Happy Birthday, Great-Aunt Margie!

Tuesday, August 31, 2010
As you all know, my beloved Gram passed away earlier this year. She was survived by her younger sister, my Great-Aunt Margie, who is the last surviving member of her generation, and a hell of a nice lady. You may recall that she was my 100,000th visitor here at Hot Chicks Dig Smart Men last November.

And today is her birthday! Her 89th birthday!

So join me in wishing my awesome Great-Aunt Marge a most wonderful and satisfying birthday, along with many more.

Happy Birthday, Margie! I love you!

An American Tradition

Monday, August 30, 2010
On Friday night, vandals set fire to equipment parked at the location of the proposed new Islamic Center of Murfreesboro in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. The local Sheriff's Department discovered the fire, and the Center has notified the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, who have indicated this will be investigated as a hate crime.

I can't tell you how sad this makes me.

It's nothing new, of course. Americans have a long history of marginalizing and damaging those we consider to be "other." We stole from and butchered those who lived on the land we wanted. We enslaved millions of black people, based solely on the color of their skin. Once they were free, we denied them full standing under the law, including blowing up their buildings and making their community members "disappear." We interned thousands of American citizens and other legal residents based solely on their Japanese ethnicity during World War II.

So I suppose I shouldn't be surprised when the bigots and the racists determine that having an Islamic Center in their neighborhood is grounds for this type of behavior.

And yet, I am. I'm surprised because I believe we're better than that. Even in places where institutional bigotry and racism is a cultural norm, I believe Americans are capable of living up to the ideals on which our nation was founded, and complying with the rule of law enshrined in our Constitution. The freedom to worship (or not worship) as we choose is not a right that is selectively given - it applies to everyone or to no one. It guarantees the right of the minority not to be persecuted by the majority, and it holds us to a standard that protects all Americans, not just the Christian ones that happen to go to your church.

As Americans, we have a dichotomy of traditions. We can choose to follow the tradition that ostracizes and persecutes those who are different from us. Or we can choose that other American tradition - the one that defends the weak, the oppressed minority, and chooses to do what's right, and just.

I am uniquely American. I'm an upper middle class white woman. I'm a military veteran. I have two children. I own my home. I'm completely irreligious. I'm concerned about the state of our nation and the danger posed by the radicals that seem to be popping up in every aspect of American life.

And today, I'm a supporter of the Muslim community in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. My September charitable donation will be going to the construction fund for the new Islamic Center of Murfreesboro.

It's time to stand up. Muslim-Americans are our neighbors, our workmates, our brothers and sisters in arms. They are deserving of the same rights and privileges as any American citizen. To treat them otherwise belittles us all.

Sheeple Power

Sunday, August 29, 2010
Remember how yesterday I said "Follow the Money" when it came to the current crop of right-wing whackadoos? Well, I usually love it when I'm right (I'M RIGHT, MOTHERFUCKER - SUCK ON THAT), but in this case I find the justification of my cynicism to be just fucking depressing, although my blood pressure is starting to rise, as well.

So Glenn Beck had his little mutual masturbation event yesterday in Washington, DC. 87,000 people attended, and as part of the pre-event "festivities," Beck collected donations to support the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, a nonprofit that provides support to children of fallen service members. Sounds good, right? Show your support of our troops by supporting their children! It's a selfless act that provides demonstrable support!

Yeah, not so much.

From the fine print at the bottom of the donation page:
"All contributions made to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation (SOWF) will first be applied to the costs of the Restoring Honor Rally taking place August 28, 2010. All contributions in excess of these costs will be retained by SOWF."
So basically, Glenn Beck is saying, "Not only did you pay to come here and hear me spout my self-serving nonsense, but you're going to pay for the privilege of doing so. So that $5 million we collected? Totally going to pay for my public masturbation, and if there's a few bucks left over for the kids of those dead service members, well, they can take it and be grateful! Power to the Sheeple!"

And that's why I'm depressed. This is perhaps the most cynical, self-serving run-around I've ever heard of, and he's using the sacrifices of our Armed Forces - my brothers and sisters in arms - to further his own agenda. That's not new, of course, politicians do it all the time, but I find this to be a particular egregious example.

Glenn Beck is one slimy, amoral sonofabitch who has turned his media franchise into one big fleecing of his sheeple followers. And not only do they follow him and swoon at his feet, they happily pay for the privilege of being used.

