But really, it raises more questions than it answers:
What is he ready to make amends for?
How could he afford this ad?
How cracked out is that signature?
Seriously, did he borrow the money for the ad from Feldman?
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Not sure how much commenting this needs
Corey Haim recently took out this regrettable ad in Variety:
But really, it raises more questions than it answers:
What is he ready to make amends for?
How could he afford this ad?
How cracked out is that signature?
Seriously, did he borrow the money for the ad from Feldman?
But really, it raises more questions than it answers:
What is he ready to make amends for?
How could he afford this ad?
How cracked out is that signature?
Seriously, did he borrow the money for the ad from Feldman?
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Like Ron Shapiro, but for bad music
A couple of weeks ago, I was going on a bit of a Dennis Miller-esque rant about pop music, specifically the likes of Justin Timberlake. I was trying to justify to a friend why it's ok to enjoy his music on a certain level. I mean, I know it's throw-away bubblegum pop, but it's pretty good for throw-away bubblegum. I mean, he's at least trying to do something new and slightly innovative, even if it's all well within the confines of corporate radio. And it's not like he set out to do anything dramatically different in the first place, and his music is good for what it is. And on a business level, you gotta give it to the guy, he knows what he's doing. His first disc was Pharell produced when P was the be-all and end-all of Hip Hop, and JT has almost single-handedly led the (welcome) Timbaland resurgence.
And after finishing this protracted and long-winded defense of such worthless music, I felt a momentary pang of regret, as I realized I had just become a corporate rock apologist. I was half waiting for the phone to ring with an offer to write for Rolling Stone (zing!). This kind of balderdash would've never flown back when I was a hardcore, straight-edge college punk with no room in my revolutionary schedule for such ersatz crooning.
However, over the years as my sensibilities, as well as physique, have softened significantly, I've realized there's no shame in enjoying the occasional well-crafted pop album. I liken it to Oreos. Comprised almost completely of trans-fats, one magazine article I read posited them as the worst food in existance, given the entire lack of nutritional value as well as the aforementioned harmful fats.
But yet they are so fucking delicious.
It's much the same way with your higher-end radio pop. There is no shame in enjoying it, for it is scientifically designed to be enjoyable. I actually envision this music being made much the same way as Oreos: old men in white coats scurry around a sterile lab combining beats and effeminite vocals until they have the most potent pop mix known to human kind. It's not a terrible waste that I'm entertained by such a product, only a mere inevitability of time and scientific advancement.
Now, don't get me wrong. I would much, much rather spend my time with some obscure Ween tracks, or Brother Ali, Billy Bragg, Modern Life is War, or any number fof verifiably good bands. Hell, even if I'm going for pop, I'd rather have some Jackson 5. But much like I strive to get my 3-5 servings of both fruits and vegetables everyday and have long since given up Captain Crunch in favor of organic granola and flax seed, every once in a while I just feel compelled to sneak to the corner store, buy a big bag of Double Stuffs, and contemplate exactly just what futuresex will be like.
And after finishing this protracted and long-winded defense of such worthless music, I felt a momentary pang of regret, as I realized I had just become a corporate rock apologist. I was half waiting for the phone to ring with an offer to write for Rolling Stone (zing!). This kind of balderdash would've never flown back when I was a hardcore, straight-edge college punk with no room in my revolutionary schedule for such ersatz crooning.
However, over the years as my sensibilities, as well as physique, have softened significantly, I've realized there's no shame in enjoying the occasional well-crafted pop album. I liken it to Oreos. Comprised almost completely of trans-fats, one magazine article I read posited them as the worst food in existance, given the entire lack of nutritional value as well as the aforementioned harmful fats.
But yet they are so fucking delicious.
It's much the same way with your higher-end radio pop. There is no shame in enjoying it, for it is scientifically designed to be enjoyable. I actually envision this music being made much the same way as Oreos: old men in white coats scurry around a sterile lab combining beats and effeminite vocals until they have the most potent pop mix known to human kind. It's not a terrible waste that I'm entertained by such a product, only a mere inevitability of time and scientific advancement.
Now, don't get me wrong. I would much, much rather spend my time with some obscure Ween tracks, or Brother Ali, Billy Bragg, Modern Life is War, or any number fof verifiably good bands. Hell, even if I'm going for pop, I'd rather have some Jackson 5. But much like I strive to get my 3-5 servings of both fruits and vegetables everyday and have long since given up Captain Crunch in favor of organic granola and flax seed, every once in a while I just feel compelled to sneak to the corner store, buy a big bag of Double Stuffs, and contemplate exactly just what futuresex will be like.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Finally, some justice in the world
Friends, there is much about the world you can be angry at. An illegal, immoral, and unjust war continues to kill thousands. Our healthcare system lets millions of people die for lack of care, simply because they cannot afford it. Over half of the world lives on less than $1 U.S. per day. Corporate control of the world has thrown our environment into peril.
But I no longer despair. For once in my life, I have finally seen justice enacted on a grand scale.
Yes, we may all breathe a sigh of relief tonight and go to sleep with some faith in the world, as those fucking Patriots finally lost.
For all the talk of greatness, all the hype, all the un-punished cheating, they simply could not defeat the out-of-nowhere Giants. And for that, I thank all that is good and holy.
But I no longer despair. For once in my life, I have finally seen justice enacted on a grand scale.
Yes, we may all breathe a sigh of relief tonight and go to sleep with some faith in the world, as those fucking Patriots finally lost.
For all the talk of greatness, all the hype, all the un-punished cheating, they simply could not defeat the out-of-nowhere Giants. And for that, I thank all that is good and holy.
Friday, February 01, 2008
Lazy friday morning = stealing someone else's post
Courtesy of Jonathan Schwarz, via This Modern World:
Several weeks ago this statement of Hillary Clinton got lots of attention:
I would point to the fact that Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the president before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done. That dream became a reality. The power of that dream became real in people’s lives because we had a president who said, “We are going to do it,” and actually got it accomplished.
What’s gotten less attention is what Martin Luther King himself thought on this subject. Chris Rabb has the bad taste to point out that King wrote this in an article published in January, 1969 after his death:
The past record of the federal government, however, has not been encouraging. No president has really done very much for the American Negro, though the past two presidents have received much undeserved credit for helping us. This credit has accrued to Lyndon Johnson and John Kennedy only because it was during their administrations that Negroes began doing more for themselves. Kennedy didn’t voluntarily submit a civil rights bill, nor did Lyndon Johnson. In fact, both told us at one time that such legislation was impossible. President Johnson did respond realistically to the signs of the times and used his skills as a legislator to get bills through Congress that other men might not have gotten through. I must point out, in all honesty, however, that President Johnson has not been nearly so diligent in implementing the bills he has helped shepherd through Congress.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
"Dude was the best TA ever"--direct quote
This past semester I was a teaching assistant for Intro to Sociology, which was a new and interesting trip for me. You see, being a TA means many different things at many different places. But what it means here in the sociology department at the U of M is usually that you show up to class, sit there while the prof lectures and pretend you're paying attention, hold office hours no one comes to, and grade things. Pretty straightforward, and not a bad way to make nearly 12 grand a year.
But Intro is different. When you're a TA for Intro, you have to run "discussion sections." These are basically smaller versions of the class because someone somewhere must have felt guilty about sticking 200 kids together in one class. So, in this case, I had an hour discussion section before class, then the three hour lecture, and then a differet discussion section after class.
And I learned something about myself. Namely, that I was hidesouly under-prepared for what went down. This was the first time in my life I ever had a class of my own. And there's not really a training session or practice or anything. You just kind of get thrown in there, told to teach something vaguely on-topic, and good luck. Well, I don't recall anyone telling me good luck.
This may have been the single most humbling experience of my life. I was a bit cocky going in; I mean, I know my stuff, I'm an outgiong guy, I've got extensive improv experience. I really thought I could handle pretty much anything, and besides, it's Intro--how hard could it be? Well, it turns out it's very hard. For example, on the very first day, I had planned what I was sure was way too much to do that day. When we were done with everything I had planned, we were a good 25 minutes into a 50 minute period. Not too much you can do there, other than admit you're an idiot on the very first day of class. A great way to start things.
But, still, what is the point of all these ramblings? Well, this past week I got my first set of student evaluations. And I mean ever, because I've never been in a position to be evaluated before. However, I just couldn't bring myself to read them. I mean, I really, really felt like I fucked up that class. To the point where I almost apologized on the last day because I felt like I had been so horridly out of place and done such a shoddy job.
But last night I finally read them. Now, I have to preface this by saying that probably more than half of the students only did the required bubble-sheet part of the eval (in which my average scores we exactly the same as the department averages), but a good number did actually write comments. The only negative one read "I wish I had been in Rehema's (the other TA) section because she grades easier." Technically not true because Rehema and I grade pretty much the same, but hey, not too shabby.
Overall, though, they were pretty damn positive, including the titular praise from this post, though the self-effacing part of me wants to think some of the good comments were sarcastic. In the end, I don't so much know that there's a point to this post other than a mixture of relief at evals that weren't anywhere as bad as I thought they'd be and my general vanity. But I suppose a grandiose point that can be brought home from this is that you should always cut yourself a little slack, because you're probably doing a much better job in life than you think you are.
But Intro is different. When you're a TA for Intro, you have to run "discussion sections." These are basically smaller versions of the class because someone somewhere must have felt guilty about sticking 200 kids together in one class. So, in this case, I had an hour discussion section before class, then the three hour lecture, and then a differet discussion section after class.
And I learned something about myself. Namely, that I was hidesouly under-prepared for what went down. This was the first time in my life I ever had a class of my own. And there's not really a training session or practice or anything. You just kind of get thrown in there, told to teach something vaguely on-topic, and good luck. Well, I don't recall anyone telling me good luck.
This may have been the single most humbling experience of my life. I was a bit cocky going in; I mean, I know my stuff, I'm an outgiong guy, I've got extensive improv experience. I really thought I could handle pretty much anything, and besides, it's Intro--how hard could it be? Well, it turns out it's very hard. For example, on the very first day, I had planned what I was sure was way too much to do that day. When we were done with everything I had planned, we were a good 25 minutes into a 50 minute period. Not too much you can do there, other than admit you're an idiot on the very first day of class. A great way to start things.
But, still, what is the point of all these ramblings? Well, this past week I got my first set of student evaluations. And I mean ever, because I've never been in a position to be evaluated before. However, I just couldn't bring myself to read them. I mean, I really, really felt like I fucked up that class. To the point where I almost apologized on the last day because I felt like I had been so horridly out of place and done such a shoddy job.
But last night I finally read them. Now, I have to preface this by saying that probably more than half of the students only did the required bubble-sheet part of the eval (in which my average scores we exactly the same as the department averages), but a good number did actually write comments. The only negative one read "I wish I had been in Rehema's (the other TA) section because she grades easier." Technically not true because Rehema and I grade pretty much the same, but hey, not too shabby.
Overall, though, they were pretty damn positive, including the titular praise from this post, though the self-effacing part of me wants to think some of the good comments were sarcastic. In the end, I don't so much know that there's a point to this post other than a mixture of relief at evals that weren't anywhere as bad as I thought they'd be and my general vanity. But I suppose a grandiose point that can be brought home from this is that you should always cut yourself a little slack, because you're probably doing a much better job in life than you think you are.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
I wonder what Terry Ryan's up to right now?
Well, he's gone.
And we got the possibility of having maybe one or two good players in the next couple years.
This hurts...real bad.
Please do not call me all day, for I will be curled in the fetal position, holding the beloved ticket stub from the game of his 1,000th strikeout to my chest, while gently sobbing.
And we got the possibility of having maybe one or two good players in the next couple years.
This hurts...real bad.
Please do not call me all day, for I will be curled in the fetal position, holding the beloved ticket stub from the game of his 1,000th strikeout to my chest, while gently sobbing.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Not to brag, but some of us saw this coming
I'm not one to give much creedence to the notion of issue burn-out, but even I can't get enraged about the war sometimes these days. I mean, does anyone out there believe in it anymore? Something like 60-70% of people consistently report they want the troops home. The troops themselves continually (according to surveys) say they don't believe in the war, and even the Republicans running for president are acknowledging it should be ending soemtime soon.
But if you don't mind, let me try to get us all riled up again for a minute. By now you've hopefully heard that the Bush administration lied at least 935 times to the American public in the run-up to the war. You know, the war that's costing us over 11 billion dollars a month.
Let's recap that really quick: We're spending $11 billion a month on a war that we have indisputible eveidence was based on a lie.
Even without the hundreds of thousands of dead people that's appaling. And now all of the Democrats are pretending they didn't know any better when they voted for the War in the first place, but in their defense, they already have enough to worry about right now because the houses they bought with sub-prime loans are being forclosed on (they were mis-lead about that one, too).
Of course, some of us saw this coming a little earlier (like, before the war started). So, if I could, I'd like to reiterate my appeal that next time you believe us. You know, before 100,000 or so people are dead, we've spent several hundred billion dollars, and we've completely destroyed our standing in the international community. Couldn't hurt to try.
But if you don't mind, let me try to get us all riled up again for a minute. By now you've hopefully heard that the Bush administration lied at least 935 times to the American public in the run-up to the war. You know, the war that's costing us over 11 billion dollars a month.
Let's recap that really quick: We're spending $11 billion a month on a war that we have indisputible eveidence was based on a lie.
Even without the hundreds of thousands of dead people that's appaling. And now all of the Democrats are pretending they didn't know any better when they voted for the War in the first place, but in their defense, they already have enough to worry about right now because the houses they bought with sub-prime loans are being forclosed on (they were mis-lead about that one, too).
Of course, some of us saw this coming a little earlier (like, before the war started). So, if I could, I'd like to reiterate my appeal that next time you believe us. You know, before 100,000 or so people are dead, we've spent several hundred billion dollars, and we've completely destroyed our standing in the international community. Couldn't hurt to try.
