Tuesday, August 05, 2008

StartLogic and Me, Part 1

The following is a tech support exchange that I’ve been having with Startlogic concerning a three week old issue with this site and two other websites I own. The time span here is about two weeks. There’s more to come as this fiasco progresses, including a video of it all if I get around to adding narration.

The frustration level here is indescribable and can only be demonstrated with the actual exchanges. The “it’s working fine now” responses from Startlogic - after I’ve told them at almost every turn that the problem is intermittent - pretty much says it all.

You will notice in my second response that I plead with them: “Please, I don’t want to get into this game of repeating myself to different techs every time.” I’ve played this game with Startlogic technical support countless times over the past three and a half years. Why? Because their techs simply do not read earlier updates to an ongoing ticket, and different techs handle each separate update to a ticket. It’s the most asinine and inefficient way to do virtually anything, but that’s the Startlogic way I guess.

This particular support ticket began on July 22nd and is still ongoing. The actual transcript of the whole thing is 9 pages long and growing. At some point this site may be down for a period of time either due to Startlogic pulling this site because of bad publicity - yes, apparently it is legal for them to engage in such censorship - or due to my transferring of this domain to a new hosting company. Oh well, here we go....

NOTE: the following is by no means the full ticket thread, only selections. To provide the full ticket thread would certainly crash their servers…

Startlogic
Thank you for contacting us. I have checked by accessing the Web site B1 and it is working fine now.

Me
Great, but the following sites are now having the same problems: C1 & D1. I haven’t touched these sites in months, and like B1, this problem comes and goes. There’s no apparent pattern here - sometimes they load, sometimes they don’t…

Startlogic
Thank you for contacting us. I checked your Web site again and I could access it without any issues. It is working fine. I did not get “500 internal server error” message.

Me
Did you read my update/summary at 3:01 PM EDT? The problem is not constant. My web surfing works spectacularly with all other websites that I visit. Please, I don’t want to get into this game of repeating myself to different techs every time.

Startlogic
Thank you for contacting Support. Our engineers have looked into the issue and the site was loading fine at the time they looked at it.

Me
Have you read anything I’ve posted thus far. I’ve already pointed out that this is an intermittent problem. I’ve just checked my site and the initial loading of the index page took c.45 seconds to load, and the internal links are not loading at all.

Startlogic
We have now noticed that the domains at the URLs B1, C1 and D1.com are currently working fine.

Me
I can’t believe this. I’m talking to a wall. FYI - B1 didn’t load at all. On the second attempt at loading, I received the following error message: “Database Error: Unable to connect to your database. Your database appears to be turned off or the database connection settings in your config file are not correct. Please contact your hosting provider if the problem persists.”

Startlogic
The Web sites: B1 , C1 , D1 are now working fine.

Me
Wow, unbelievable… Ok, let’s try once again. I’m still getting the database error message: “Database Error: Unable to connect to your database. Your database appears to be turned off or the database connection settings in your config file are not correct. Please contact your hosting provider if the problem persists.” The time I checked was 6:38 pm through 6:45 pm. At the present time it simply isn’t loading at all.

Startlogic
Thank you for contacting us. We apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you. The Web site: B1 is now working fine.

Me
You’re not understanding the nature of the problem here. My site (B1) intermittently displays errors messages - already described. To say that my site is *now* working fine because someone just checked it means very little because it will not be working fine a few minutes later. I am currently experiencing this intermittency - my site did not load and displayed the database error message about 15 minutes ago; about 10 minutes ago my site started to display properly; a few minutes ago it wouldn’t display again and now it displays fine.

Startlogic
We apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you. The Web site: B1 is working perfectly fine here.

Me
I have attached images of the error messages that I’m still receiving (about 10 minutes ago) at:

error1.JPG
error2.JPG

Startlogic
We apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you. There appears to be a temporary issue with one of the sql servers which has now been fixed. Currently, the domain loading fine.

Me
See links below for typical cases (they all occurred just this morning):

error3.JPG
error4.JPG
error5.JPG

My sites continue to load slowly, typically taking two attempts before loading at all. That is, the initial attempts at loading (if not stopped and reloaded) will eventually lead to one of the above error pages. After the site loads, refreshing the page will still often lead to a “database error...” page or a “504 Gateway Timeout” page.

Startlogic
Thank you for contacting us. I apologize for the inconvenience caused to you. I have checked the Web site B1 and I was able to access it without any issues.

Me
You and the startlogic tech staff have mentioned that “[you] have checked the Web site B1 and [you were]able to access it without any issues” ad nauseam. This mantra is now to the point of being infuriating. No one, including you, have bothered to follow the ticket thread. If you had, you would have realized how utterly useless and inane such a statement is and continues to be regarding my situation here. So, to help you understand the “situation here”, I have uploaded a video of this problem that I produced this morning. Here it is:

startlogicandme.wmv

Startlogic
Thank you for contacting us. I apologize for the inconvenience caused to you. I have checked the Web site B1 again from different machines and I was able to access it without any issues. I did not receive the error message which you have provided in the screenshot.