I think I need a few days off from politics.

____________
H/T to Bob Cesca, who has appropriately called for an accounting of the expenditures of this event.

2010 Flower Pr0n

Follow the Money

Saturday, August 28, 2010
It's no secret that I think that as a organization, the Tea Party is basically a Mob of Racists and Homophobes. Nor should it be a surprise that I think "Big L" libertarians are emotional and developmental retards - there's just no moral excuse for their "fuck you, I've got mine" mentality.

So imagine my (un)surprise when a recent article in The New Yorker revealed that the Tea Party movement has, in large part, been financed and organized by the infamous Koch Brothers, the same ka-billionaire Libertarians that finance the Cato Institute and other AstroTurf organizations.

I had a political science professor who used to say, "Follow the money." Her implication, of course, is that finding the true motivations behind a political movement or candidate requires some digging to determine who will benefit most from the goals of the movement or the candidate. I find it extremely ironic that the Tea Baggers are being financed and promoted by 1) Right-wing demagogues whose interests are limited to ratings and book sales and 2) Secretive billionaires who appear to be motivated by the deregulation of the oil industry and the elimination of social programs (which they've never needed, being, you know, born and bred billionaires).

It makes me wonder - do the tea-baggers themselves have any idea how they're being used to line the pockets of millionaire media personalities and billionaire oil barons, or do they still believe their movement is all about them?

Seriously - read Amy Davidson's article. You'll find it most enlightening. The Koch brothers' level of wing-nuttery, combined with their incredible wealth and lack of a discernible moral compass on social issues makes Dick Cheney look like the moral center of the universe by comparison.

Scary times, children.

Suck It, Wagner

Friday, August 27, 2010
As you all may know, the UCF has been following the antics of one Walter L. Wagner for quite some time. His incredible litigiousness is like a train wreck - I just can't look away.

Well, his latest frivolous lawsuit was an appeal at the United States District Court to stop the operation of the LHC (which has, incidentally, been quietly colliding its particles for months with no discernible ill effects to the world-as-we-know-it) on the grounds that it is DANGEROUS and MUST BE STOPPED before it creates micro black holes and SWALLOWS THE EARTH, O NOES.

The judge has ruled, and amazingly enough, it turns out ole Wally was wrong. AGAIN.

According to the decision,
Wagner cannot demonstrate that he has standing. A plaintiff alleging a procedural injury, such as Wagner, must still establish injury in fact. See Laub v. U.S. Dep’t. of Interior, 342 F.3d 1080, 1086 (9th Cir. 2003). Injury in fact requires some “credible threat of harm.” Cent. Delta Water Agency v. United States, 306 F.3d 938, 950 (9th Cir. 2002). At most, Wagner has alleged that experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (the “Collider”) have “potential adverse consequences.” Speculative fear of future harm does not constitute an injury in fact sufficient to confer standing. Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 970.

Even if Wagner has demonstrated injury in fact, he nevertheless fails to satisfy the causality or redressability prongs set out in Lujan. The European Center for Nuclear Research (“CERN”) proposed and constructed the Collider, albeit with some U.S. government support. The U.S. government enjoys only observer status on the CERN council, and has no control over CERN or its operations. Accordingly, the alleged injury, destruction of the earth, is in no way attributable to the U.S. government’s failure to draft an environmental impact statement.

CERN maintains total ownership, management, and operational control of the Collider. CERN has never been properly served, and is not a party to this case. Even if this court were to render a decision in Wagner’s favor, such a decision would have no impact on CERN or Collider operations, and would not afford Wagner the relief he seeks. [[Because our determination of standing is not dependent on the identity of the Appellant, we need not address whether Luis Sancho is a party to this appeal.]]
Yeah. The court has determined that not only does the U.S. District Court have no authority to tell a European entity what it can and cannot do, it also has determined that Wagner's Chicken-Little "speculative fear" has no standing.

I'M SHOCKED. SHOCKED, I TELL YOU.

Who could have guessed that Walter L. Wagner's personal crusade to shut down the LHC to protect us from the Black Holes (o noes) would end in an ignominious dismissal? Besides everyone but Wagner, I mean.

___________
H/T to Dr. Phil, who is an ACTUAL PHYSICIST. With a Ph.D. In PHYSICS. Unlike some other people we could name...