Monday, January 28, 2008
The Difficulties of Cleaning the Bookshelf
I really love books. What can I say? I write that sentence and realize how painfully, painfully nerdy it is, but yet it is completely true. However, at the same time, I look at the bookshelf over-flowing with random literature and the random large piles of books in every corner of my room and realize I can't keep on going like this. Not only is it really annoying to have that many books in your room, I also am keenly aware of the fact that I'll have to move again at some point relatively soon, and I just can not believe I'm going to be willing to carry all of those books.
But now, after having spent a half hour going through the shelves and the floor, I've not even got half a box full of books I can let go of. And most of them are books I got for free when professors were retiring that I wasn't really even interested in to begin with. I just can't seem to let any of them go, even though I fully know I'm being completely ridiculous. The argument with my inner, rational self goes approximately like this:
Will you ever read Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling again? You hardly even read it when you was supposed to for an Intro to Philosophy class 6 years ago! Come on, it's a classic philosophical text! Why not keep it? Besides, it makes you look deep to have high-brow books sitting around.
But what about the obscure Marxist "theory" books that are really just crazy old men arguing historical minutae with one another? Yes, I know, but they're out of print. What if I want to read them someday? Then I won't have them and will forever curse the day I let that gem of a book go.
Ok...but a college textbook? Are you serious? Yeah, but that book changed my life when I was in college! I can't get rid of that! Citizen Kane got rid of Rosebud and look what happened to him! I don't want to die some crazy and embittered William Randolph Hearst stand-in muttering "the sociologically examined life" to myself as I slowly fade away into regret and nothingness.
And there I stand even still. I've got half a box full of books to give away, and several thousand arguments as to why I should never get rid of a single book ever again.
But now, after having spent a half hour going through the shelves and the floor, I've not even got half a box full of books I can let go of. And most of them are books I got for free when professors were retiring that I wasn't really even interested in to begin with. I just can't seem to let any of them go, even though I fully know I'm being completely ridiculous. The argument with my inner, rational self goes approximately like this:
Will you ever read Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling again? You hardly even read it when you was supposed to for an Intro to Philosophy class 6 years ago! Come on, it's a classic philosophical text! Why not keep it? Besides, it makes you look deep to have high-brow books sitting around.
But what about the obscure Marxist "theory" books that are really just crazy old men arguing historical minutae with one another? Yes, I know, but they're out of print. What if I want to read them someday? Then I won't have them and will forever curse the day I let that gem of a book go.
Ok...but a college textbook? Are you serious? Yeah, but that book changed my life when I was in college! I can't get rid of that! Citizen Kane got rid of Rosebud and look what happened to him! I don't want to die some crazy and embittered William Randolph Hearst stand-in muttering "the sociologically examined life" to myself as I slowly fade away into regret and nothingness.
And there I stand even still. I've got half a box full of books to give away, and several thousand arguments as to why I should never get rid of a single book ever again.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Dissecting the Democratic Debates
First of all, applaud me for avoiding the obvious and groan inducing triple-D comment in the title.
Anyway, in watching both the Democratic debates last night and before in New Hampshire (which, if you happened to be making a drinking game out of, be glad you didn't chose "drink every time they say change"), I think I'm ready to call it an Obama-Edwards ticket. Not that I wan't that ticket, but that's what I think it will be.
Sure Hilary had a win in New Hampshire and a big upset in Nevada, but we're moving to the South, where one could reasonably argue race could be a more positive factor than gender amongst Democratic primary attendees, and states like Minnesota, famous for electing the first Muslim member of Congress.
But there's also been some clear positioning. John Edwards, the Dickensian boot black of the debates ("Oi! Oy'll shine that White House up good, me will! Sharp as a thistle, clean as a whistle it'll be!"), has clearly been siddling up to Obama in the most shame-facedly naked display of desperation since the midget drove the tank. Edwards has clearly decided he has no shot and that he's hitchin' his wagon to the winning horse.
Pay attention the next time you hear him in a debate. He opens about half of his points with "So I argue, and Senator Obama agrees with me, blah blah blah" or "Senator Obama and I agree that blah blah blah" or some variation of that. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if during the debates he was writing "Obama + Edwards" inside of little hearts in his Lisa Frank notebook.
So you heard it here first: the Democrats will end up running an Obama-Edwards ticket, and they'll have the smilin'-est, most positive, can-do ticket in the history of politics.
Anyway, in watching both the Democratic debates last night and before in New Hampshire (which, if you happened to be making a drinking game out of, be glad you didn't chose "drink every time they say change"), I think I'm ready to call it an Obama-Edwards ticket. Not that I wan't that ticket, but that's what I think it will be.
Sure Hilary had a win in New Hampshire and a big upset in Nevada, but we're moving to the South, where one could reasonably argue race could be a more positive factor than gender amongst Democratic primary attendees, and states like Minnesota, famous for electing the first Muslim member of Congress.
But there's also been some clear positioning. John Edwards, the Dickensian boot black of the debates ("Oi! Oy'll shine that White House up good, me will! Sharp as a thistle, clean as a whistle it'll be!"), has clearly been siddling up to Obama in the most shame-facedly naked display of desperation since the midget drove the tank. Edwards has clearly decided he has no shot and that he's hitchin' his wagon to the winning horse.
Pay attention the next time you hear him in a debate. He opens about half of his points with "So I argue, and Senator Obama agrees with me, blah blah blah" or "Senator Obama and I agree that blah blah blah" or some variation of that. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if during the debates he was writing "Obama + Edwards" inside of little hearts in his Lisa Frank notebook.
So you heard it here first: the Democrats will end up running an Obama-Edwards ticket, and they'll have the smilin'-est, most positive, can-do ticket in the history of politics.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Back with a depressing post
So after a month of crazy travels and oddly random adventures (much more on those later), I thought it best to come back swinging with some old school political rantings. So here goes:
This evening, in memory of Dr. King, I attended a showing of The Devil Came on Horseback, a documentary centering on Brian Steidle, an ex-Marine turned humanitarian observer in Sudan, and eventually the Darfur region.
Steidle was essentially the first person to bring back classified (for unknown reasons) photos of the genocide occuring in Darfur. While the horrific photos initially sparked intense media coverage of the issue (despite the Defense Department asking him to not share the photos with anyone), the attention waned and public focus moved on to [insert rant about mainstream media descent into tabloid coverage over actual news here].
A panel afterwards actually featured some insightful comments and ideas for action, including discussions of several divestment campaigns (I'm proud to report both the state of Minnesota and the U of M have divested all holdings from Sudan). But one of the most practical was a hotline that has been set up to contact elected officials urging them to take action:
1-800-GENOCIDE
In an ingenious move, all one needs to do is call the number and enter their area code. They can then press 1 to be connected to their Representative, 2 to be connected to their Senators, and 3 to be connected to the White House. It even plays a short recording of talking points for you to mention before you are connected.
And even someone as cynical as yours truly believes in the power of contacting elected officials, as even the hyper-conservative representative I had when I was in undergrad (Jim Nussle, at the time the Chairman fo the House Budget Committee...also famous for coming to session with a paper bag over his head) signed on to the call to close the School of the Americas citing constituent pressure, and this guy did not budge for anyne, so it must be useful for something.
This evening, in memory of Dr. King, I attended a showing of The Devil Came on Horseback, a documentary centering on Brian Steidle, an ex-Marine turned humanitarian observer in Sudan, and eventually the Darfur region.
Steidle was essentially the first person to bring back classified (for unknown reasons) photos of the genocide occuring in Darfur. While the horrific photos initially sparked intense media coverage of the issue (despite the Defense Department asking him to not share the photos with anyone), the attention waned and public focus moved on to [insert rant about mainstream media descent into tabloid coverage over actual news here].
A panel afterwards actually featured some insightful comments and ideas for action, including discussions of several divestment campaigns (I'm proud to report both the state of Minnesota and the U of M have divested all holdings from Sudan). But one of the most practical was a hotline that has been set up to contact elected officials urging them to take action:
1-800-GENOCIDE
In an ingenious move, all one needs to do is call the number and enter their area code. They can then press 1 to be connected to their Representative, 2 to be connected to their Senators, and 3 to be connected to the White House. It even plays a short recording of talking points for you to mention before you are connected.
And even someone as cynical as yours truly believes in the power of contacting elected officials, as even the hyper-conservative representative I had when I was in undergrad (Jim Nussle, at the time the Chairman fo the House Budget Committee...also famous for coming to session with a paper bag over his head) signed on to the call to close the School of the Americas citing constituent pressure, and this guy did not budge for anyne, so it must be useful for something.
Monday, December 24, 2007
Dialing up a good blog
With nothing to do and armed with but a dial-up modem (Fort Dodge, IA: Where it always 1996!) I have successfully wasted nearly all of this Christmas Eve Morning, which is possibly the mom nonsensical string of nouns and adjectives I've ever heard used on broadcast television, which is saying quite a bit.
Anyhoo, in reflecting on many year-end lists and what not, as usual the Onion has effectively destroyed them through superior, cynical sarcastic displays. And also as usual, they have a much better take on most subjects than pretty much anyone involved. For instance, check out their statsheet on the Michael Vick dogfighting scandal:
The discovery of a dogfighting ring in a house owned by Michael Vick has led to speculation of what other secrets the Falcons quarterback might be hiding. Onion Sports runs down the potentially damaging sights that frequent visitors to Vick's mansion have reported witnessing
Embarrassingly thick glasses Vick needs to see more than 20 yards in front of him
A fully annotated slam book, evidence that Vick and his friends can get pretty catty when they get together and start talking
Empty beer cans everywhere, because although Vick is well over legal age, something about empty beer cans always seems to add drama to an already troublesome situation
Authentic original of Edvard Munch's "The Scream," implying that either the version in the Oslo museum or the one owned by Norwegian billionaire Petter Olsen are in fact forgeries
Over 200 tubes of lipstick in various tastefully understated shades
Perfectly legal, albeit tasteless, cat-fighting set-up
Framed diploma proving that Oxford University awarded Vick a doctorate in Jacobean theater during the 2003 offseason
Water cooler with secret compartment containing stash of Oreos
Assorted helmets, pads, and other gladiatorial gear, presumably for use in some grotesque human-versus-human bloodsport
Note that last one. In all the uproar and Peta protests and all of that hoopla, what was conspicuously missing from the discussion was the fact that football (as much as enjoy it) is far more gruesome and damaging than dogfighting.
The counter-argument against this is usually that pro football players get paid millions of dollars. However, this really only applies to the elite few. The average NFL career is 4 years and the average life expectancy of an NFL player is 50, due to the stress the put their bodies through. Think about that: these players literally sacrifice a quarter of their lives to play football for a couple of years. Not to mention the fact that most of them spend their retirement in intense pain and often in poverty, given the terrible treatment retirees are given by the NFL and the astounding medical costs to deal with their old playing injuries.
I'd like to draw some sort of grandiose conclusion about a society that sends you to jail for two years for hurting a dog yet gives millions upon millions of dollars to owners and executives who force human beings to work themselves quite literally to death for them, but it's Christmas Eve Morning, so I'll leave that for a future post.
Anyhoo, in reflecting on many year-end lists and what not, as usual the Onion has effectively destroyed them through superior, cynical sarcastic displays. And also as usual, they have a much better take on most subjects than pretty much anyone involved. For instance, check out their statsheet on the Michael Vick dogfighting scandal:
The discovery of a dogfighting ring in a house owned by Michael Vick has led to speculation of what other secrets the Falcons quarterback might be hiding. Onion Sports runs down the potentially damaging sights that frequent visitors to Vick's mansion have reported witnessing
Embarrassingly thick glasses Vick needs to see more than 20 yards in front of him
A fully annotated slam book, evidence that Vick and his friends can get pretty catty when they get together and start talking
Empty beer cans everywhere, because although Vick is well over legal age, something about empty beer cans always seems to add drama to an already troublesome situation
Authentic original of Edvard Munch's "The Scream," implying that either the version in the Oslo museum or the one owned by Norwegian billionaire Petter Olsen are in fact forgeries
Over 200 tubes of lipstick in various tastefully understated shades
Perfectly legal, albeit tasteless, cat-fighting set-up
Framed diploma proving that Oxford University awarded Vick a doctorate in Jacobean theater during the 2003 offseason
Water cooler with secret compartment containing stash of Oreos
Assorted helmets, pads, and other gladiatorial gear, presumably for use in some grotesque human-versus-human bloodsport
Note that last one. In all the uproar and Peta protests and all of that hoopla, what was conspicuously missing from the discussion was the fact that football (as much as enjoy it) is far more gruesome and damaging than dogfighting.
The counter-argument against this is usually that pro football players get paid millions of dollars. However, this really only applies to the elite few. The average NFL career is 4 years and the average life expectancy of an NFL player is 50, due to the stress the put their bodies through. Think about that: these players literally sacrifice a quarter of their lives to play football for a couple of years. Not to mention the fact that most of them spend their retirement in intense pain and often in poverty, given the terrible treatment retirees are given by the NFL and the astounding medical costs to deal with their old playing injuries.
I'd like to draw some sort of grandiose conclusion about a society that sends you to jail for two years for hurting a dog yet gives millions upon millions of dollars to owners and executives who force human beings to work themselves quite literally to death for them, but it's Christmas Eve Morning, so I'll leave that for a future post.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Merry War on Christmas
Before I shut this thing down for the holidays in a little bit, I'm hoping to get a flurry of interesting stuff out there...or at least enough to justify coming back to read this thing. Anyway, here's an interesting recent video:
It's part of an effort by Robert Greenwald, master of the quickie-leftist documentary (see Outfoxed, Wal Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, etc.), to step up the boycott of Fox News. Two Democratic front-runners, Obama and Edwards, have alreay publicly declared a boycott of all-Fox sponsred events.
Now, I understand that the Deomcrats are not much better or much more desirable than the Republicans, but if they were to enact a whole-sale boycott of Fox News, it could actually do something positive. Recenly, Fox has begun to slip from the highest-rated cable news network into the land of shrill partisan shouting so slanted that even the American public views it with distrust. And for a politics/news channel, a boycott by one of the two major parties pretty much spells death. If not death, at least a Ralph Nader-like decline into an oblivion where even the people who agree with you no longer want to be associated with you.