Me
I don’t know what else I can do to convince you that this is not an isolated problem on an isolated machine on an isolated network. Did you even bother to watch the video that I uploaded (see my previous post)? It clearly demonstrates that the problem is on your end. I have already waited nearly three weeks for this problem to be resolved and I am not waiting any longer.

Startlogic
It appears that the Mysql host on which your sites are hosted, were experiencing load issues which has now been brought down and now the sites at C1 and B1 are loading fine and coming up fine.

Me
It is now 2:20 am EDT on August 5, 2008 (note: less than two hours after the above response). The following screenshot was taken 15 minutes ago on August 5, 2008 at 2:05 am EDT of my website C1:

error9.JPG

As you can see, it’s another “504 Gateway Time-out” error page and my other websites B1 & D1 are still loading and loading and loading.

Startlogic
We checked all 3 of your sites B1 , C1 and D1 and all of them are loading in reasonable time. Therefore we are not able to duplicate the issues on our end.

Me
Look at the time in the lower right-hand corner of each of these screenshots: error10.JPG, error11.JPG. These database error pages happened just minutes ago.

Yes, the cache and cookies were cleared.
Yes, this behavior exists on different computers, on different networks, and in different states (i.e. Minnesota and Massachusetts).
Yes, I’ve tried all of this on Firefox as well.

Have you been reading ANY of the previous posts to this ticket? How many times do I need to repeat myself?

Saturday, July 19, 2008

Federal judge restores protections for grey wolves

From the AP:

“U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy granted a preliminary injunction late Friday restoring the protections for the wolves in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho. Molloy will eventually decide whether the injunction should be permanent.”

It’s good news that the protections are back in place at least for now. As I’ve stated before, opposition to the wolf reintroduction program has little to do with actual depredation problems. The reasons for such opposition as stated by livestock producers in the region are financial. The real reasons are cultural.

Why that is the case is simple. There’s very little evidence that wolf depredation places a significant financial burden on ranchers (see below). Wolf related losses are minimal and ranchers are compensated for such losses anyway. What often happens, however, is that ranchers increasingly attribute livestock depredation (of any kind) to wolves. Unfortunately for the ranchers, it’s relatively easy to tell the difference between coyote, mountain lion, eagle, bear and wolf kills.

Ed Bangs, the biologist who has played a central role in the reintroduction program, also played a role in having the wolves delisted as an endangered species and is now advocating hunting the wolves on a limited basis. It’s difficult to tell whether Bangs is making recommendations on a purely management basis or due to pressures from area ranchers and the livestock industry.

Let’s start with comments he made to NOVA in 2000 (Full NOVA interview here - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wolves/bangs.html).

Regarding the U.S. government’s systematic extermination of wolves in the late 19th and early 20th century, Ed Bangs says the following:

NOVA: Weren’t biologists concerned about this extermination policy?

EB: Well, some people voiced concern, but they were a tiny minority. If you look at politics in the west—it was nothing but farmers and ranchers and settlers who had this strong anti-predator attitude and who were just scraping by. With nothing else to eat, predators were taking their livestock. And so really the voices for restraint were overwhelmed by the vast majority of people who wanted to put all the Indians on Indian reservations, cut all the timber, mine all the dirt, and use all the water. The attitude was exploitative. You know, it’s not good unless a person’s using it immediately.

Regarding current attitudes of ranchers and those measures in place to compensate ranchers for wolf depredation, Ed Bangs says the following:

NOVA: Who has opposed the reintroduction of wolves and why?

EB: Well the livestock industry, particularly the sheep industry, has been the most outspoken opponent of wolf restoration. And the reason for that is obvious. I mean, sheep get killed by golden eagles, by mountain lions, by grizzly bears, black bears, feral dogs, coyote, you know, everything kills sheep. And so, of course, they don’t want another predator feeding on their livestock. Cattle really don’t get killed by much of anything—maybe a grizzly bear now and then. But wolves occasionally will kill livestock. The studies that we’ve done and that other people have done indicate that wolves normally kill less than one-tenth of one percent of the livestock available to them. To date, in the past 15 years in the northern Rocky Mountains, we’ve lost an average of about five cattle and five sheep per year to wolf depredations. And there is a private program that compensates producers for their losses. But still livestock producers have the potential to be the most directly impacted in a negative way by wolves. And so they’ve been the main opponent to wolf restoration. The supporters, of course, are people that own businesses around Yellowstone or Central Idaho who are selling wolf t-shirts and other tourists services. We did an economic analysis and it indicated that wolves in the Yellowstone system would generate up to about $19 million dollars a year in extra economic activity. So economically it’s a big winner, but not for livestock producers.

NOVA: Are livestock producers still fighting the reintroduction?

