense. Here's a great one to start with.
"The Crusades were defensive! The Muslims invaded Europe, and Europeans rode out valiantly to repel them." Well, no. Yes, Muslims invaded places, Spain first, and there were many battles there and elsewhere, and access to the Holy Land was cut off during some internecine Muslim struggles. But saying the Crusades were a defensive response to that is ridiculous. Hundreds of years elapsed between the Spanish Conquest and the start of the Crusades. By that logic Britain would be justified in taking back their American colonies tomorrow; after all, they would just be fighting defensively. And of course you're ignoring all the Crusades in Europe against Jews and heretics, and the siege of Constantinople (Christian on Christian,) and the pillaging along the way, and all sorts of other things.
This article is a good starting point for further research into Crusade revisionism.
"Climate change isn't real! The temperatures are leveling off!" Well, no. You can't pick a short period where temps aren't increasing quite as fast, and claim proof of anything. Fit those years into the big picture, and the earth is still definitely getting warmer, and that period is in fact barely a blip in the scheme of things. Science describes reality; ignore it at your peril (and ours.)
Please read this great article about the latest nonsense from climate-change deniers.
You can't just pull one fact out and base your opinion on that, out of context (and actually, you are just trying to twist that fact to fit your already-decided opinion.) You can't say "Oh yeah, well the first slaveowner in the U.S. was black" and think that invalidates all the history that has come after that, and the contextual reality surrounding even just that moment.
If you cherrypick facts, you end up with a distortion of reality. If you research and understand history and current events, you can come to conclusions based on reality. Maybe they will be conservative conclusions; that is possible. I am conservative on some issues, and I love having reasonable discussions with people of differing views. But liberal or conservative, if you do not know what you are talking about, if you think history does not matter, if you insist that you are right in the face of obvious facts to the contrary, I will not bother pretending to respect you or your opinions. If you get your information from unreliable sources like Limbaugh and Beck, if you pick and choose your facts to fit your opinions, you are delusional. And probably a conservative.
A couple of recent examples from conversations I have had:
"Republicans have always been the civil rights leaders! That didn't change in the '60s; only two senators switched sides." Well, no. This is what you get from pulling a fact out of context, and twisting things to support your views. Yes, Lincoln was a Republican, and for a while after the Civil War the Republicans were indeed a reasonably principled party. That changed over time, and from the early 20th century on the two big parties went through gradual transformations. Many individuals and politicians switched parties in the '40s and '50s in response to civil rights issues. Only a few actively switched parties right around the 1964 Civil Rights Act debate, but after that the shift continued, with many switching and also with many officials losing reelection due to their views. Basically, the Republicans became anti-civil rights and the Democrats became pro-. There was a time when both parties were reasonable, and where bipartisanship was possible. Nowadays, with so many lunatics in the rank and file and rising up among elected officials, the Republican Party is a lost cause. The fact that conservatives have to look back to Lincoln, and a few people in the '60s, to find examples of civil rights advocates is telling.
There are many good articles about this "but Republicans are the good guys!" nonsense. Here's a great one to start with.
"The Crusades were defensive! The Muslims invaded Europe, and Europeans rode out valiantly to repel them." Well, no. Yes, Muslims invaded places, Spain first, and there were many battles there and elsewhere, and access to the Holy Land was cut off during some internecine Muslim struggles. But saying the Crusades were a defensive response to that is ridiculous. Hundreds of years elapsed between the Spanish Conquest and the start of the Crusades. By that logic Britain would be justified in taking back their American colonies tomorrow; after all, they would just be fighting defensively. And of course you're ignoring all the Crusades in Europe against Jews and heretics, and the siege of Constantinople (Christian on Christian,) and the pillaging along the way, and all sorts of other things.
This article is a good starting point for further research into Crusade revisionism.
"Climate change isn't real! The temperatures are leveling off!" Well, no. You can't pick a short period where temps aren't increasing quite as fast, and claim proof of anything. Fit those years into the big picture, and the earth is still definitely getting warmer, and that period is in fact barely a blip in the scheme of things. Science describes reality; ignore it at your peril (and ours.)
Please read this great article about the latest nonsense from climate-change deniers.
You can't just pull one fact out and base your opinion on that, out of context (and actually, you are just trying to twist that fact to fit your already-decided opinion.) You can't say "Oh yeah, well the first slaveowner in the U.S. was black" and think that invalidates all the history that has come after that, and the contextual reality surrounding even just that moment.
If you cherrypick facts, you end up with a distortion of reality. If you research and understand history and current events, you can come to conclusions based on reality. Maybe they will be conservative conclusions; that is possible. I am conservative on some issues, and I love having reasonable discussions with people of differing views. But liberal or conservative, if you do not know what you are talking about, if you think history does not matter, if you insist that you are right in the face of obvious facts to the contrary, I will not bother pretending to respect you or your opinions. If you get your information from unreliable sources like Limbaugh and Beck, if you pick and choose your facts to fit your opinions, you are delusional. And probably a conservative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)