So check out the video, head on over to the site, sign the petition, and hope the Dems grow a pair sometime soon...
It's part of an effort by Robert Greenwald, master of the quickie-leftist documentary (see Outfoxed, Wal Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, etc.), to step up the boycott of Fox News. Two Democratic front-runners, Obama and Edwards, have alreay publicly declared a boycott of all-Fox sponsred events.
Now, I understand that the Deomcrats are not much better or much more desirable than the Republicans, but if they were to enact a whole-sale boycott of Fox News, it could actually do something positive. Recenly, Fox has begun to slip from the highest-rated cable news network into the land of shrill partisan shouting so slanted that even the American public views it with distrust. And for a politics/news channel, a boycott by one of the two major parties pretty much spells death. If not death, at least a Ralph Nader-like decline into an oblivion where even the people who agree with you no longer want to be associated with you.
So check out the video, head on over to the site, sign the petition, and hope the Dems grow a pair sometime soon...
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Update: Troops don't support the troops
In my last post I began to address the out-dated notion that you can't support the troops without supporting the war. Well, today's Los Angeles Times reports that apparently families of active-duty personnel and the soldiers themselves don't support the troops. I tried to reproduce the poll graphic here, but it's too small to legible. It's embedded in the article, or you can look at the most interesting response here.
When asked about when the troops should be brought home, more families of soldiers in Iraq and veterans of Iraq want them home immediately than do those in the general public. Similarly, the same number of vets as the general public think the war was not worth it that (60%).
For people not familiar with military culture, this is huge. It is incredibly rare for members of the American Armed Forces to ever publicly discredit the president, even more so during war time.
So this brings us to the inevitable question: America wants the troops home. The citizens want the troops home, the military wants the troops home, everybody wants the troops home. Why won't our elected officials bring them home?
When asked about when the troops should be brought home, more families of soldiers in Iraq and veterans of Iraq want them home immediately than do those in the general public. Similarly, the same number of vets as the general public think the war was not worth it that (60%).
For people not familiar with military culture, this is huge. It is incredibly rare for members of the American Armed Forces to ever publicly discredit the president, even more so during war time.
So this brings us to the inevitable question: America wants the troops home. The citizens want the troops home, the military wants the troops home, everybody wants the troops home. Why won't our elected officials bring them home?
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Supporting the Troops
By now it is such a moot point that it's become a cliche to say you can support the troops and not support the war. Or maybe (more likely) it's become cliche in the circles I run in. Either way, though, pretty much every American has to have seen at least one "Support the Troops, Bring Them Home/End the War/Etc." sign, pin, or bumper sticker by now.
So that's not really the problem anymore (yeah, I know there are plenty of people who think otherwise, but just grant me this for the sake of argument). The real problem is that nobody looks at what the other side is doing. Namely, how are those supporting the war, and especially those who started the warm, supporting the troops?
It's still criminally under-reported that the Bush administration has been cutting veteran's benefits since the start of the war and continues to do so. And let's not forget the famous "hobo armor" stories of soldiers who have to patch together their own safety armor, or the stories of families purchasing flak jackets themselves to send to their relatives in Iraq and Afghanistan who were not equipped with armor.
But even more criminal than the cuts and the shoddy armor are the ways in which the soldiers who have returned home are being almost completely ignored in many instances. This was brought to light recently when a CBS investigation turned up the fact that there are 120 veteran suicides per week. Coupled with the fact that Veterans make up the largest percentage of the homeless, with even conservative estimates putting it at 33% of all homeless being veterans of some branch of the military, this paints a very bleak picture.
This isn't to just grind a political axe (though I could point out that my anti-war actions in no way effect veterans, whilst the actions of those in power who say I don't support the troops significantly negatively effect them), but rather to simply point out the completely criminal nature of our military system. The people we task with fighting for our country (rightly or wrongly) are thanked with debilitating injuries for which they receive little to no care, mental illness for which they rarely if ever receive care, and massively disproportionate rates of homelessness.
So, to beat a dead horse, who is supporting the troops?
So that's not really the problem anymore (yeah, I know there are plenty of people who think otherwise, but just grant me this for the sake of argument). The real problem is that nobody looks at what the other side is doing. Namely, how are those supporting the war, and especially those who started the warm, supporting the troops?
It's still criminally under-reported that the Bush administration has been cutting veteran's benefits since the start of the war and continues to do so. And let's not forget the famous "hobo armor" stories of soldiers who have to patch together their own safety armor, or the stories of families purchasing flak jackets themselves to send to their relatives in Iraq and Afghanistan who were not equipped with armor.
But even more criminal than the cuts and the shoddy armor are the ways in which the soldiers who have returned home are being almost completely ignored in many instances. This was brought to light recently when a CBS investigation turned up the fact that there are 120 veteran suicides per week. Coupled with the fact that Veterans make up the largest percentage of the homeless, with even conservative estimates putting it at 33% of all homeless being veterans of some branch of the military, this paints a very bleak picture.
This isn't to just grind a political axe (though I could point out that my anti-war actions in no way effect veterans, whilst the actions of those in power who say I don't support the troops significantly negatively effect them), but rather to simply point out the completely criminal nature of our military system. The people we task with fighting for our country (rightly or wrongly) are thanked with debilitating injuries for which they receive little to no care, mental illness for which they rarely if ever receive care, and massively disproportionate rates of homelessness.
So, to beat a dead horse, who is supporting the troops?
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Yeah, it's cliche, but...
Over at MSN, they're once again loudly touting those brilliant business minds who have figured out how to not pay taxes.
The reasons given for not paying taxes are even more laughable than the already low tax rates most major corporations have. For example, DirecTv paid only 2% in taxes last year because of "historical losses." Yeah, why should they have to pay taxes when they're down on their luck? It's just like the way I barely make any money so I don't have to pay taxes...oh wait, I'm taxed quite heavily despite having .000013% the income of DirecTv.
Or how about Broadcom, a semiconductors manufacturer? Well, they pay 1.1% in taxes because while they made $703 million overseas, they "lost" $336 million domestically. And yes, that still means they made well over $350 million in profits, but hey, who's counting? Oh, and before you go crying for them about their domestic losses...well, they aren't really loses. Broadcom is just one of many corporations to put it's highly developed Research & Development wings (which require highly educated and trained workforces) in the U.S. while they put their manufacturing (which does not require costly education or training) overseas, in this case Singapore.
As such, while they continue to make obscene profits, they're technically losing money in the U.S. As such, they pay incredibly low taxes because their domestic earnings are so low. Never mind the money all goes to the same place (which is inside the U.S.), or that the money they're "losing" in the U.S. is simply part of the payroll of any tech company. They simply figured that if they split it up like that they won't have to pay taxes. And this is all legal.
So you know, just something to think about when you're filling out your taxes this year. I don't know about you, but I'm thinking I'll start counting the money I make from teaching foreign students as over-seas expenditures. That oughtta bump me down a tax bracket or two...
The reasons given for not paying taxes are even more laughable than the already low tax rates most major corporations have. For example, DirecTv paid only 2% in taxes last year because of "historical losses." Yeah, why should they have to pay taxes when they're down on their luck? It's just like the way I barely make any money so I don't have to pay taxes...oh wait, I'm taxed quite heavily despite having .000013% the income of DirecTv.
Or how about Broadcom, a semiconductors manufacturer? Well, they pay 1.1% in taxes because while they made $703 million overseas, they "lost" $336 million domestically. And yes, that still means they made well over $350 million in profits, but hey, who's counting? Oh, and before you go crying for them about their domestic losses...well, they aren't really loses. Broadcom is just one of many corporations to put it's highly developed Research & Development wings (which require highly educated and trained workforces) in the U.S. while they put their manufacturing (which does not require costly education or training) overseas, in this case Singapore.
As such, while they continue to make obscene profits, they're technically losing money in the U.S. As such, they pay incredibly low taxes because their domestic earnings are so low. Never mind the money all goes to the same place (which is inside the U.S.), or that the money they're "losing" in the U.S. is simply part of the payroll of any tech company. They simply figured that if they split it up like that they won't have to pay taxes. And this is all legal.
So you know, just something to think about when you're filling out your taxes this year. I don't know about you, but I'm thinking I'll start counting the money I make from teaching foreign students as over-seas expenditures. That oughtta bump me down a tax bracket or two...
Monday, December 03, 2007
The run up to war...again
It's fairly amazing, when you get down to it, how recent wars have been fought on evidence roughly as credible as notes passed in eighth grade math ("Do you like neo-liberal hegemony? Check yes or no"). By now, everyone (hopefully) knows about how the U.S. case for the invasion of Iraq was almost entirely predicated on the testimony of Ahmed Chalibi, which of course turned out to be completely made up.
But the fact that it's made up doesn't matter. Because even though the Bush administration itself has admitted it fabricated every reason for going to war, we're already there. There's already hundreds of thousands of people dead, and the Democrats sure as hell aren't going to do anything because then they won't look as tough as the Harvard and Yale-educated, Conneticut-born cheerleader who likes to play dress up.
Well, not surprisingly, the exact same thing is happening with Iran. While the big Lie has yet to come (is Iran looking for yellowcake yet? Probably! Stay tuned!), the little lies that fan the flames are already coming.
Case in point: the National Review Online, the elctronic version of the hyper-conservative National Review, has a regular feature writeen by ex-Marine/"reporter" W. Thomas Smith, Jr. Smith has been fabricating lies left and right on the NRO website, with the biggest being that "thousands" of Hezbollah forces were invading the Christian section of Beirut, a claim which turns out to be completely made up. A good overview of what's going on here.
And what was the National Review's response to this completely fabricated story? Some good ol' timey racism. According to the editor's of NRO, it's not Smith's fault that he completely lied about what's going on; rather, it's actually due to the "Arab tendency to lie and exaggerate."
Yep.
Anyway, when this Smith guy is sitting next to the first lady at the next State of the Union address being touted as the only reporter courageous enough to expose those dirty I-ranians and allow the U.S. to invade, and then three months later the government quitely apologizes as all of his stories and "facts" have been proven to be completely false, just remember that you heard it from me first.
But the fact that it's made up doesn't matter. Because even though the Bush administration itself has admitted it fabricated every reason for going to war, we're already there. There's already hundreds of thousands of people dead, and the Democrats sure as hell aren't going to do anything because then they won't look as tough as the Harvard and Yale-educated, Conneticut-born cheerleader who likes to play dress up.
Well, not surprisingly, the exact same thing is happening with Iran. While the big Lie has yet to come (is Iran looking for yellowcake yet? Probably! Stay tuned!), the little lies that fan the flames are already coming.
Case in point: the National Review Online, the elctronic version of the hyper-conservative National Review, has a regular feature writeen by ex-Marine/"reporter" W. Thomas Smith, Jr. Smith has been fabricating lies left and right on the NRO website, with the biggest being that "thousands" of Hezbollah forces were invading the Christian section of Beirut, a claim which turns out to be completely made up. A good overview of what's going on here.
And what was the National Review's response to this completely fabricated story? Some good ol' timey racism. According to the editor's of NRO, it's not Smith's fault that he completely lied about what's going on; rather, it's actually due to the "Arab tendency to lie and exaggerate."
Yep.
Anyway, when this Smith guy is sitting next to the first lady at the next State of the Union address being touted as the only reporter courageous enough to expose those dirty I-ranians and allow the U.S. to invade, and then three months later the government quitely apologizes as all of his stories and "facts" have been proven to be completely false, just remember that you heard it from me first.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
A Week in the Arts
As usual with my increased free time around the ol' Thanksgiving holiday, I've been filling as much of my life as possible with as many entertaining, non-school-related bits of work I can before I return to the soul-crushing drudgery of my life. So here are, in no particular order, the more interesting things I saw/heard last week:
M.I.A. w/ opening act The Cool Kids at First Avenue
You know, I'm not really much of an M.I.A. fan, but this was a really fun show. I think it stems from the fact that her music is dance music, and isn't really something you just plug in and sit there listening to. Because let's be frank; if you can tell the difference between any two M.I.A. songs you are either a shaman of some kind or a liar.
But live? Live is a whole different story. With incredible energy and dance moves that can only be described as nearly as confusing as her singing, it's a fun time. Plus, the Cool Kids turned out to be a quite pleasant surprise. I must admit I was pretty wary of a band I'd never heard of that also had such a stupid, stupid name, but they know how to rock the mic. Highly recommend them if you are a fan of rap from the years 1988-1992.
No Country for Old Men
The Coen brothers are a rare pairing in that they barely ever make flops. Widda T likes to say the only reason they made The Ladykillers is because their new dog had bladder control issues and they couldn't afford a new carpet, which is the best explanation I've heard thus far.
Fortunately, this is no Ladykillers. No Country is probably the best serious Coen brothers movie since Fargo (I say serious because Lebowski is beyond reproach, but of a completely different style of brilliance). It's always pretty much impossible to sum up one of their movies, so I'll just say I highly recommend this. And the ending...I won't ruin it, but it was one of the most challenging and interesting movie endings I've seen since Gone, Baby Gone (a highly under-rated flick). Definitely should make your "Best Of" year-end list you've got kicking around in your head.
I'm Not There
I must admit I'm still torn on this one. I'll really need another viewing before I can say definitively how I feel about it, though I definitely lean toward the positive. I like the idea of having 6 different people play Dylan, with only one of them even attempting to look like him (Cate Blanchet, ironically). As Dad pointed out, even if that wasn't the best way to do it, it sure as hell beat whatever they could've done as a straight biopic (see: Walk The Line).
But some parts of it failed to impress. Possibly the worst decision was the attempt to integrate Dylan lyrics into the movie. At best, they thudded awkwardly into the conversation, but often they felt more like Scary Movie-style mentions of pop culture that reward even the stupidest viewer for having once heard a chart-topping Dylan song. But despite it's significant flaws, it's moments of brilliance kept me engaged. Any time a two-hour plus movie doesn't drag at all, you know something was done correctly.