EB: Well, I think everybody has accepted the fact that wolves are here to stay. The reintroductions are over and done with. The wolves are doing great. There’s been almost no problems with livestock, and when there have been livestock problems, we efficiently take care of the problem including killing the wolves, and they receive their money from the Defenders of Wildlife, a group that established a private compensation program within just a matter of weeks. So it’s pretty hard to complain, really.

On principle, I’m not necessarily opposed to hunting wildlife for management reasons. However, I don’t believe the primary reasons that federal officials delisted the grey wolf, which thus paved the way for a hunting season on wolves this Fall, were management related, if at all. Again, the conflict here is not ranchers vs. wolves, it’s ranchers vs. the government. The same sorts of conflicts occur over BLM land policy disputes. I’ll repeat what I said in March:

”The crux of the problem here has less, if anything, to do with so-called “problem wolves” or delisting the grey wolf as an endanger/threatened species than with the fact that the federal government defied the wishes of ranchers in the 90s by re-introducing wolves.”

But then again, effecting federal policy at the behest of powerful interest groups is the American way, on all sides of the aisle.

Thursday, July 03, 2008

What religion does to the mind

The nth occurrence of seeing jesus in your ___________ (fill in the blank). Apparently a Miami couple believes the image of jesus appeared to them in an ultrasound image of their unborn child.

See the astonishing video here.

This would be mildly amusing if it weren’t for the sad fact that such “sightings” are truly believed by their seekers. You know we’re destined for extinction; such stupidity cannot go unanswered. Oh well, I guess I shouldn’t dis-miss phenomena of this sort. I see Bertrand Russell in almost everything these days. He’s in my beer right now and won’t shut up.

Friday, June 20, 2008

Ohio science teacher burns cross on students’ arms

The insane set of events that occurred in Mount Vernon, Ohio demonstrates the sorry state of science education in the U.S. This lunatic is a Christian who actively teaches against evolution in the classroom - surprise surprise. But the fact that someone as mentally ill as John Freshwater was allowed to teach students for the past 21 years is disturbing. The system failed miserably in this case, and John Freshwater was protected throughout.

The most bizarre part of this story is that he will be able to challenge the school board’s decision to terminate his contract. Is this option given to teachers who sexually assault their students? He literally branded students with a cross - it’s assault, a criminal offense!!! Why wasn’t this guy arrested? What more does it take these days to show that such religious nuts should not be teaching our children… anything! They shouldn’t be allowed within 100 yards of any child for that matter.

Those responsible for keeping this nutjob employed need to be fired.

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

We take our free speech for granted

A University of Washington study reports that the arrest of bloggers in places like China, Iran, Egypt, and Burma are on the rise. Most of the arrests are occurring in East Asia and the Middle East, but American, British, Canadian and French bloggers have been arrested as well.

It would be interesting to know the circumstances for those arrested here in the U.S., or Canada for that matter. Blogging is a powerful medium, and thus governments will always find ways of restricting and controlling that power. It’s hard to imagine being fearful of arrest while typing your next blog entry.

Of course in the U.S., we have a more subtle form of controlling speech - corporate censorship.

Addendum: you can find the report and the dataset at WIA Report. There were three blogger arrests in the U.S. Here are the reported reasons for each arrest:

1. “for videotaping a burning police car”
2. “for terrorism”
3. “for posting pictures of little girls, being a pedophile”

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Political suicide, stupidity or arrogance?

All of the above. I’m of course referring to Senate Republicans block on the Democrats’ plan to put an end to the billions of dollars of tax breaks the oil industry currently enjoys and impose a 25 percent tax on oil profits, which in the first three months of this year were around 36 billion dollars. It’ll be a joy to watch McCain dance around this one on the campaign trail, but then again he would have voted with his Republican colleagues anyway.

This demonstrates once again that McCain’s message of change is a con. Why? Change is simply impossible with Republicans. As much as Republicans attempt to distance themselves from Bush, he always comes back to haunt them because Bush represents what this Party is really all about. He’s the logical outcome of conservative ideology - how’s that working out for ya America?

Removing Republicans from office is like undergoing cancer treatments, it just takes time to get it all out and there’s always the risk of it coming back.

Sunday, June 01, 2008

It’s déjà vu all over again

The amount of rancor that exists between the Obama and Clinton camps worries me. The hatred is now turning physical according to the NYTimes. It seems to me the onus for making peace lies with the Obama camp. They’ve effectively won, and thus the responsibility of extending a hand of reconciliation rests on their shoulders.

But, given current sentiments, I’m getting this sick feeling of another Nader effect coming on. If Obama’s message of uniting this country has any substance whatsoever, he needs to quickly begin at home and demand from his followers that they start embracing and reconciling with Clinton supporters. If he can’t accomplish this in-house, let alone within the Democratic party, we may as well welcome McCain as our next President now.

It’s astonishing how much mileage Republicans continue to get from the abject stupidity of the Left in this country - do I hear former Nader supporters turned Obama supporters? You folks just can’t wait to bleep up another presidential election, can you? 