Boogie Blogging Firday - Snack, Please


If Boogie finishes his kibble, he gets a little treat for being such a good, good boy. And he's usually polite about asking. As you can see, his attention is FIXED on the sweet potato rawhide stick in my right hand.

Something Icky This Way Comes

Thursday, August 26, 2010
So the doorbell rang yesterday afternoon, and it was my mail carrier with a package for me. A package from Brooklyn, NY. A package from Nathan and John the Scientist.

::cue ominous music::


A number of years ago, the Incomparable Anne™ and I sent John a bug-pop that we bought at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. And by "bug-pop," I mean a lollipop with an actual bug in it. This, of course, necessitated a response.


 The green box appears to be some sort of chocolate coated cookies, although the photo looks like chocolate coated mushrooms. Or penises. Either way, I'm not eating them.


The bubble envelope contained a ziploc baggy.


A ziploc baggy with a cold-pack and a butcher's tray.


A butcher's tray containing duck tongues. Because really - nothing says "I am your true friend" like a package full of duck tongues shipped from Flushing, New York.

Needless to say, the duck tongues are now double wrapped and sitting in the trash can at the curb awaiting the fine folks from Waste Management to come and take them away. Nicely played, guys. Nicely played. 

You know what this means.

On the Nature of Professional Relationships

Wednesday, August 25, 2010
In spite of my occasional ranting about poor customer service, I really prefer to have cordial professional relationships with the organizations with whom I do business. That's one of the reasons I prefer small, locally owned businesses - I think it's much easier to develop and maintain relationships with local businesses than with some huge faceless organization whose agents don't give a good goddamn about your issues or your satisfaction.

In the past, when I've had issues with my local businesses, we've usually been able to resolve them to my satisfaction and continue the business relationship. That's usually because (in spite of my ranting), I can see that they're meeting me half-way, and trying to maintain long-term relationships with their customers. I, in turn, attempt to meet them half-way as well, and we can then continue a mutually beneficial relationship.

There are times, however, when it's just not worth it.

Sometimes that point occurs from a customer's perspective. Repeated poor service without a good faith effort to resolve issues and difficulties, unresponsiveness on the part of the customer contacts, poor quality products, general incompetence - all of these things can make a customer decide to cut and run.

And you know what? Sometimes it's the business who needs to cut and run. I know it's not popular or politically correct to say it, but sometimes certain customers are just not worth the trouble, and should be dropped like a hot rock.

When a customer is completely unwilling to meet you half-way, when the relationship only goes one way, when there's simply nothing a business can do to increase customer satisfaction because either the issue is personal or the cultural norm of the customer is such that no one could establish a trusting, mutually beneficial relationship with them - perhaps it's time to cut your losses.

Hell, I've been that customer. There are certain businesses that have pissed me off to the point that it really doesn't matter what the company does to woo me back - they'll never darken my doorstep again. In those cases, I think it's perfectly appropriate for the business in question to tell me never to darken their doorstep again, as well. I don't like it, but intellectually I understand the choice, and know that I myself might make the same choice in similar circumstances. And while I do have occasional fits of bitchiness, I don't act like that all the time, or with every vendor with whom I do business.

What I wonder is, do customers (or businesses that are customers) who do act like that all the time ever run out of vendors? Or do they just rotate from one vendor to another until they come to the top of the list again, hoping that the corporate memory of their bad behavior has faded into obscurity?

Glad to Live in the Mountain States

Tuesday, August 24, 2010
On this anniversary week of Hurricane Katrina, let me just say: I'm very glad to live where I do. Check out these natural disasters:
  • Hurricanes. Um, no. Land-locked, don't you know.
  • Tsunami. Again - land-locked, baby.
  • Tornadoes. Not usually around here - we're too close to the mountains.
  • Flood. Colorado's a pretty dry state. With the notable exception of some mountain communities, we don't have that many rivers, and flooding is pretty rare. Plus, I live on hill.
  • Earthquake. We're right in the middle of a tectonic plate. Old rock.
  • Blizzard. We do get occasional blizzards, but we've never been snowed in for more than a few days. 
  • Volcano. This is the only one that gives me pause. Not to be all end-of-the-world-is-nigh, but Yosemite Yellowstone does harbor a Super-Volcano. Given the frequency of eruptions, however, and the inevitable result if it does erupt, I'm going to try and not lose any sleep over it.
 I wouldn't mind living someplace a bit warmer when we retire, but not if it means living someplace less stable.