Well, having experienced a pretty satisfying week of living, I turn back to my insular world devoid of meaning and free time...
M.I.A. w/ opening act The Cool Kids at First Avenue
You know, I'm not really much of an M.I.A. fan, but this was a really fun show. I think it stems from the fact that her music is dance music, and isn't really something you just plug in and sit there listening to. Because let's be frank; if you can tell the difference between any two M.I.A. songs you are either a shaman of some kind or a liar.
But live? Live is a whole different story. With incredible energy and dance moves that can only be described as nearly as confusing as her singing, it's a fun time. Plus, the Cool Kids turned out to be a quite pleasant surprise. I must admit I was pretty wary of a band I'd never heard of that also had such a stupid, stupid name, but they know how to rock the mic. Highly recommend them if you are a fan of rap from the years 1988-1992.
No Country for Old Men
The Coen brothers are a rare pairing in that they barely ever make flops. Widda T likes to say the only reason they made The Ladykillers is because their new dog had bladder control issues and they couldn't afford a new carpet, which is the best explanation I've heard thus far.
Fortunately, this is no Ladykillers. No Country is probably the best serious Coen brothers movie since Fargo (I say serious because Lebowski is beyond reproach, but of a completely different style of brilliance). It's always pretty much impossible to sum up one of their movies, so I'll just say I highly recommend this. And the ending...I won't ruin it, but it was one of the most challenging and interesting movie endings I've seen since Gone, Baby Gone (a highly under-rated flick). Definitely should make your "Best Of" year-end list you've got kicking around in your head.
I'm Not There
I must admit I'm still torn on this one. I'll really need another viewing before I can say definitively how I feel about it, though I definitely lean toward the positive. I like the idea of having 6 different people play Dylan, with only one of them even attempting to look like him (Cate Blanchet, ironically). As Dad pointed out, even if that wasn't the best way to do it, it sure as hell beat whatever they could've done as a straight biopic (see: Walk The Line).
But some parts of it failed to impress. Possibly the worst decision was the attempt to integrate Dylan lyrics into the movie. At best, they thudded awkwardly into the conversation, but often they felt more like Scary Movie-style mentions of pop culture that reward even the stupidest viewer for having once heard a chart-topping Dylan song. But despite it's significant flaws, it's moments of brilliance kept me engaged. Any time a two-hour plus movie doesn't drag at all, you know something was done correctly.
Well, having experienced a pretty satisfying week of living, I turn back to my insular world devoid of meaning and free time...
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Will write journal-length academic papers for food
Got a thick(er) envelope from the folks at Deviant Behavior today, but it turned out to be another rejection letter. Which is a bit disappointing, seeing as they're not that great of a journal. It's kind of like being turned down by the homely girl at the bar...at least you were kind of expecting rejection from the pretty one.
So it's back to drawing board again...sigh...always an academic bride's mate, never a published bride...
So it's back to drawing board again...sigh...always an academic bride's mate, never a published bride...
Friday, November 23, 2007
This, my friends, is the stuff dreams are made of...
As I noted round abouts this time last year, I've never been successful in my attempts to leave the kiddie table.
But what a difference a year makes. After sustained complaints, my family (albeit quite sarcastically) finally let me move on up to that de-luxe dinning table in the dinning room, as it were. I didn't get to move up to a full bed this year, but at least I got to move onto a couch in the upstairs living room, which receives heat. Baby steps, my friends, baby steps.
And let me tell you, the adult table is everything I thought it would be and more. Real chairs! Real table! Real words used in conversation!
Suddenly, the world is my playground. Food tastes better, the sky is bluer, the young ladies are more comely, and the slow-gripping desperation brought on by neo-liberal hegemony seems less overwhelming.
But more importantly, I feel as if I've finally crossed one of the great thresholds into the strange land of adult-hood. Today, I can stand in front of my God and my peoples and say unequivocally that I am indeed a Man, with a capital M, for that is now my right.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Man, there weren't toys like this when I was a kid...
A friend came across this playmobil set in Target. Yes, Target.
In case the details escape you, it's a WTO-protest anarchist vs. cop playset. Hopefully Arise! will be carrying them soon, just in time for the holidays. Perfect for that anti-authoritarian on your list!
UPDATE: Arise! indeed does carry them now. Stop in and buy yours today--teach your children how to fight authority while simultaneously supporting collective bookstores! It's a win-win!
In case the details escape you, it's a WTO-protest anarchist vs. cop playset. Hopefully Arise! will be carrying them soon, just in time for the holidays. Perfect for that anti-authoritarian on your list!
UPDATE: Arise! indeed does carry them now. Stop in and buy yours today--teach your children how to fight authority while simultaneously supporting collective bookstores! It's a win-win!
Monday, November 19, 2007
My two cents on the writer's strike
Possibly the best thing to come out of the writer's strike thus far is ironically a demonstration of the power of the internet as a superior medium for communication. The writer's union has (not suprisingly) come up with the clever idea of putting together internet sketches, some parodying the shows they write for and some just simple interviews, but all discussing the strike and explaining what is going on broadly and giving the latest updates. They're now posting them regularly on YouTube as a way of forcing the agenda into the media, which for some reason doesn't seem to be providing very good coverage of a strike against, well, them. As a propaganda tool, it could not be more cleaver. Unions especially, but the entire progressive left generally, could take an example from this as a powerful model of strike/protest actions moving outside the status quo. Similarly, the media could take this as an example that the internet is indeed at least of equivalent importance to television, and that the writers should be compensated for their internet work.
The best one I've found thus far--"Not the Daily Show" starring One of the Writers:
The best one I've found thus far--"Not the Daily Show" starring One of the Writers:
Thursday, November 15, 2007
News round up in a bad day for America
Two articles jump out at me this morning as I peruse the daily news:
First, the U.S. has fallen to 15th in average worker income.
And second, in what I can only hope is un-related news, the U.S. has been called a haven for war criminals.
It's fun to put news stries side-by-side and wonder about the state of this nation.
In a bit of slightly positive news, the Edwards campaign has said that if elected, he will introduce a bill that would strip Congress of their healthcare until they institute universal healhcare.
Now it's not a very good plan in that it still allows for insurance companies to rape and pillage, but it is a serious attempt from a recognized candidate to force the issue of single payer healthcare, which is a pretty big sea change from only a decade ago.
First, the U.S. has fallen to 15th in average worker income.
And second, in what I can only hope is un-related news, the U.S. has been called a haven for war criminals.
It's fun to put news stries side-by-side and wonder about the state of this nation.
In a bit of slightly positive news, the Edwards campaign has said that if elected, he will introduce a bill that would strip Congress of their healthcare until they institute universal healhcare.
Now it's not a very good plan in that it still allows for insurance companies to rape and pillage, but it is a serious attempt from a recognized candidate to force the issue of single payer healthcare, which is a pretty big sea change from only a decade ago.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
What have I become?
Last night, while reading a book I might include in the syllabus I'm preparing, I checked an end note. You know, the little number that appears after every so many sentences in academic books that corresponds to a number in the back of the book in the midst of a bewildering collection of diagrams, notes, and 10 point font.
And while I excitedly checked to see what book was being refferenced in the text, I stopped myself and wondered aloud how I had gotten to this moment. Here I was, nerdily flipping to the back of the book to find out what was cited. Not only that, but I was actually interested. I had followed the author's aside and honestly wanted to know where this information was coming from.
Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with being excited about learning. Being a grad student, I would pretty much have to be a nerd who's excited about learning, or I never would have made it this far. But even I have limits. Even I have sighed loudly with relief upon noticing that the last 20 pages of the chapter I've been assigned are actually the end notes, meaning it's 20 pages less of reading. I've always pondered the very existance of such notes, knowing, just knowing deep down in my heart that no one but no one actually reads these things.
I mean, what the hell could be back there that would be worth searching through all of those notes, tucked away between the index (useful) and research design(whaa?!?)? The cure for cancer? The recipie for a low-fat brownie that doesn't let you down in the flavor department? What Meatloaf wouldn't do for love? I had always figured they were just a way to pad page numbers, built on the flawless assumption that you get paid more for writing a bigger book (though I still think that might be true).
But now here I am. Here I sit before God and all of you, my faithful reader(s), and admit that I have read an end note. But not only read it; I have seriously considered going out and finding the book refferenced.
How the hell did I get to this point? Man, graduate school is a weird process.
And while I excitedly checked to see what book was being refferenced in the text, I stopped myself and wondered aloud how I had gotten to this moment. Here I was, nerdily flipping to the back of the book to find out what was cited. Not only that, but I was actually interested. I had followed the author's aside and honestly wanted to know where this information was coming from.
Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with being excited about learning. Being a grad student, I would pretty much have to be a nerd who's excited about learning, or I never would have made it this far. But even I have limits. Even I have sighed loudly with relief upon noticing that the last 20 pages of the chapter I've been assigned are actually the end notes, meaning it's 20 pages less of reading. I've always pondered the very existance of such notes, knowing, just knowing deep down in my heart that no one but no one actually reads these things.
I mean, what the hell could be back there that would be worth searching through all of those notes, tucked away between the index (useful) and research design(whaa?!?)? The cure for cancer? The recipie for a low-fat brownie that doesn't let you down in the flavor department? What Meatloaf wouldn't do for love? I had always figured they were just a way to pad page numbers, built on the flawless assumption that you get paid more for writing a bigger book (though I still think that might be true).
But now here I am. Here I sit before God and all of you, my faithful reader(s), and admit that I have read an end note. But not only read it; I have seriously considered going out and finding the book refferenced.
How the hell did I get to this point? Man, graduate school is a weird process.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Not sure what this means, but...
in yet another blatant bit of theivery from you-gun:
Congratulations. If you have ever read and understood my blog, you are apparently smart enough to graduate from high school. Or, conversely, I'm smart enough to write things that sound like I graduated from high school. I think the both of us should be notably proud of our collective accomplishment.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Happy Veterans Day
And as a reminder, those who have fought for our country and received debilitating physical and mental injuries are woefully under-cared for. For instance, my cousin was talked into an honorable discharge form the Navy one week shy of the time required for medical benefits. Now she's in third stage kidney failure and can't afford the bills, and our compassionate armed services have politely told her to fuck off.
Oh, and one of every four homeless people is a veteran. That pretty well sums up our collective level of commitment to them.
And I'm the one who doesn't support our troops...
Oh, and one of every four homeless people is a veteran. That pretty well sums up our collective level of commitment to them.
And I'm the one who doesn't support our troops...
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Race and Capital Punishment
In doing some work for Contexts, the "public sociology" journal that recently came here to Minnesota, I ran across some really interesting work on the death penalty. In addition to finding out that only 10% of those sentenced to death are ever actually executed (crazy, huh?), these two recent artciles by David Jacobs and friends had some pretty interesting findings.
Probably the most interesting was that civil-rights protests reduce both public support for and the number of executions, and are the most important factor in doing so. As a person who's had to answer the "why do you bother protesting? it's not going to change anything" qustion/annoyance several thousand times, that's a pretty comforting finding.
Another major finding in these two articles was that the death penalty is applied in an inherently racist way (surprise, surprise), but that it probably works differently than you think. While the race of the person convicted definitely matters, the race of the victim is the much bigger factor. Not surprisingly, those convicted of killing a white victim are far, far likelier to actually be executed than those sentenced to death for killing a black person.
Anyway, sometimes it's hard to write posts like this because if you still believe the death penalty isn't a racist form of state-sponsored murder, then you most likely live in a gumdrop house at the end of lollipop lane and frolic all day in the sugar cane forests with magic elves and pixies, and therefore scientific findings don't mean anything to you. But nonetheless, I think it's pretty interesting.
If you're a huge nerd and would like to find out more, check out these articles at your local library:
--Jacobs, David and Stephanie L. Kent. 2007. The Determinants of Executions since 1951: How Politics, Protests, Public Opinion, and Social Divisions Shape Capital Punishment. Social Problems 54 (3): 297-318
--Jacobs, David, Zhenchao Qian, Jason T. Carmichael, and Steaphnie L. Kent. 2007. Who Survives on Death Row? An Individual and Contextual Analysis American Sociological Review 72: 610-632
Probably the most interesting was that civil-rights protests reduce both public support for and the number of executions, and are the most important factor in doing so. As a person who's had to answer the "why do you bother protesting? it's not going to change anything" qustion/annoyance several thousand times, that's a pretty comforting finding.
Another major finding in these two articles was that the death penalty is applied in an inherently racist way (surprise, surprise), but that it probably works differently than you think. While the race of the person convicted definitely matters, the race of the victim is the much bigger factor. Not surprisingly, those convicted of killing a white victim are far, far likelier to actually be executed than those sentenced to death for killing a black person.
Anyway, sometimes it's hard to write posts like this because if you still believe the death penalty isn't a racist form of state-sponsored murder, then you most likely live in a gumdrop house at the end of lollipop lane and frolic all day in the sugar cane forests with magic elves and pixies, and therefore scientific findings don't mean anything to you. But nonetheless, I think it's pretty interesting.
If you're a huge nerd and would like to find out more, check out these articles at your local library:
--Jacobs, David and Stephanie L. Kent. 2007. The Determinants of Executions since 1951: How Politics, Protests, Public Opinion, and Social Divisions Shape Capital Punishment. Social Problems 54 (3): 297-318
--Jacobs, David, Zhenchao Qian, Jason T. Carmichael, and Steaphnie L. Kent. 2007. Who Survives on Death Row? An Individual and Contextual Analysis American Sociological Review 72: 610-632
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Why the Patriots actually suck, almost as bad as the insular media
Yet another football-related post.
Unfortunately, this past sunday, the Patriots beat the Colts 24-20, keeping their perfect season alive and allowing everyone at ESPN to open up a little bit wider and take the Patriots collective cock a bit further down their throat. Recently there was a good critique at the A/V Club about the problem with ESPN is that while it used to be a sympathetic yet good and critical outsider approach to sports (a la the New York Times) it has become a sycophantic sports-worship machine with posts filled by former athletes who will never question the game (a la the Wall Street Journal).