Addendum:  Here’s my bottom line. As a former Clinton supporter, my patience with the rabid-anti-Hillary crowd within the Obama camp is beginning to wear thin very quickly. I fully support Obama as the best candidate to challenge McCain in November, and the best person to lead our country for the next (hopefully) 8 years. But, the amount of venom that Obama supporters continue to level against Clinton is at best offensive. It needs to stop.

Obama has won! His victory was actually a reality some time ago, but his constituency seems more bent on further marginalizing Clinton than realizing their victory. Please, just move on and focus on what we need for November, namely, Clinton supporters. If you think I exaggerate, just hop on over to the Daily Kos and read a random selection from that petulant crowd.

I know of no other way to put it except to say:

You stupid bleeps are going to give away this election to another Republican once again… How many Presidential elections do you need to lose for this country before you get your tiny little heads out of your bleeps? McCain is the fricken target not Clinton you stupid bleeps!

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Obama, Clinton, Bobby Kennedy and Olbermann’s over-reaction

Clinton’s gaffe, to put it charitably, effectively ended any possibility of her nomination. Her chances prior to the remark were remote at best, but this self-inflicted wound is one that cannot be dressed.

Ok, so why would she say something so stupid and damaging not only to her candidacy but to herself personally?

If you had listened to Keith Olbermann’s commentary the other night, the answer you got was (paraphrased): Hillary Clinton is a conniving, impudent, ruthless, cruel, conspiring – and on and on and on – human being, whose political opportunism demonstrates the absolute lowest level of character and decency this country has ever seen…

I was expecting Olbermann to call for a public lashing of Clinton on live television, followed by her resignation from the U.S. Senate. He apparently couldn’t wait for the former, calling Clinton a racist in every other sentence without actually saying the word itself. It was quite the spectacle. To say that Olbermann simply went over the top with his remarks is to understate the tirade.

As regulars here know, I like(d) Keith Olbermann – a lot!  But his display the other night was embarrassing and painful to watch. The most embarrassing piece of it all was Olbermann’s own opportunism. His external disgust for Clinton was only matched by his inner delight of having the opportunity to once again denounce her candidacy. Olbermann even had the gall to impute the gender issue as a contrast to Clinton.

Again to the question: Why in the hell would Hillary Clinton say something so stupid and damaging not only to her candidacy but to herself personally?

She may as well have said the ‘N’ word while mentioning Obama’s name. The effect would have been the same. But Olbermann seems to think the remark was part of an intentional scheme on Clinton’s part to undermine…. What? Her own candidacy? Does Olbermann really think her remark about Bobby Kennedy was a calculated, strategic move on her part? Are you that stupid Mr. Olbermann?

The only explanation that would even remotely approach the realm of Olbermann’s contempt, would be to invoke Freud. It was at worse, a colossal slip of the tongue.

In any event, this caliber of scolding is usually reserved for the likes of George Dubya Bush. I guess I missed his commentary on Bush’s Hitler remarks, which were not slips of the tongue in any sense, but were calculating, intentional, and scripted; in true character of our retarded leader.

Obama is the Democratic nominee, as he should be. He’s demonstrated that he’s the better candidate of the two. My support shifted from Clinton to Obama several months ago. It’s time to rally behind our candidate, and take joy in the fact that we will actually be part of electing our first African American President.

Saturday, March 29, 2008

Hunting wolves as a means of defiance

Here’s the official (media) story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23856723. But there’s more to it than meets the eye…

The crux of the problem here has less, if anything, to do with so-called “problem wolves” or delisting the grey wolf as an endanger/threatened species than with the fact that the federal government defied the wishes of ranchers in the 90s by re-introducing wolves. There’s a long history here that is seldom mentioned. It’s a battle that’s been going on for quite some time, and like most things, what we see in the media is pure window dressing.

Simply put: If the federal government mandated that all ranchers provide land on which their mothers could live, ranchers would work day and night to establish a way to block it, even to the point of declaring open season on their own mothers. Those who live in the West know exactly what I’m talking about…

A classic example of irrationality at its best/worst.

Monday, March 24, 2008

U.S. death toll in Iraq reaches 4,000

“The situation in Iraq has turned around. The surge has opened the door to a major strategic victory in the broader war on terror. Faster and larger withdrawals could unravel recent progress, and having come so far and achieved so much, we are not going to let this happen.”

George Bush (March 19th 2008)

“Think about what would have happened if Abraham Lincoln had paid attention to polls, if they had had polls during the Civil War. He never would have succeeded if he hadn’t had a clear objective, a vision for where he wanted to go, and he was willing to withstand the slings and arrows of the political wars in order to get there.”

Dick Cheney (March 19th 2008)

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Got Religion?

I’m guessing that these sorts of sermons were regular fare for Obama’s church. He just was never there to hear them.

Anyone familiar with this style of preaching within African American congregations knows that it’s not all that unusual, and actually relatively mild. You can hear far more disturbing homilies at many White Evangelical/Fundamentalist churches on almost any given Sunday.