Tommy Guns and Conservative Christianity - They Go Together Like PB&J

Monday, August 23, 2010
I'm a bit pressed for time today since I'm catching up from a couple of days off last week. Stupid employer, insisting I respond in a timely manner and provide decent support to my customers.

So while I'm off working through my deep-seated issues surrounding SIP trunk offerings and financial promotions, enjoy this INCREDIBLY RETARDED political ad from one Pamela Gorman, Arizona (where else?) Congressional candidate. Please note all the clever weapons-related repartee in addition to the footage of Ms. Gorman completely botching her form as she shoots her various weapons.*

SNORT.

I love the smell of desperation in the morning...



Squeeze of the trigger to The Bob and Elvis Show.

____________________
*I especially enjoyed her use of the Tommy gun. Because, really - what State Senator DOESN'T need a Tommy gun to keep her district safe from the invading hoards of brown people come to steal our Jesus? SHE'S A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN, YOU KNOW.

And Arizonans wonder why their politics have become the laughingstock of the rest of the country...

2010 Flower Pr0n - Quebec City

Sunday, August 22, 2010

Conversations with Karma - Pastor Terry Jones

Saturday, August 21, 2010
*ring, ring*

Pastor Terry Jones: Hello! Don't forget to burn a Quran on September 11th!

Karma: Hello! This Karma. May I speak to Terry Jones, please?

TJ: This is Terry Jones. But I don't know any Karma. This is a CHRISTIAN ENDEAVOR.

K: Yes, well, the good thing about my gig is that people don't need to "know" me in order for me to perform my work. But for the record, I'm the eastern idea that you will receive your punishment or reward for your deeds. You know...what comes around goes around, people get what they deserve. Karma.

TJ: I don't need any Karma. I am FORGIVEN. By JESUS. Who was WHITE.

K: Um, yeah. I hate to break the news, but if Jesus really lived and really was the son of God, he was a Jew. A middle eastern Jew.

TJ: BLASPHEMY!

K: Whatever.

TJ: I am sponsoring "Burn a Quran Day" on September 11th, so that ALL GOOD CHRISTIANS can show how pious they are. THAT's an activity ALL GOOD CHRISTIANS can support!

K: You know what else ALL GOOD CHRISTIANS support? Child pornography!

TJ: ...

K: Oh, wait...that's just the Catholics.

TJ: ...

K: In any event, regardless of what ALL GOOD CHRISTIANS believe, the possession of child pornography in your country is quite illegal. And I believe the secular authorities are one their way to inform you of that fact.

TJ: Those aren't mine! I was just...um...researching child pornography as a means to help Christians understand how blasphemous Islam is! Yes, yes! That's the ticket!

K: ::snort::

TJ: I need to call my attorney. And my P.R. person.

K: You are one sick son of a bitch. Maybe you should, oh, I don't know...pray?

TJ: That's not funny.

K: It's funny to me.

::click::

I'm Sensing a Trend...


This morning's e:Mail brought this delightful selection of Tea Party T-Shirt logos from long-time friend and occasional commenter The Mechanicky Gal. I especially enjoyed the one about harvesting the organs of immigrants. Because really, what ELSE are they good for?

If nothing else, the Tea Party sure provides comic relief...

Mob of Racists and Homophobes

Friday, August 20, 2010

This arrived in the mail today from long time friend and occasional commenter Juan Federico.

He knows me so well...

Boogie Blogging Friday - Stylin'

Turns out Boogie's groomer, the fabulous Gigi, has decided to move on and start her own business, so Boogie now has a new groomer. Every groomer has their own "style," and so when I picked him up after his appointment, he looked a bit different, especially around the face:

"I am handsome. Yes, I am."

As you can see, she trimmed his beard, and his eyebrows are a bit shorter than Gigi typically cut them. She also thinned the long hair on his legs in an effort to keep them from getting so matted when they get wet, so his legs look a bit thinner than normal.

"Peel me a grape."

I like the way his beard looks, all trimmed up, but his legs look a bit odd to my eye.

Chinese Spam - Business Plan or Disgusting Luncheon Meat?