The current Patriots are a good case in point. The NFL is the un-disputed king of major league sports in America, but it jealously gaurds its place atop the sports mountain and is always clawing for new markets. And let us not forget the spectacular failure that has been their attempt to branch out into foreign markets, especially when compared with the success of baseball and basektball internationally. As such, the NFL, and it's underling ESPN, needs the Patriots. They need a team that's dominant, fun to watch, and yet ever-so-humble.
The problem is, the cracks are starting to show. For example, the Patriots are the most class-less team in all of professional sports, constantly running up the score. Two weeks ago, they even went for it on 4th and 1 with a 28 point lead in the 4th quarter, jsut to run up the score. What has the response been from the commentators at the major sports network? The consensus seems to be that if other teams have a problem with it, they should stop them. Much like the way I'm sure they would look at their mother getting raped on the street and say that if she has a problem with it, she should stop the guy, but that's fodder for a whole different post on the conservtaive individualism of sports broadcasting.
What no one seems to be pointing out (possibly because they've gotten a bit too cozy with each other) is the reason why the Patriots are so good:
Because they cheat.
They were caught illegally filming other team's practices to know their plays ahead of time. When they were caught, the league issued a fine and tried to bury the story, because as we've covered, they need the Patriots. But this does complicate the "if you don't like, play better" response: maybe the other teams (like the Colts) are playing well, but they aren't cheating.
And maybe we could cut out the praise of Bill Belicheck, the asshole who everyone thinks is a genius but already been proven to be nothing but a cheater with a bunch of good players. I think any coach could look like a genius if they knew what plays the other team was going to run.
For example, look at the coaches who have left. Remember how Charlie Weiss was an offensive genius? Well, now he's in charge of some of the greatest college football players in the nation, and yet cant score points to save his life, while the Fightin' Irish are en route to their worst season ever. Maybe it turns out that he's not so much as genius as it's really easy to look like one when you have the other guy's plays ahead of time.
All of which you think would make fodder for a great story, but not when the media needs this to go away just as much as the league does. Then there is no story. But the bigger problem is that when this happens with sports, it's annoying at worst. But the exact same process is going on with things that really matter (such as the impending war with Iran), and nobody's getting upset about that either. I guess it just goes to show that no one ever wants to question the motives of a Patriot, even when they're clearly lying.
UPDATE: Turns out Don Shula agrees with me.
Unfortunately, this past sunday, the Patriots beat the Colts 24-20, keeping their perfect season alive and allowing everyone at ESPN to open up a little bit wider and take the Patriots collective cock a bit further down their throat. Recently there was a good critique at the A/V Club about the problem with ESPN is that while it used to be a sympathetic yet good and critical outsider approach to sports (a la the New York Times) it has become a sycophantic sports-worship machine with posts filled by former athletes who will never question the game (a la the Wall Street Journal).
The current Patriots are a good case in point. The NFL is the un-disputed king of major league sports in America, but it jealously gaurds its place atop the sports mountain and is always clawing for new markets. And let us not forget the spectacular failure that has been their attempt to branch out into foreign markets, especially when compared with the success of baseball and basektball internationally. As such, the NFL, and it's underling ESPN, needs the Patriots. They need a team that's dominant, fun to watch, and yet ever-so-humble.
The problem is, the cracks are starting to show. For example, the Patriots are the most class-less team in all of professional sports, constantly running up the score. Two weeks ago, they even went for it on 4th and 1 with a 28 point lead in the 4th quarter, jsut to run up the score. What has the response been from the commentators at the major sports network? The consensus seems to be that if other teams have a problem with it, they should stop them. Much like the way I'm sure they would look at their mother getting raped on the street and say that if she has a problem with it, she should stop the guy, but that's fodder for a whole different post on the conservtaive individualism of sports broadcasting.
What no one seems to be pointing out (possibly because they've gotten a bit too cozy with each other) is the reason why the Patriots are so good:
Because they cheat.
They were caught illegally filming other team's practices to know their plays ahead of time. When they were caught, the league issued a fine and tried to bury the story, because as we've covered, they need the Patriots. But this does complicate the "if you don't like, play better" response: maybe the other teams (like the Colts) are playing well, but they aren't cheating.
And maybe we could cut out the praise of Bill Belicheck, the asshole who everyone thinks is a genius but already been proven to be nothing but a cheater with a bunch of good players. I think any coach could look like a genius if they knew what plays the other team was going to run.
For example, look at the coaches who have left. Remember how Charlie Weiss was an offensive genius? Well, now he's in charge of some of the greatest college football players in the nation, and yet cant score points to save his life, while the Fightin' Irish are en route to their worst season ever. Maybe it turns out that he's not so much as genius as it's really easy to look like one when you have the other guy's plays ahead of time.
All of which you think would make fodder for a great story, but not when the media needs this to go away just as much as the league does. Then there is no story. But the bigger problem is that when this happens with sports, it's annoying at worst. But the exact same process is going on with things that really matter (such as the impending war with Iran), and nobody's getting upset about that either. I guess it just goes to show that no one ever wants to question the motives of a Patriot, even when they're clearly lying.
UPDATE: Turns out Don Shula agrees with me.
Monday, November 05, 2007
Remember, Remember the 5th of November
On this day 402 years ago, a group of Catholics in London, assisted by explosives expert Guy Fawkes (pictured above as he may have looked if he were a bad-ass super hero) were foiled in their plot to blow up Parliament and thereby assassinate the king and most members of the protestant aristocracy. Check out the pretty good wikipedia entry here.
The move triggered some increased freedom for Catholics, although it would be another 200 years before Catholic emanciaption was finally brought to the United Kingdom. While it's still mostly celebrated as an English day of rememberance, it marks an important international turning point for the freedom of Catholics.
Guy Fawkes has over time become a sort of cult hero amongst some, especially after the release of Alan Moore's superb graphic novel and later not-so-superb movie V for Vandetta.
So mark the day today, for it's a nice day to remember. Suggested activities include fireworks (as they do in Britain, Canada, and a few other paces in the British Isles) or acts of terrorism against oppresive governments. They're both pretty, but require varying degrees of commitment.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Why this commie still watches football
Two words: Adrian Peterson.
If you did not watch the Vikings game today (possibly doing work that desperately needs to be done, unlike me) then you are a grade A sucka. Adrian Peterson just put on possibly the best game of football I've ever seen, and I've watched a fair amount of football for a chap my age.
For crying out loud, the man just set the NFL single-game ruching record as a rookie. I know the Vikes are not looking dood at all this season (hey, it's touch plyaing without a quarterback or reciving corps), but this paints a rather rosy picture for the franchise. I personally would argue they should call this a practice season, tank the rest of their games, and then pick up one of tha half-dozen really good QBs that are going to be in next year's draft. And before you laught at the suggestion, just note that fact that tanking last year and getting a top-10 pick has seemed to work out pretty damn well thus far.
Anyway, without getting too excited off a caffeine-buzz/home-team win, you've got to admit Peterson clearly has the potential to be one of the greatest, possibly even better than that LT guy on the other team who had a pretty lackluster day. It really makes me want to wax poetic about the beauty of the savage ballet that is football, but I just spent three hours loving every minute of it and am now painfully behind for the day.
But then again, the Colts/Pats game is just starting, and that could prove to be fairly entertaining as well...
If you did not watch the Vikings game today (possibly doing work that desperately needs to be done, unlike me) then you are a grade A sucka. Adrian Peterson just put on possibly the best game of football I've ever seen, and I've watched a fair amount of football for a chap my age.
For crying out loud, the man just set the NFL single-game ruching record as a rookie. I know the Vikes are not looking dood at all this season (hey, it's touch plyaing without a quarterback or reciving corps), but this paints a rather rosy picture for the franchise. I personally would argue they should call this a practice season, tank the rest of their games, and then pick up one of tha half-dozen really good QBs that are going to be in next year's draft. And before you laught at the suggestion, just note that fact that tanking last year and getting a top-10 pick has seemed to work out pretty damn well thus far.
Anyway, without getting too excited off a caffeine-buzz/home-team win, you've got to admit Peterson clearly has the potential to be one of the greatest, possibly even better than that LT guy on the other team who had a pretty lackluster day. It really makes me want to wax poetic about the beauty of the savage ballet that is football, but I just spent three hours loving every minute of it and am now painfully behind for the day.
But then again, the Colts/Pats game is just starting, and that could prove to be fairly entertaining as well...
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
You have got to be shitting me...
The Central Intelligence Agency has recently un-veiled it's new "terrorist buster" logo
Yes, this is the actual logo.
No, I'm not making this up.
Though it does explain a great deal. It must actually be that these people are not evil, there's simply a river of ectoplasm running under the Whitehouse, and Dick Cheney's body is actually posessed by the spirit of Vigo the Carpathian.
See, I knew these people couldn't actually be that crazy...
Yes, this is the actual logo.
No, I'm not making this up.
Though it does explain a great deal. It must actually be that these people are not evil, there's simply a river of ectoplasm running under the Whitehouse, and Dick Cheney's body is actually posessed by the spirit of Vigo the Carpathian.
See, I knew these people couldn't actually be that crazy...
Monday, October 29, 2007
Why I Love Free e-mail...
Surprisingly, it's not some angrily dogmatic Marxist celebration of equity. It's shit like the picture above. I think that woman is supposed to be dancing around sensuously to her favorite music...? I don't know, it's the best I can do to figure out what it's actually supposed to be. But seriously, give me a compelling argument as to why it isn't just some woman listening to music and smelling her armpits. Thank you, Yahoo! music services. I now know your music is so good it will make me want to smell my armpits. That's very informative and helpful.
But when you log into your Yahoo! page, you don't go straight to your inbox. That would simply be too ludicrous a function for an e-mail server. Rather, you go to some weird, nebulous void of internet space and are bombarded with today's headlines, sports scores, and all sorts of awkwardly dancing silhouettes who are presumably happy of the falling mortgage rates.
And these headlines I speak of? The most important news you will ever need to know. For example, through Yahoo! I have learned that New Orleans is one of the laziest cities in America. Out of respect, I will make no joke about evacuations. I'm saddened to report that it doesn't get any more rosy elsewhere. For example, you wouldn't ever want to relocate to Philadelphia, America's ugliest city.
Thank you, Yahoo! You and your disturbingly up-beat exclamation mark have made me the informed citizen I am today. And lose some weight, Philadelphia; you're getting even fatter than your lazy-ass brother, New Orleans.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
The City That Almost Was and Then Wasn't
Anybody get the Simpsons refernce in the title? Just checking to see if it's too obscure or not...
This past friday eve during my shift at the good ol' neighborhood radical info shop (though not the one in my neighborhood...not that it matters, but the kids are easily confused these days), I was pleasantly suprised by the screening of new documentary, Plagues and Pleasures on the Salton Sea.
It's a fascinating look at what can only be described a modern day ghost town (narrated by the legendary John Waters, none-the-less). The Salton Sea was formed accidentally at the run of the century by a design mistake in irrigation fields. It sat as a little-used curiosity until the 1950s, when an enterprising group of entrepreneurs attempted to turn it into a second Palm Springs (the actual Palm prings being only a few dozen miles away).
While it did indeed enjoy a brief period of immense popularity, a series of environmental and political disasters have decimated the once-thriving town. Now there are only a few thousand people who still cling to their bit of paradise amongst economic ruin. The towns surrounding the sea once again enjoy some popularity, but mostly with young skate-boarders taking advantage of the many empty swimming pools and free-spirits & those running from the law who come to enjoy the lack of supervision or really government in any form. In other words, it's basically a ghost town for the new millenium.
The few locals left largely match these visitors in both poverty and colorful personality. It's not all a rosy story, though, as both environmntal and geographic racism/classism figure prominently into the fate of the greater Salton region. It's an interesting meditation on what could have been and what sadly currently is. Highly recommend it. Check the website for a list of up-coming screenings or to just buy it, you cheap-ass. If you're in the Minneapolis area, fret not, while you may have missed it this weekend, it will be coming back in November.
And as a last word to get you to check it out, this screening (as are almost all of them) was attended by co-director Chris Metzler, who in addition to being talented film-maker, is possibly one of the nicest and most knowledgeable people you'll meet. It's simultaneously a funny, powerful, and heart-wrenching story of a bizarre piece of Ameicana. You could find many worse ways to fill up 75 minutes of your life.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Mojitos and State-Sponsored Terrorism
Recently, Bush has been stepping up the pressures on Cuba, calling for the "freeing" of the Cuban people. However, as a representative of the Cuban governtment, Felipe Pérez Roque, noted, this is really "an unprecedented escalation in the anti-Cuba policy" and an attempt at "the re-conquest of Cuba by force."
Humorously, Bush announced he was thinking about softening the 40+ year embargo so that religious philanthropy groups could bring computers into Cuba, a little odd for a nation with hundreds of thousands of computers and near-universal internet access.
Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think that Castro is a particularly great fella, and I'm completely for free and open elections as well as a free and independent media. There are many more ways in which one could validly criticise Castro, but to imply that the Cuban people are hampered or "backward" because of state socialism is completely laughable.
For example, Cuba has lower infant mortality rates and higher literacy rates than the United States of America. Yes, a tiny island nation under embargo from half of the world for the past half-century manages to have far-superior health and education systems than the richest and most powerful nation in the world. I'm still waiting for a convincing argument as to how this proves that socialism doesn't work.
But what makes Bush's latest round of threats even more odd is that they are explicitly the kind of terrorist tactics we're wasting trillions of dollars supposedly fighting in the Middle East. He's even go so far as to propose the creation of an "International Fund for the
Freedom of Cuba," to basically fund any and all attempts to overthrow Castro and instill a capitalist regime in Florida's peskiest neighbor.
In retalitaion, the Cuban government issued a statement of initiatives they could agree to support:
Humorously, Bush announced he was thinking about softening the 40+ year embargo so that religious philanthropy groups could bring computers into Cuba, a little odd for a nation with hundreds of thousands of computers and near-universal internet access.
Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think that Castro is a particularly great fella, and I'm completely for free and open elections as well as a free and independent media. There are many more ways in which one could validly criticise Castro, but to imply that the Cuban people are hampered or "backward" because of state socialism is completely laughable.
For example, Cuba has lower infant mortality rates and higher literacy rates than the United States of America. Yes, a tiny island nation under embargo from half of the world for the past half-century manages to have far-superior health and education systems than the richest and most powerful nation in the world. I'm still waiting for a convincing argument as to how this proves that socialism doesn't work.
But what makes Bush's latest round of threats even more odd is that they are explicitly the kind of terrorist tactics we're wasting trillions of dollars supposedly fighting in the Middle East. He's even go so far as to propose the creation of an "International Fund for the
Freedom of Cuba," to basically fund any and all attempts to overthrow Castro and instill a capitalist regime in Florida's peskiest neighbor.
In retalitaion, the Cuban government issued a statement of initiatives they could agree to support:
1. Respect for Cubans' right to their independence and sovereignty.
2. An immediate end to the policy of aggression and threat.
3. An end to intervention in Cuba's internal affairs and attempts to manufacture an internal opposition.
4. An end to subversive acts against Cuba and the dismantling of the radio and television that offend the name of the national hero (José MartÃ).
5. The immediate lifting of the blockade.
6. The elimination of the ban on travel to Cuba by U.S. citizens and family visits by Cubans living there.
7. An end to the stimulation of illegal emigration from Cuba. The repeal of the Cuban Adjustment Act and the fulfillment of the Migratory Agreements.
8. An end to the aggressive disinformation campaigns.
9. The release of the five anti-terrorist fighters, political prisoners in U.S. jails.
10. The extradition of the terrorist Luis Posada Carriles to Venezuela or his trial in the United States.
11. The immediate closure of the torture center he created on the Guantánamo Naval Base.
12. The cessation of pressure on the international community to support his anti-Cuba policy.
Again, say what you will about the Cuban government, but not only are these demands more rational than Bush's, they also comply with international law, which is supposedly "the supreme law of the land" according to the Constitution. I know, I know, but I'm still one of those people who foolishly believes the Constitution still exists for some purpose.
Anyway, just something to muse over this weekend...
Monday, October 22, 2007
Insular Academic Post on the Importance of Education
This post is complety irrelevant to those outside of academia (well, I could make an argument on how it's relevant, but you know), so unless you're an academic or really bored, this would be a good time to wander over to ebay and start bidding on velour jumpsuits. They're comfortable and stylish, and unlike this post, are appropriate for all occasions.
With that out of the way, we had a long and interesting discussion in my Sociology of Higher Educaiton class today about reading loads for undergraduate students. Some argued that in light of the many demands on today's undergraduate students, most notably the many hours they must work to afford higher education, we should keep readings light, some arguing for no more than 20 pages of reading a week. The argument goes that students are too busy to read anyway, so we may as well keep the readings short and really delve into them.
And there's definately something to be said for such arguments. After all, students are working more than ever (most of our Soc undergrads work an average of 20 hours a week) and it's always a challenge to balance breadth and depth.
When I noted that the actual problem is a capitalist system that doesn't value or fund education, everyone agreed, but the arguments didn't change. And while I'm always one to advocate for student needs, I find it extremely problematic that the solution is to de-value education even further.
The vast majority of students would never think of asking their employer to cut back on their hours of work because it is interfering with school. And they would certainly never ask for the same amount of pay for these reduced hours (though they really should). However, this is exactly what they're asking of us. They want the same degree and all of its inherent benefits, but with only a fraction of the work that was once expected.
The counter-argument that I can already hear is that they need the work to pay their bills and afford school. True, but if they completely sacrifice their education to pay for it, what purpose did it serve in the first place? Is their job washing dishes truly more important than their education?
Saying that we should reduce course workloads to accomidate students higher pay workloads simply serves to reinforce the idea that education is secondary to capitalist accumulation. The purpose of a college education is to learn, not to wash dishes, and not even to earn a piece of paper that allows you to get a better job upon completion. But instead of crititcally examining such issues, we instead wring our hands about how we can best stay out of the way of the neo-liberal pressures that our destroying our universities.
Of course, we could instead be debating how to best pressure administrators to cut tution, or how to convince elected officials to fully fund public education, or even more effectivley, how to end the capitalist economic relations that cause these tensions in the first place, but that's the kind of critical thinking we don't particularly care to encourage in higher education.
With that out of the way, we had a long and interesting discussion in my Sociology of Higher Educaiton class today about reading loads for undergraduate students. Some argued that in light of the many demands on today's undergraduate students, most notably the many hours they must work to afford higher education, we should keep readings light, some arguing for no more than 20 pages of reading a week. The argument goes that students are too busy to read anyway, so we may as well keep the readings short and really delve into them.
And there's definately something to be said for such arguments. After all, students are working more than ever (most of our Soc undergrads work an average of 20 hours a week) and it's always a challenge to balance breadth and depth.
When I noted that the actual problem is a capitalist system that doesn't value or fund education, everyone agreed, but the arguments didn't change. And while I'm always one to advocate for student needs, I find it extremely problematic that the solution is to de-value education even further.
The vast majority of students would never think of asking their employer to cut back on their hours of work because it is interfering with school. And they would certainly never ask for the same amount of pay for these reduced hours (though they really should). However, this is exactly what they're asking of us. They want the same degree and all of its inherent benefits, but with only a fraction of the work that was once expected.
The counter-argument that I can already hear is that they need the work to pay their bills and afford school. True, but if they completely sacrifice their education to pay for it, what purpose did it serve in the first place? Is their job washing dishes truly more important than their education?
Saying that we should reduce course workloads to accomidate students higher pay workloads simply serves to reinforce the idea that education is secondary to capitalist accumulation. The purpose of a college education is to learn, not to wash dishes, and not even to earn a piece of paper that allows you to get a better job upon completion. But instead of crititcally examining such issues, we instead wring our hands about how we can best stay out of the way of the neo-liberal pressures that our destroying our universities.
Of course, we could instead be debating how to best pressure administrators to cut tution, or how to convince elected officials to fully fund public education, or even more effectivley, how to end the capitalist economic relations that cause these tensions in the first place, but that's the kind of critical thinking we don't particularly care to encourage in higher education.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
The unintended positive of internet piracy
Like pretty much every other human being of my generation, I'm very pro-internet piracy. But it's not just the free music. Don't get me wrong, I hear the free music is great (but given recent events around here, I would like to make clear that I would never, ever do something as heinous as download music...), but I love internet piracy because I think it is going to save the future of American music.
The claim floated from the industry is that record sales are down because of internet downloading. Defenders of downloading claim that it's just the shitty music the industry is making, as record execs similarly opposed blank cassettes for home recording, MTv, and multiple other venues "destined" to destroy the industry. However, contrary to these previous claims, it seems that internet downloading could actually destroy the current state of record companies (but alas, even I can't dream big enough to think the record companies will be destroyed).
And I couldn't be happier. If the internet actually were to take all of the profit out of recorded music, it would do nothing but good for all of music. Think about it--the only way for performers to make money would be to go back to relentless touring that would provide a great, but not ridiculous, lifestyle. Would Justin Timberlake be in music if he could only keep an upper-middle class lifestyle through constant effort? Maybe, but I'm not entirely sure about it.
In fact, without the current star-production system, with performers being forced back into refining their playing skills instead of relying on pre-recorded music and highly-trained dance teams, performers wouldn't be able to fake their way into millions of dollars with little-to-no talent. Don't get me wrong, I like the spectacle of big stage shows. But there is a big difference between those who use lavish sets and pre-recorded clips to put on a consumate show (think Flaming Lips) and those who do the same to mask their bland and unimaginative music (think the entire Pop Tarts® Presents: American Idol Tour).
But it's even bigger than destroying pop stars (which would be great). At the heart of it, what I really yearn for is a return to music being connected ot the people. Maybe it's just my punk aesthetic left over from my younger days, but I find it hard to believe that anyone could possibly prefer stadium shows to intimate venues. I'm reminded of a story a good friend's uncle always tells of the time he saw Johnny Cash shooting up in a bathroom in a bar in Prarie Du Chien. It blows my mind to think that only 30 years ago many world-famous performers still made their living through relentless touring and building a fan base, instead of drinking Cristal from gold-platted chalices while occassionally recording music. It's inconceivable to think of running into a celebrity like that in such a situation now, because no musician that makes more than ten dollars a year would ever set foot in Prarie Du Chien, Wisconsin (not that I can blame them).
In the end, though, that's what it comes back to. I want my performers to be regular folk, who walk off-stage after the show and have a beer at the bar, instead of retiring to their grandiose tour van, protected from the people who pay their salary by dozens of beefy and angry security gaurds. In other words, it would be nice if mainstream musicians were human beings again, making music for and with their fans again.
The claim floated from the industry is that record sales are down because of internet downloading. Defenders of downloading claim that it's just the shitty music the industry is making, as record execs similarly opposed blank cassettes for home recording, MTv, and multiple other venues "destined" to destroy the industry. However, contrary to these previous claims, it seems that internet downloading could actually destroy the current state of record companies (but alas, even I can't dream big enough to think the record companies will be destroyed).
And I couldn't be happier. If the internet actually were to take all of the profit out of recorded music, it would do nothing but good for all of music. Think about it--the only way for performers to make money would be to go back to relentless touring that would provide a great, but not ridiculous, lifestyle. Would Justin Timberlake be in music if he could only keep an upper-middle class lifestyle through constant effort? Maybe, but I'm not entirely sure about it.
In fact, without the current star-production system, with performers being forced back into refining their playing skills instead of relying on pre-recorded music and highly-trained dance teams, performers wouldn't be able to fake their way into millions of dollars with little-to-no talent. Don't get me wrong, I like the spectacle of big stage shows. But there is a big difference between those who use lavish sets and pre-recorded clips to put on a consumate show (think Flaming Lips) and those who do the same to mask their bland and unimaginative music (think the entire Pop Tarts® Presents: American Idol Tour).
But it's even bigger than destroying pop stars (which would be great). At the heart of it, what I really yearn for is a return to music being connected ot the people. Maybe it's just my punk aesthetic left over from my younger days, but I find it hard to believe that anyone could possibly prefer stadium shows to intimate venues. I'm reminded of a story a good friend's uncle always tells of the time he saw Johnny Cash shooting up in a bathroom in a bar in Prarie Du Chien. It blows my mind to think that only 30 years ago many world-famous performers still made their living through relentless touring and building a fan base, instead of drinking Cristal from gold-platted chalices while occassionally recording music. It's inconceivable to think of running into a celebrity like that in such a situation now, because no musician that makes more than ten dollars a year would ever set foot in Prarie Du Chien, Wisconsin (not that I can blame them).
In the end, though, that's what it comes back to. I want my performers to be regular folk, who walk off-stage after the show and have a beer at the bar, instead of retiring to their grandiose tour van, protected from the people who pay their salary by dozens of beefy and angry security gaurds. In other words, it would be nice if mainstream musicians were human beings again, making music for and with their fans again.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Blog Action Day
So it's Blog Action Day, a day in which bloggers are supposed to all blog on the same issue as a way of raising awareness. This year's theme is "the environment." Yeah, it's that vague.
I don't ever want to discourage actions such as these. I mean, seeing as it's a basically no cost way to theoretically raise awareness about an important subject it's hard to call it a bad thing. But I say theoretically because I can't see too much awareness being raised by it. The problem with such blanket issue ideas like this is that they are of necessity watered-down. There's no way you can get a million bloggers to all agree on something unless it's pretty weak. For example, I highly doubt that the same amount of people would have agreed to blog on the issue if it were putting forth clear-cut calls for real change. Note that we're just supposed to blog about the environment, not call for an end to te capitalist organization of the world economy that is directly responsible for the majority of wasteful and harmful anti-environmental practices that are killing the earth.
Furthermore, there's always the self-selection process. Because of recent high-profile events surrounding the environment (up to and including the stupidest Nobel Peace Prize award since Hank Kissinger), there are very few people unaware of the current environmental crisis. In addition, it's become such a politicized issue that it's pretty likely all those who see a problem with the environment will gravitate to those blogs that speak to a need for change, and those who think global warming is just an anti-business communist plot will probably gravitate toward blogs that think we dont really need to do anything.
I'm sure many people will write some very moving, humorous, poetic, and/or brilliant screeds today on the need for action and environmental change. And those posts will be read primarily by people who agree with them. Which again is not to say that it's bad these people are writing these posts, but just that it will likely have very little effect, outside of possibly motivating already sympathetic peoples to be more resolved in their actions, which is certainly not a bad thing.
But one could argue that such events actualy have a harmful aspect to them as they focus on individual action instead of far-more effective collecive action. The danger in these days-of-action semi-movement types of action is that they allow many participants to feel not only that their participation in this day of blogging made a difference (which again is quite questionable) but that they are now absolved of responsibility for further action because they've done their part. I understand that a significant number of people blogging about the environment are seriosuly committed and will continue their struggles long after they've written their posts, but without a clear and agreed-upon set of demans, the impact of such days will be little more than some feel-good time for all involved.
Which is not a bad thing, but we should always keep in mind the distinction between actions that do good and actions that make us feel good. Both are important, but it can cause serious problems when people mistake one with the other.
But in the meantime, try to do something environmental today. Plant a tree, walk to work, recycle your shit, get those fancy long-lasting lightbulbs, start a compost pile, masturbate manually instead of with some sort of battery-powered device...whatever floats your boat. But if you're interested in making a real impact, why not try to track down a few people and get a real movement going.
So there, I've fulfilled my duty as a citizen of the blogosphere. Tomorrow: more wackiness and potty talk, with no mention of the environment what-so-ever.