The point of this story is that Barak Obama’s religious commitments have been nominal at best, which this video ironically demonstrates quite well. If he was a regular at this church he would have known that this kind of religious rhetoric was probably quite routine.

The religious Obama is for the most part a political creation. It’s just too bad that in this day and age politicians must continue to pay homage to religion and create a religious identity to be viable candidates for almost any office. Unfortunately, this is one Albatross that Obama will find difficult to cut loose.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Democrats imploding

With Spitzer’s infidelity and the Obama crew crying wolf once again, it’s not looking good for democrats. The reason has nothing to do with democratic infighting or scandal in-and-of-themselves. The reason has everything to do with the Republican’s use of these events. The race issue (currently up front with Ferraro’s comments) will be used to foment fears among baby boomers by turning a fake issue, i.e., the Clinton campaign is racist, into another fake issue but with real consequences, i.e., democrats are so racially charged and beholden to political correctness that Obama in the Whitehouse will strip status quo whites of their social and economic advantage.

It’s a simple matter of demographics folks! The baby boomers are going to decide this election as they have in virtually every other election since Reagan. Talk of racism, regardless of its context real or otherwise, will sour White Americans to the point of pushing them to McCain. YES, America is still racist!; you’ve made the obvious point, good for you!; do you really think pummeling it over “our” heads is going to help Obama!?

McCain provides the perfect alibi for baby boomers who are considering the possibility of voting for a black man or a white woman and need an excuse not to. McCain is the easy out for these people; a candidate behind which they can hide without appearing fearful of a black man or a white woman in the White House. We finally have a very real chance of electing a non-white-male as our President and some people are willing to give that up by alienating the very constituency needed for that reality to come true? I’m getting this sick feeling that we’re dealing with the same folks who voted for Nadar in the 2000 election.

Screw principles for god’s sake and start looking at this strategically. If you want a democratic president, whether that be Obama or Clinton, it’s time you start thinking with your head and not your ideological heart. We have a very good chance of electing our first black or woman President, and if race or gender becomes a prominent issue in this next election (the fear-mongering Republicans will certainly do their best to make it so), it will alienate a large segment of the voting public (read baby boomers), giving them an excuse to vote for McCain.

The stupidity of Americans knows no bounds…

Sunday, February 17, 2008

So, how are those gun laws working out for ya?

With all the speculation about how the NIU shootings could have happened, the only relevant details are the following from the Associated Press (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23200851):

On Feb. 9, Kazmierczak walked into a Champaign gun store and picked up two guns — a Remington shotgun and a Glock 9mm handgun. He bought the two other handguns at the same shop — a Hi-Point .380 on Dec. 30 and a Sig Sauer on Aug. 6.

All four guns were bought legally from a federally licensed firearms dealer, said Thomas Ahern, a spokesman for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. At least one criminal background check was performed — Kazmierczak had no criminal record.

Kazmierczak had a state police-issued FOID, a firearms owners identification card, which is required in Illinois to own a gun, authorities said. Such cards are rarely issued to those with recent mental health problems.

This small detail, however, isn’t mentioned in full until page two of the article, and only after the more thorough mentioning of the gunman’s mental health issues, tattoos, and rocky relationship with his girlfriend. What would you pick as the most crucial feature of the SHOOTING? What was the necessary element without which this SHOOTING would never have taken place?

It’s another example of what I call the George Bush effect. That is, something that would otherwise have rational people up in arms (no pun intended), outraged, and demanding change, quickly disappears into the background because of its commonality. Just as the Bush administration’s serial scandals have desensitized the American people to their frequency, we’ve become desensitized to these types of shootings.

In a sort of twisted way, the more these types of events happen the more organizations like the NRA are secure in holding this country hostage behind the prevalence of convenience-store gun buying.

Our tolerances increase with the frequency of such events. We tend to tune out the relevant details due to the background noise. We want to profile the individual or individuals involved while ignoring the conditions that provided the impetus for the events. And finally, the gun becomes the taken for granted, invisible part of the drama. It’s the unremarkable character that goes unnoticed.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

$54 million lawsuit against Best Buy

There’s a story on MSNBC about the hassle a woman named Raelyn Campbell went through when Best Buy lost her laptop computer. I hope she wins every penny of her lawsuit - not likely unfortunately. Her experience doesn’t surprise me. Positive feedback about Best Buy is hard to find.

The article mentions that after months of getting the runaround and repeatedly being lied to, Campbell had friends and family write to the store manager indicating they wouldn’t shop there until the matter was resolved. Here’s how the store manager responded in an email:

“For every customer that has had an unpleasant experience I can show you hundreds who have had a great experience. I have been in retail for a long time and the one conclusion I have come to is that not every customer can be satisfied,...” “Does my store have opportunities? Absolutely! What I can say is that we strive to deliver the experience that every customer deserves to receive.”

I’m thinking about writing to Best Buy to express my support for Raelyn Campbell and mentioning that I’ll never shop there again. I wonder if that manager still has his job?