I don't ever want to discourage actions such as these. I mean, seeing as it's a basically no cost way to theoretically raise awareness about an important subject it's hard to call it a bad thing. But I say theoretically because I can't see too much awareness being raised by it. The problem with such blanket issue ideas like this is that they are of necessity watered-down. There's no way you can get a million bloggers to all agree on something unless it's pretty weak. For example, I highly doubt that the same amount of people would have agreed to blog on the issue if it were putting forth clear-cut calls for real change. Note that we're just supposed to blog about the environment, not call for an end to te capitalist organization of the world economy that is directly responsible for the majority of wasteful and harmful anti-environmental practices that are killing the earth.
Furthermore, there's always the self-selection process. Because of recent high-profile events surrounding the environment (up to and including the stupidest Nobel Peace Prize award since Hank Kissinger), there are very few people unaware of the current environmental crisis. In addition, it's become such a politicized issue that it's pretty likely all those who see a problem with the environment will gravitate to those blogs that speak to a need for change, and those who think global warming is just an anti-business communist plot will probably gravitate toward blogs that think we dont really need to do anything.
I'm sure many people will write some very moving, humorous, poetic, and/or brilliant screeds today on the need for action and environmental change. And those posts will be read primarily by people who agree with them. Which again is not to say that it's bad these people are writing these posts, but just that it will likely have very little effect, outside of possibly motivating already sympathetic peoples to be more resolved in their actions, which is certainly not a bad thing.
But one could argue that such events actualy have a harmful aspect to them as they focus on individual action instead of far-more effective collecive action. The danger in these days-of-action semi-movement types of action is that they allow many participants to feel not only that their participation in this day of blogging made a difference (which again is quite questionable) but that they are now absolved of responsibility for further action because they've done their part. I understand that a significant number of people blogging about the environment are seriosuly committed and will continue their struggles long after they've written their posts, but without a clear and agreed-upon set of demans, the impact of such days will be little more than some feel-good time for all involved.
Which is not a bad thing, but we should always keep in mind the distinction between actions that do good and actions that make us feel good. Both are important, but it can cause serious problems when people mistake one with the other.
But in the meantime, try to do something environmental today. Plant a tree, walk to work, recycle your shit, get those fancy long-lasting lightbulbs, start a compost pile, masturbate manually instead of with some sort of battery-powered device...whatever floats your boat. But if you're interested in making a real impact, why not try to track down a few people and get a real movement going.
So there, I've fulfilled my duty as a citizen of the blogosphere. Tomorrow: more wackiness and potty talk, with no mention of the environment what-so-ever.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Seriously, though, are all Republicans closeted homosexuals? Part II of a never-ending series...
So, as I asked before, are all Republicans closeted homosexuals?
But I'm not being facetious anymore. Someone actually prove to me that it's not true. Once again we have a Liberty University grauate and former Jerry Fallwell employee dead with an...ahem...the fake version of a miniature piano player inside of him and a Christian children's clown who was also a 20-year veteran of the polcie force (where he was a youth-liason nonetheless) is found to be a child's molestor as much as a child's entertainer.
That makes these two gay-hating, ammendment-demanding, godhatesfags.com-reading, Fred Phelps-loving assholes numbers 1,079,892,914 and 1,079,892,915 on the list of moralizing Republicans found out to be really confused self-hating, super-hypocritical gay men.
But let's make something perfectly clear here: there's nothing wrong with the fact that these men are gay. And the fact that these men are gay is not what leads them such interesting and emberassing ends. But do you know what does lead them to such emberassing situations, like trying to find sex in a men's bathroom in the Humphrey-Nazi airport?
Well, it's two things. Some people have weird sexual kinks, and will get off from having sex in public bathrooms. But arguably a much bigger reason is that we have demoinzed homosexuality to such an extent that even in the year 2007 gays and lesbians can only live on the margins of society. But even worse than that is the fact that homosexuality is so demonized that homosexual men will be elected to the United States Senate on promises to harass and persecute homosexuals.
I feel like I'm starting to understand why Kurt Vonnegut always noted how emberassing it is to be human sometimes...
But I'm not being facetious anymore. Someone actually prove to me that it's not true. Once again we have a Liberty University grauate and former Jerry Fallwell employee dead with an...ahem...the fake version of a miniature piano player inside of him and a Christian children's clown who was also a 20-year veteran of the polcie force (where he was a youth-liason nonetheless) is found to be a child's molestor as much as a child's entertainer.
That makes these two gay-hating, ammendment-demanding, godhatesfags.com-reading, Fred Phelps-loving assholes numbers 1,079,892,914 and 1,079,892,915 on the list of moralizing Republicans found out to be really confused self-hating, super-hypocritical gay men.
But let's make something perfectly clear here: there's nothing wrong with the fact that these men are gay. And the fact that these men are gay is not what leads them such interesting and emberassing ends. But do you know what does lead them to such emberassing situations, like trying to find sex in a men's bathroom in the Humphrey-Nazi airport?
Well, it's two things. Some people have weird sexual kinks, and will get off from having sex in public bathrooms. But arguably a much bigger reason is that we have demoinzed homosexuality to such an extent that even in the year 2007 gays and lesbians can only live on the margins of society. But even worse than that is the fact that homosexuality is so demonized that homosexual men will be elected to the United States Senate on promises to harass and persecute homosexuals.
I feel like I'm starting to understand why Kurt Vonnegut always noted how emberassing it is to be human sometimes...
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
The last horse crosses the finish line on Gnarls Barkley
So I kind of missed the whole Gnarls Barkley thing. I mean, I always meant to go out and pick it up, but it never really happened for many reasons. A combination of the fact that I'm lazy and I rarely make a point to rush out and buy big-label albums. Besides, by the time I got around to the record story, Crazy became passé and I was sick of it anyway, and then the public moved on and I had just kind of missed the phenomenon.
But now that I’ve finally listened to the album, I think I can honesly argue that it is the most necessary hip-hop album to come along in a long while, especially given the current state of top-40 radio rap. To actually see two guys making intersting music that actually steps outside the status quo of repititious hi-hats, cheesy synth samples, and ignorant lyrics about nothing puts a glimmer of hope into what is becoming one of the most co-opted art forms we've seen in quite some time. It's not just the wild, shirtless lyrics of Ce-Loo, or the bong-rattling bass courtesy of Danger Mouse, or even the competent drum work of the Roland 808. It's the fact that these guys are actually going out on a limb to make interesting music, when either one of them could easily sit inside the mainstream and cash checks pretty much as long as they feel like it.
It's also been fascinating to see how the music establishment has handled these cats. I can't even count the number of reviewers who have had aneurisms trying to figure out what these guys are doing. They want to consider them white guys, because only white people take rap in weird directions (goes the conventional wisdom), but both of them have such street cred that they have to be accepted as "real" members of hip hop. One reviewer, in trying to solve this paradox, figured their careers must be on the down turn, even pitying Cee-Lo for being reduced to doing "college" rap, in one of the more inventive ways I've ever heard anyone challenge somone's racial identity.
Theoretically, their due to release a follw-up in the ambiguous "late 2007" so it remains to be seen what direction they go in the second time around. Even more interesting, though, will be to see if their album has any kind of impact on the direction of mainstream hip hop, or if they remain relegated forever to white kid bin...sorry, the "college" sound.
But now that I’ve finally listened to the album, I think I can honesly argue that it is the most necessary hip-hop album to come along in a long while, especially given the current state of top-40 radio rap. To actually see two guys making intersting music that actually steps outside the status quo of repititious hi-hats, cheesy synth samples, and ignorant lyrics about nothing puts a glimmer of hope into what is becoming one of the most co-opted art forms we've seen in quite some time. It's not just the wild, shirtless lyrics of Ce-Loo, or the bong-rattling bass courtesy of Danger Mouse, or even the competent drum work of the Roland 808. It's the fact that these guys are actually going out on a limb to make interesting music, when either one of them could easily sit inside the mainstream and cash checks pretty much as long as they feel like it.
It's also been fascinating to see how the music establishment has handled these cats. I can't even count the number of reviewers who have had aneurisms trying to figure out what these guys are doing. They want to consider them white guys, because only white people take rap in weird directions (goes the conventional wisdom), but both of them have such street cred that they have to be accepted as "real" members of hip hop. One reviewer, in trying to solve this paradox, figured their careers must be on the down turn, even pitying Cee-Lo for being reduced to doing "college" rap, in one of the more inventive ways I've ever heard anyone challenge somone's racial identity.
Theoretically, their due to release a follw-up in the ambiguous "late 2007" so it remains to be seen what direction they go in the second time around. Even more interesting, though, will be to see if their album has any kind of impact on the direction of mainstream hip hop, or if they remain relegated forever to white kid bin...sorry, the "college" sound.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
When does schadenfreude become regular freude?
Notre Dame is terrible this year. After dropping their first five games in rather emberassing fashion, they are 0-5 for the first time in school history (of course, this comes immediately after starting 0-4 for the first time ever). With their next three games, respectively, at UCLA and then at home against #12 BC and then #2 USC, it looks like they won't start winning anytime soon. In fact, it would be fortunate at this point for the Irish to finish 3-9, but even that isn't seeming entirely likely.
And I couldn't be happier. It's not just because Notre Dame has always been the most over-rated team in all of college athletics (quick: name the last bowl game they won), but they're also uncomfortably racist. Let me explain.
A few years ago, the Irish were terrible as usual, so they brought in young coach Ty Willingham. After a great first season, in which the Irish started 8-0 and Willingham won multiple awards, he struggled the next two season with the team finishing 5-7 and 6-5 in the following years. After these mixed results in this short term, he was fired. Now it's widely known that if a coach only has three years at a program, he never really had a chance. It's simply the nature of college recruiting--Willingham, for better or for worse, was really playing with a team his predecessor put together. But Willingham already had a big strike against him, namely that he was the first black head coach in the history of a rather, how do we put this politely, lilly white school.
After Willingham was villified and run out of town, ND settle don a newer, whiter coach who happened to have made up most of his resume, but Notre Dame apparently doesn't really check into things like that. Afer he was let go (and then taken in by the Vikes...motto: "We Don't Judge"), they made the move to Charlie Weiss, a man who has more in bosoms than in head coaching experience, but was also white.
And Wies also had a great first season, also using his predecessors (this would be Ty Willingham's) recruits. But what happens when a white coach has a good first year? Well, for some reason, the white guy gets a unprecendented 10-year, $30 million contract. Even after the Irish once again proved how over-rated they were by getting their asses handed to them by LSU in Sugar Bowl, Weis was the golden boy in South Bend. The term genius has been thrown about more than actual footballs, which may explain why the Irish are doing so terribly once again.
But what's happening now that Weis is using his own recruits? Well, it turns out he may not be the genius that everyone seemed to think he was. In fact, he may not even know what the game of football is, judging by the incredibly inept play of his star-studded roster.
So now we can only wait and see how racist the administrators and alumni of Notre Dame are. The black guy was run out on a rail for going 6-5 in his third year. What happens when the white guy does even worse? Stay tuned...
And I couldn't be happier. It's not just because Notre Dame has always been the most over-rated team in all of college athletics (quick: name the last bowl game they won), but they're also uncomfortably racist. Let me explain.
A few years ago, the Irish were terrible as usual, so they brought in young coach Ty Willingham. After a great first season, in which the Irish started 8-0 and Willingham won multiple awards, he struggled the next two season with the team finishing 5-7 and 6-5 in the following years. After these mixed results in this short term, he was fired. Now it's widely known that if a coach only has three years at a program, he never really had a chance. It's simply the nature of college recruiting--Willingham, for better or for worse, was really playing with a team his predecessor put together. But Willingham already had a big strike against him, namely that he was the first black head coach in the history of a rather, how do we put this politely, lilly white school.
After Willingham was villified and run out of town, ND settle don a newer, whiter coach who happened to have made up most of his resume, but Notre Dame apparently doesn't really check into things like that. Afer he was let go (and then taken in by the Vikes...motto: "We Don't Judge"), they made the move to Charlie Weiss, a man who has more in bosoms than in head coaching experience, but was also white.
And Wies also had a great first season, also using his predecessors (this would be Ty Willingham's) recruits. But what happens when a white coach has a good first year? Well, for some reason, the white guy gets a unprecendented 10-year, $30 million contract. Even after the Irish once again proved how over-rated they were by getting their asses handed to them by LSU in Sugar Bowl, Weis was the golden boy in South Bend. The term genius has been thrown about more than actual footballs, which may explain why the Irish are doing so terribly once again.
But what's happening now that Weis is using his own recruits? Well, it turns out he may not be the genius that everyone seemed to think he was. In fact, he may not even know what the game of football is, judging by the incredibly inept play of his star-studded roster.
So now we can only wait and see how racist the administrators and alumni of Notre Dame are. The black guy was run out on a rail for going 6-5 in his third year. What happens when the white guy does even worse? Stay tuned...
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
What have I been up to lately? Apparently the answer is "nothing interesting"
I've been pretty bad about keeping up with the regular updates lately. But it's not out of spite, or even out of a general laziness that permeates all that I do. Rather, I've just been really, really busy. Not busy doing anything interesting, or I'd have all sorts of blog posts on the interesting things I've been doing.
So instead of trying to figure out somehting interesting to write about from my rather un-intersting life, I figured I'd give the people what they want: Bill O'Reilly acting like a complete jackass. Apparently, he has a hard time believing that that black people can eat dinner without swearing.
Read it. It's well worth your time. Then, when you're done reading it, remember that this guy is one of the highest rated news anchors in America, and ponder what that means for the fate of our dear nation.
So instead of trying to figure out somehting interesting to write about from my rather un-intersting life, I figured I'd give the people what they want: Bill O'Reilly acting like a complete jackass. Apparently, he has a hard time believing that that black people can eat dinner without swearing.
Read it. It's well worth your time. Then, when you're done reading it, remember that this guy is one of the highest rated news anchors in America, and ponder what that means for the fate of our dear nation.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
They're nothing but a bunch of sumbitches, I tell you...
In yet another sickening development, this morning President Bruininks, Provost Sullivan, and the Board of Regents sent a student to the hospital.
Background? Several students, faculty, and staff have been on a hunger strike since monday, vowing not to eat until the U finally gives AFSCME a fair contract. This morning, one hunger striker (I'm going to withhold the name until we find out how they're doing) collapsed and was taken to the emergency room. Updates have been hard to come by, but I'll keep you all posted.
If you would like to give a call to any of these folks and ask them why they are sending students to the hospital because they refuse to pay their workers the money allocated to them, you can contact them at the following places:
Please note that by including their home addressess, I'm am NOT advocating any illegal activity. But if you'd like to stop by in a very neighborly way and ask them for a cup of sugar and decent wages, by all means, feel free
Update: Check out the hunger strikers website.
"Honorable" Patricia S. Simmons
Chair
600 McNamara Alumni Center
200 Oak Street SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455-2020
(507) 289-0616
simmons@umn.edu
"Honorable" Anthony R. Baraga
Box 26
Side Lake, MN 55781
(218) 254-3559
baraga@umn.edu
"Honorable" Dallas Bohnsack
5550 Bohnsack Way
New Prague, MN 56071
(952) 758-2140
bohnsack@umn.edu
"Honorable" Maureen Cisneros
1062 Ottawa Avenue
West St. Paul, MN 55118
(651) 353-2387
cisneros@umn.edu
"Honorable" Linda Cohen
2402 Oakland Road
Minnetonka, MN 55305
(952) 544-1817
lacohen@umn.edu
"Honorable" John Frobenius
3008 Dunbar Road
St. Cloud, MN 56301
(320) 255-9951
froben@umn.edu
"Honorable" Clyde E. Allen, Jr.
Vice Chair
318 44th Avenue S.
Moorhead, MN 56560
(218) 236-7213
allen190@umn.edu
"Honorable" Venora Hung
2445 Manchester Drive
Golden Valley, MN 55422
(612) 625-6300
hung0025@umn.edu
"Honorable" Steven D. Hunter
175 Aurora Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55103
(651) 227-7647
sdhunter@umn.edu
"Honorable" Dean Johnson
3228 Eagle Ridge Drive W
Willmar, MN 56201
(320) 235-6815
djohns@umn.edu
"Honorable" David M. Larson
Cargill, Incorporated
15615 McGinty Road W
Wayzata, MN 55391
(952) 742-7411
dmlarson@umn.edu
"Honorable" David R. Metzen
273 Salem Church Road
Sunfish Lake, MN 55118
(651) 455-3020
metze002@umn.edu
President Bruininks
bruin001@umn.edu
Office Address: Ofc Of the President
202 MorH
100 Church St SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
612-626-1616
Provost Sullivan
sulli059@umn.edu
Office Address: Acad Affairs and Provost
234 Morrill Hall
100 Church St SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
612-625-0051
Background? Several students, faculty, and staff have been on a hunger strike since monday, vowing not to eat until the U finally gives AFSCME a fair contract. This morning, one hunger striker (I'm going to withhold the name until we find out how they're doing) collapsed and was taken to the emergency room. Updates have been hard to come by, but I'll keep you all posted.
If you would like to give a call to any of these folks and ask them why they are sending students to the hospital because they refuse to pay their workers the money allocated to them, you can contact them at the following places:
Please note that by including their home addressess, I'm am NOT advocating any illegal activity. But if you'd like to stop by in a very neighborly way and ask them for a cup of sugar and decent wages, by all means, feel free
Update: Check out the hunger strikers website.
"Honorable" Patricia S. Simmons
Chair
600 McNamara Alumni Center
200 Oak Street SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455-2020
(507) 289-0616
simmons@umn.edu
"Honorable" Anthony R. Baraga
Box 26
Side Lake, MN 55781
(218) 254-3559
baraga@umn.edu
"Honorable" Dallas Bohnsack
5550 Bohnsack Way
New Prague, MN 56071
(952) 758-2140
bohnsack@umn.edu
"Honorable" Maureen Cisneros
1062 Ottawa Avenue
West St. Paul, MN 55118
(651) 353-2387
cisneros@umn.edu
"Honorable" Linda Cohen
2402 Oakland Road
Minnetonka, MN 55305
(952) 544-1817
lacohen@umn.edu
"Honorable" John Frobenius
3008 Dunbar Road
St. Cloud, MN 56301
(320) 255-9951
froben@umn.edu
"Honorable" Clyde E. Allen, Jr.
Vice Chair
318 44th Avenue S.
Moorhead, MN 56560
(218) 236-7213
allen190@umn.edu
"Honorable" Venora Hung
2445 Manchester Drive
Golden Valley, MN 55422
(612) 625-6300
hung0025@umn.edu
"Honorable" Steven D. Hunter
175 Aurora Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55103
(651) 227-7647
sdhunter@umn.edu
"Honorable" Dean Johnson
3228 Eagle Ridge Drive W
Willmar, MN 56201
(320) 235-6815
djohns@umn.edu
"Honorable" David M. Larson
Cargill, Incorporated
15615 McGinty Road W
Wayzata, MN 55391
(952) 742-7411
dmlarson@umn.edu
"Honorable" David R. Metzen
273 Salem Church Road
Sunfish Lake, MN 55118
(651) 455-3020
metze002@umn.edu
President Bruininks
bruin001@umn.edu
Office Address: Ofc Of the President
202 MorH
100 Church St SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
612-626-1616
Provost Sullivan
sulli059@umn.edu
Office Address: Acad Affairs and Provost
234 Morrill Hall
100 Church St SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
612-625-0051
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
The next best thing...
Baseball fans in Minnesota are more than familiar with Legovision, the far-superior mode of watching highlights. However, with Bat Girl's saddening departure from the scene, we've been left with nothing.
Until now. Check out the infamous Mookie Wilson v. Bill Buckner showdown rendered in exquisite 8-bit glory, courtesy of RBI baseball and people with too much time on their hands. Go about 7'15" in for the infamous play.
Until now. Check out the infamous Mookie Wilson v. Bill Buckner showdown rendered in exquisite 8-bit glory, courtesy of RBI baseball and people with too much time on their hands. Go about 7'15" in for the infamous play.
Friday, September 07, 2007
Shutting down the Board of Regents, 101
In a community-service learning project this morning, the Student Solidarity Committee stormed the weekly Board of Regents meeting with the demand that the University meet the terms the striking AFSCME clerical, technical, and medical staff have asked for.
During a question and answer session, one student asked president Bob Bruininks why he won't give the workers a decent wage. When the Board refused to acknowledge the question, the students chanted "Shame on you! Shame on you! Give a fair contract at the U!" at which point in time the Board cowardly fled the room rather than answer for their money-grubbing practices. Then 5 of the demonstrators were arrested apparently for being the 5 closest to the police, because no explanation was given as to why 5 random people from the crowd of over 100 were arrested.
One board member, Steven Hunter, had the guts to stay and talk to the students, though it must be noted that he is the Treasurer/Secretary of the AFL-CIO in Minnesota. Through him, the students negotiated a truce with the Board that held that the students would sit quietly and not disrupt the meeting as long as the Board agreed to at least discuss the strike.
When the Board members finally returned to the room almost an hour later, Hunter read a weak, 3 minute long statement about how all sides want the strike to end as soon as possible, and that maybe the U should think about giving the workers a decent wage. After this, Board of Regents Chair Patricia Simmons called the meeting back to its regular schedule. When the students became upset at the bold-face lie of the Board in its refusal to even discuss the strike and began chanting "Shame on you!", the Board cowardly fled again down a back elevator to a van waiting for them and called off the rest of their meeting.
All of the students then left with a vague sense of wonder as to why the Board of Regents can't even answer the simple question of why they refuse to intervene on behalf of the workers, who are only asking for the pay the state Legislature already earmarked for them.
This may not be the last the Board hears form the Student Solidarity Committee...
If you'd like to be involved in the strike, please come to the weekly community Strike Support meeting at strike headquarters (University Baptist Church, at the corner of 13th and University) and/or come to the next meeting of the Student Solidarity Committee this monday at 4:30 at May Day books (in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood)
During a question and answer session, one student asked president Bob Bruininks why he won't give the workers a decent wage. When the Board refused to acknowledge the question, the students chanted "Shame on you! Shame on you! Give a fair contract at the U!" at which point in time the Board cowardly fled the room rather than answer for their money-grubbing practices. Then 5 of the demonstrators were arrested apparently for being the 5 closest to the police, because no explanation was given as to why 5 random people from the crowd of over 100 were arrested.
One board member, Steven Hunter, had the guts to stay and talk to the students, though it must be noted that he is the Treasurer/Secretary of the AFL-CIO in Minnesota. Through him, the students negotiated a truce with the Board that held that the students would sit quietly and not disrupt the meeting as long as the Board agreed to at least discuss the strike.
When the Board members finally returned to the room almost an hour later, Hunter read a weak, 3 minute long statement about how all sides want the strike to end as soon as possible, and that maybe the U should think about giving the workers a decent wage. After this, Board of Regents Chair Patricia Simmons called the meeting back to its regular schedule. When the students became upset at the bold-face lie of the Board in its refusal to even discuss the strike and began chanting "Shame on you!", the Board cowardly fled again down a back elevator to a van waiting for them and called off the rest of their meeting.
All of the students then left with a vague sense of wonder as to why the Board of Regents can't even answer the simple question of why they refuse to intervene on behalf of the workers, who are only asking for the pay the state Legislature already earmarked for them.
This may not be the last the Board hears form the Student Solidarity Committee...
If you'd like to be involved in the strike, please come to the weekly community Strike Support meeting at strike headquarters (University Baptist Church, at the corner of 13th and University) and/or come to the next meeting of the Student Solidarity Committee this monday at 4:30 at May Day books (in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood)
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Fuck Univeristy Intimidation
I received the following e-mail form a lackey of Provost Sullivan today:
To which I sent the following reply:
I know it will not amount to anything (or even be read by anyone), but I figure if they can threaten us for no reason, well, the least I can do is threaten them right back.
But as always, for more info, be sure to check out uworkers.org for updates.
Also, if you can spare it, be sure to donate to the strike fund. The union doesn't have a pre-existing strike fund for its workers, so many of these folks are going on strike knowing full well that they may not be getting a paycheck for sometime now. The least you can do is chip in a few bucks and help out, ain't it?
Dear Jesse
Executive Vice President and Provost Tom Sullivan asked that our office respond to your concerns about the email you received from him regarding possible strike issues. The purpose of the email was to be as informative as possible with respect to both the legal obligations and University expectations of all those with teaching responsibilities.
The Public Employment Labor Relations Act (PELRA) explicitly requires non-striking University of Minnesota employees to report to work in the event of a strike by another union. In addition, under PELRA, non-striking University employees who refuse to report to work as directed, are absent from any portion of their work assignment without permission, or who abstain wholly or in part from the full performance of their duties, are considered to be engaged in an illegal sympathy strike and are subject to discipline. The reasons for requiring classes to be held on campus, and the University's expectations in that regard, are set forth in the email you received, and we expect those University employees with teaching responsibilities to carry them out as assigned.
We certainly appreciate your and others' desire to be supportive of the striking employees. However, you must do so consistent with your University obligations. The two are not mutually exclusive. We encourage you to explore other ways in which you can lend your support to the strikers while fulfilling your assigned teaching obligations.
Shelley Carthen Watson
Associate General Counsel
University of Minnesota
360 McNamara Alumni Center
200 Oak Street SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Phone: 612/624-4100 Fax: 612/626-9624
To which I sent the following reply:
This is an interesting stance that the University has taken, but it is both morally reprehensible and legally questionable. While I'm well familiar with PELRA, it in no way applies to the current situation.
By taking classes off-campus we are not striking. A strike would be a refusal to work, e.g. not holding class. We are instead following our legal right to not cross a legally recognized picket line. It is actually the University who would be in violation of PELRA by disciplining faculty and staff who refuse to cross a legal picket line.
Furthermore, there has been no explanation of why this rule has not been enforced before. If there is something about the University course that it must be taught on-campus at all times, why have not the many faculty who have previously taken classes off-campus been disciplined? I have personally had multiple professors hold classes off-campus for a variety of reasons, but nothing ever happened and they most certainly did not receieve thinly veiled threats from the Provost.
It is incredibly humorous that the University officials paint themselves as the ones operating in the parameter of the law when you are implying that you will fire anyone who practices their completely legal right to not cross a legally recognized picket line.
If I were you folks, I'd start worrying about counter legal action, because there are far more people than me who are upset about the University illegally trying to pressure us into crossing picket lines.
Or, you know, you could develop a heart or even the most basic level of human compassion and simply pay these people a living wage. Either one is fine by me.
Sincerely,
Jesse Wozniak
I know it will not amount to anything (or even be read by anyone), but I figure if they can threaten us for no reason, well, the least I can do is threaten them right back.
But as always, for more info, be sure to check out uworkers.org for updates.
Also, if you can spare it, be sure to donate to the strike fund. The union doesn't have a pre-existing strike fund for its workers, so many of these folks are going on strike knowing full well that they may not be getting a paycheck for sometime now. The least you can do is chip in a few bucks and help out, ain't it?
Saturday, September 01, 2007
This one is for the li'l guys
I'm sure you've already heard this, but in case you haven't, the back-to-back Football Championship Subdivision (f/k/a I-AA) Appalachian State Mountaineers won a shocker over national powerhouse #5-ranked Michigan 34-32.
Coming from an FCS school (that has produced two NFL MVPs in the past 15 years), I couldn't be more happy. I've often held that the best of our league could hold their own against the best of the big kids league. And today, the ol' App Mountaineers proved it to be true.
So the sincerest thank you from the bottom of my heart to those guys, for giving fans of the little guy something to hang their hat on for quite some time to come.
Go Mountaineers!
Coming from an FCS school (that has produced two NFL MVPs in the past 15 years), I couldn't be more happy. I've often held that the best of our league could hold their own against the best of the big kids league. And today, the ol' App Mountaineers proved it to be true.
So the sincerest thank you from the bottom of my heart to those guys, for giving fans of the little guy something to hang their hat on for quite some time to come.
Go Mountaineers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)