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Jargon Gibberish of the Day

“The effort to include “Other” cultures as variegated amplifications of a global phallogocentrism constitutes an appropriative act that risks a repetition of the self-aggrandizing gesture of phallogocentrism, colonizing under the sign of the same those differences that might otherwise call that totalizing concept into question.”

Page 18 in Gender Trouble by Judith Butler

Translation: It’s not a good idea to generalize beyond a particular set of cultural circumstances because doing so only reinforces the masculine way of looking at the world by duplicating it, which is inherently oppressive due to the fact that it tries to lump certain things together and deny the differences between them.

Of course, my translation of Butler’s coded message itself demonstrates exactly what she’s arguing against. My apparent need to expose, let alone understand, this jargon signifies what she calls a “self-aggrandizing gesture of phallogocentrism” or in laymen’s terms - mental masturbation. Hence, the obsessive effort at being obscure - no less an act of mental masturbation - functions as a tool of protest. It’s clever, but ultimately self-defeating.

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

The best news yet in this nation’s political history

James Dobson is boycotting the Presidential election!

“I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative, and in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are … I cannot, and will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience,” he [Dobson] said in a statement on Tuesday.

“I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on their virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life,” he said.

Praise God! Get the full story HERE

Thursday, January 31, 2008

The news business/the business of news

So there’s a story in the NY Times alleging that Bill Clinton inappropriately used his influence to cut some sort of mining deal between Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra and Kazakhstan’s president Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. Here’s a representative excerpt:

“Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.”

“Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.”

Come on… This is just pathetic. Gee-wiz, now I wonder why the NY Times decided to go with this story today? Hmmm, Super Tuesday perhaps? Because it wouldn’t have the same play and sensationalism if it were printed a week or two weeks ago or after Super Tuesday? Indeed, today gives the story a good 4 full days to percolate and gather steam before Tuesday.

It doesn’t matter that the NY Times endorsed Hillary Clinton. The news business is just that, a business first and last. This sort of stuff sells. Real journalism apparently finds itself somewhere farther down the list, at the bottom. They also should have pointed out that the “sumptuous midnight banquet” included puppy kabobs, and afterwards Bill Clinton was “whisked off to share” in a game of name that “quashed political dissenter.”

Is it news? Sure it’s news. But for the article’s authors to spin their story in such a self-righteous tone and with such conspicuous timing is disingenuous to say the least. This type of reporting places itself firmly within the self-serving, sensationalist journalism of an organization like Fox News.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Vista sucks, chocolate ice cream is better than vanilla, and look at me I’m having a temper tantrum

Those of you who visit tech sites on a regular basis, especially those that feature discussions on Vista in particular, will have undoubtedly noticed the rabid chorus of Vistahaters. “Noticed” is a euphemism of course. It’s sort of like having a quiet, pleasant conversation with someone and then suddenly being interrupted with two or three people yelling at you through a blow horn.

Yes, we hear all you Vistahaters loud and clear. Your screaming and stomping of feet nonstop in almost every forum on the planet is hard to miss. But would you do the rest of us a small favor...? SHUT THE F*&% UP ALREADY!

I don’t care about your opinion of Vista and neither do the rest of us. Please shut up and go away. Your yelling and screaming is getting very old. We’re so sorry that Vista hasn’t met your expectations. Life sucks sometimes, but please vent your frustrations somewhere else to someone who cares - I don’t and never will.

Take a deep breath, stop your habitual typing of “VISTA SUCKS”, uncross your eyes, and for your own sake stop throwing a temper tantrum like a 3-year-old child. Just go back to your wonderful XP or MAC or Linux or Commodore 64 and simply enjoy life and leave the rest of us alone.

Thanks!

Monday, December 17, 2007

A glimpse into Medievalism

Again, a woman is spared from Islamic “justice.” This time it was Saudi king Abdullah who pardoned a female rape victim. You can get the full story here - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22293189/

But here’s what the Saudi “Justice Minister” said:

“The king always looks into alleviating the suffering of the citizens when he becomes sure that these verdicts will leave psychological effects on the convicted people, though he is convinced and sure that the verdicts were fair.”

What a guy! Not to worry, however, I’m sure “justice” will be served when her father or brothers stone her to death… you know, to restore the family’s honor… because she was raped…

Where’s a Muhammad Teddy Bear when you need one?  Oh wait, you can get one here - Muhammad Teddy Bear

Friday, November 30, 2007

Name your teddy bear Muhammad this holiday season

A Sudanese judge has shown mercy on a British teacher who was convicted of religious hatred. Instead of the initial sentence of 40 lashes for insulting Islam, she now will only spend 15 days in jail. Thank Allah for this remarkable gesture of grace and compassion by this judge.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. This teacher’s “horrendous crime” was allowing her students to give a teddy bear the name of Muhammad… Let it sink in for a moment. No, you didn’t misread it, but it actually gets worse.

On top of this insanity (I mean that literally), a thousand or so Sudanese Muslims have taken to the streets in protest calling for this woman’s execution… That’s right, executing someone for allowing a classroom of children to name a teddy bear ‘Muhammad’ is the religious response from these Muslims. I know what you’re thinking, but the few-bad-apples-defense is beginning to wear thin.

Please, someone indulge me and defend this mass insanity in the name of religious freedom, tolerance, cultural sensitivity, misunderstanding, in the name of anything. I would really like to “understand” how anyone could defend a religious belief system that produces followers who can even contemplate executing someone for allowing children to name a stuffed toy after their prophet. Seriously, enlighten me. I’m all ears. Right, I didn’t think so.

This goes way beyond the absurd. It’s insanity to the very core. If you believe such actions (even the fifteen days in jail) are justified and have some merit, you are insane and in need of professional help - period. No metaphors here folks. This is perhaps the clearest evidence to date demonstrating Dawkins’s contention that religion is a form of mental illness.

So, here’s what I propose as a form of counter protest. Someone needs to start producing a line of teddy bears and call them Muhammad bears.

“Oh no, that’s just religious bigotry! We can’t offend the religious sensibilities of another culture!! How dare we judge the beliefs of an entire people, or segment thereof!!! Oh the arrogance of you Westerners; you evil atheists!!!!

Isn’t it curious that those who make such statements never see the bigotry, offense, arrogance, and evil of actions like the above?

My sense of rational, psychologically-stable thinking has just been violated to its core, and rather than suggest the execution of a person or persons as a consequence, I’m simply suggesting we produce fuzzy, little, cute, toy teddy bears and name them all Muhammad. We could also produce a Jesus line of teddy bears, and a Yahweh line, and a Zeus line, and a Thor line, etc. It’s the multicultural thing to do, no?

I want my Muhammad Teddy Bear.

Monday, November 12, 2007

Save humanity and the earth - punch an oil executive in the face… really hard

Think about it for a moment. With the recent and not so recent oil spills playing havoc on the environment among other environmental disasters like global warming, with oil executives sucking up millions upon millions (billions?) of dollars for themselves not to mention the wealth of Saudi royalty, with gas prices beginning to go through the roof again, and with decades of political-global turmoil due to oil, is there another commodity on this planet that has caused so much destruction to animal, plant and human life?

And the worst part of it all is we’re literally paying the oil industry to slowly kill us and the rest of the planet…

Monday, October 08, 2007

The Wild, Wild West in Wisconsin… coming to your town soon?

Let’s see, how will the NRA defend this shooting? I don’t think the law-abiding citizen shtick will work here - the shooter was the law.

Of course, if those teenagers each had their own handguns, they could have defended themselves by shooting back at the sheriff’s deputy. You know, just like you see in the Westerns were “law-abiding” is never too clear and thus your handy Colt .45 single action revolver is the best way to mediate such ambiguities.

I mean the logic here is so rock solid and tight, no? How could anyone not see the sensibility of everyone owning a handgun, having it with them at every moment (e.g., while eating pizza and watching videos with friends), being vigilant at all times against the possibility that anyone could be aiming their Glock at you at any moment, and then being quick enough on the draw that a “Marshal Matt Dillon gone bad” wouldn’t have a chance of pulling off a round.

The NRA’s new slogan:

Guns don’t kill people, the guy down the street, who you knew in high School, that everyone thought was stable, nice and helpful, and who became a sheriff’s deputy sworn to protect and serve the community, kills people… Yeah, you better buy that handgun soon!

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

“Prankster” gets his just deserts for asking Sen. Kerry too many questions

Full story - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20835952/

I guess now it’s the police who decide what constitutes appropriate speech, namely, what you can say and how long you can say it. Traditionally (read, Constitutionally), we’ve left that determination up to the courts to decide. Perhaps we’ve grown weary of such a lengthy judicial process and would rather simplify things by letting the police act as judge and jury - you know, kinda like in that comic book series Judge Dread.

Well, apparently a student’s extra 30 seconds of questions to Senator John Kerry went over the line and necessitated dragging the student away from the microphone and tasering him with 50,000 volts.

But then I guess it’s not clear that dragging a student away from a microphone and tasering him with 50,000 volts for spending an extra 30 seconds asking questions is excessive. Such ambiguities seem to be in the minds of many people regarding this incident - it’s a toughy all right. Matt Lauer on NBC’s Today Show introduced the video with the following question:

“Did he have it coming or did the officers simply go too far?”

And then of course there’s Senator Kerry’s principled and courageous response about the incident afterwards:

“Whatever happened, the police had a reason, had made their decision that there was something they needed to do. Then it’s a law enforcement issue, not mine.”

And finally, the media portrayal of this student as a prankster who likes to draw attention to himself by videotaping his pranks. For example:

“Meyer, who has his own website, seems to enjoy taking on the establishment. Rubbing people to get a reaction. In one irreverent video he posted, a placard intends to spoil the ending of the Harry Potter series. Those who hadn’t read the book thought it was true. Even the police were not amused. Maybe Andrew Meyer thought the John Kerry antics would be a stunt. The police treated it as anything but. For Today, Kerri Sanders, NBC News, Miami.”

Well done Mr. Sanders! Your condescending voice really added that needed nuance to your devastating exposé of this menace to society, Andrew Meyer. I mean for god’s sake, attempting to reveal an ending of a popular book in public is pretty sinister. And I just cannot fathom the thought of all those dear, dear, innocent children who thought Meyer’s placard “was true”!!! Oh yes, Andrew Meyer finally went too far this time with his “antics” (an extra 30 seconds of questions to Sen. Kerry) and thank god the police were there to finally give this menace his just deserts.

Hey, just as Sen. Kerry pointed out, when the police decide that action needs to be taken - for a reason - it’s simply up to them and not an issue that concerns Senator Kerry. Come on now, we all know a U.S. Senator has nothing to say about such matters…. Freedom of speech is police business.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

A petty rant - nothing new…

I began mountain biking a couple of years ago, and during this time I’ve become an enthusiast of sorts. I try to learn as much as I can about the sport and enjoy reading about bikes and mountain biking. Most of what I’ve learned came from friends, my brother, and the internet. It’s the latter source that has me kevetching.

Now one wouldn’t necessarily expect mountain bikers to be the brightest segment of society or even care all that much about mountain-biker intellects. I certainly didn’t and up until now I really hadn’t thought much about it one way or another. But, I guess it’s one of those annoyances that slowly creeps up on you and finally takes its toll.

Yes, the following is petty and superfluous, which is no surprise to those who know me.

So here’s what I’m referring to – Mountain Bikers are without a doubt the worst writers that I’ve ever encountered. They couldn’t spell if their life depended on it, their grammar is horrible at best, they use words incorrectly on a regular basis, and carrying a logical thought from beginning to end is almost an impossible task for many of them. Thankfully, none of this applies to most of my friends or my brother. If I want a coherent answer to one of my many biking questions, I know I can count on my brother for precisely that.

Of course I’m exaggerating a bit here, but the consistency is quite remarkable nonetheless. What put me over the edge was a guide on rim brakes that I recently read on eBay. These sorts of things usually don’t bother me, but if you’re going to take the time to write something informative and display it for all to see, couldn’t you at least take a little time to proof read it first, preferably aloud so you can hear how it sounds and thus how it will read? Here are a few examples:

“rim brakes… will slowly disappear as the newer generations grasp on to the more valid technology.”

“On the other hand, there are many quite a few other brands of rim brakes that will stop a bicycle as well.”

“while it is true these may squeal where the old pair did not, it would almost definitely be caused because they were not properly installed...”

“Look at it this way, just recently have helmets been accepted by most bicyclists, where as in other sports, many with a lesser chance of head injury, the helmet has made a requirement long ago.”

I think you get the picture. Unfortunately, this is probably one of the “better written” pieces that I’ve read. In any event, the above prose is the usual fare among mountain biking enthusiasts who dare to express themselves.

Again, I’m exaggerating a bit and obviously not everyone fits the above profile, but for some people, pointing out the obvious seems to be necessary. Ok, it’s time for my meds…

Friday, August 31, 2007

The time to evict the elephant in the living room is way overdue

It’s clear that the only way for the American people to see our troops return home from Iraq is to impeach Bush and Cheney. Criticizing Democrats for not doing enough on this front can only be tied to their unwillingness to proceed with impeachment hearings and nothing else. Issues involving troop funding, benchmarks, reports (independent or otherwise), resolutions, etc., are all meaningless because they accomplish nothing toward ending this war. Anything short of impeachment is a colossal waste of time.

So I’m at a loss as to why the Democrats are sticking to the tactic of trying to place Bush in a position where he must admit failure and consequently bring the troops home. It’s pure folly. It presupposes the possibility that Bush will voluntarily reverse course and that won’t happen. Facts mean nothing to Bush, the will of the American people means nothing to Bush, the legal system means nothing to Bush, and the political process means nothing to Bush. There’s no argument or set of facts, however evident or convincing, that will change Bush’s mind.

This war, ironically, is the only thing over which Bush has any real power. Absolutely nothing, except impeachment or the 2008 presidential elections, can block his decision to continue this war and he’s not giving that up even if it means destroying himself, his Party, the military, human lives…

We’re obviously not dealing with rationality here. This is the proverbial elephant in the living room and no politician, Democrat or Republican, is willing to admit its presence. The fear of taking a “radical” position or appearing to be “extreme” is what feeds this administration’s irrationality. They’ve defined political sensibilities in this country to such an absurdity that rational action, argument, and appealing to facts have become “radical” and “extreme.”

The cynical reality in all of this, and one which now places direct culpability on the Democrats, is that George W. Bush serves as a huge political asset to the Democratic Party and removing that “cash cow” would only serve to benefit Republicans. Ah yes, let’s keep our priorities straight. Elections are coming up and political careers are at stake. We need to keep our focus on what really matters - elections and re-elections!