Thursday, August 19, 2010
As you all know, I recently turned on captcha in the comment threads here at Hot Chicks Dig Smart Men. I was getting tired of deleting the Chinese Spammers who were insisting on posting their Chinese character spam in my comments.

And guess what? OF COURSE THAT HASN'T STOPPED THEM.

I continue to get several of these each week, all with Chinese characters and some sort of link that goes Cthulhu-only-knows-where. Which tells me that somebody, somewhere, is trolling the Internet, posting this random spam on miscellaneous blogs. This, of course, is irritating, but hardly earth-shattering.

But it does make me wonder - what kind of business strategy calls for paying someone to perform this "work?" No one who reads HCDSM would click on such a link, and 99.9% of my readers couldn't determine if a Chinese character said "click here for hot sex" or "beef broccoli."

So where's the profit in this "business plan?" I don't get it.

Arvada Center for the Performing Arts - A Disappointing Experience

Wednesday, August 18, 2010
So last night was the Neville Brothers concert at the Arvada Center for the Performing Arts Amphitheater. I went with my Hot Mom and her pal. The Neville Brothers came on at about 8:15 p.m., and by 9:00 p.m., I had left, with my Hot Mom and her pal not far behind me.

Here's the thing, Arvada Center for the Performing Arts - if your venue can attract the incredible talent of the Neville Brothers, one of the premier groups to ever come out of the mishmash of musical wonder that is New Orleans, don't you think it would behoove you to actually HIRE SOUND ENGINEERS THAT HAVE A DAMN CLUE?

The sound was terrible. You couldn't hear the voices over the instruments. The music itself was so distorted I couldn't even recognize the songs. There was this annoying buzzing sound overlaying everything that drove my blood pressure up the longer I sat there.

I don't think it was a problem with the venue - the opening act (Erica Brown, a local blues group with a big voice and a mediocre guitarist) didn't have any of these problems. Granted, they only had three instrumentalists and two vocalists, but they're a local gig - surely an act with the craft and reputation of the Neville Brothers can do better.

The only high spot was a solo by the Neville Brothers' bassist. I think he was playing a seven string Sadowsky, and this guy had it going on.

It's extremely unlikely that I will ever attend another event at the Arvada Center Amphitheater. I could have spent that $50.00 on most of the Neville Brothers' discography on iTunes and saved myself the trouble - and the disappointment.

____________
On an unrelated note, Aaron Neville is 69 years old this year, and dude - he looks good. I don't know if it's genes or lifestyle, but Rowr.

Music

Tuesday, August 17, 2010
I'm pretty unmotivated today in terms of new, scintillating content, so instead I'm going to brag about the fact that I'm attending two concerts this week.

Tonight is the Neville Brothers at the Arvada Center for the Performing Arts. I love these guys, although I've never seen seen them live. Here they are performing one of my favorites, Fearless.


Tomorrow is Rush at the Red Rocks Amphitheater. I love these guys, too, although I pretty much see them every time they're in town. This year is the Time Machine Tour, which means they'll be performing their Moving Pictures album in its entirety. Here they are at the Toronto Rocks Festival, performing one of my favorites, Freewill. The Smart Man and I saw this tour as well, again at Red Rocks. It seems like Red Rocks is the only venue Rush will schedule here in Denver. Which makes perfect sense to me.


To make up for my excess of fun, I'll be taking Thursday and Friday off in order to shampoo the carpets here at the Big Yellow House. Yay?

Legacy

Monday, August 16, 2010
I really enjoy reading the writing of Christopher Hitchens. I think he's smart, well-read, reasons well, and his point of view is almost always defensible.

That doesn't mean I agree with him. In fact, I disagree with a good portion of what he writes. As a liberal, I think his political point of view has always been misguided. Even though I'm an Atheist, I don't think Religion Poisons Everything. I tend more towards the opinion that if something is going to get poisoned, it's because people do it, and sometimes use religion as a rationalization to do what they want to do. But he always makes me think, which is the most complementary thing I think I can say about a writer.

I admire the man, and never so much as now, as he faces his probable death from esophageal cancer. During recent public appearances and writings, he has firmly established his legacy of unwavering intellectual honesty in a way that really touches me. He makes no excuses for the role his personal lifestyle choices may have played in his illness. Knowing that there is probably a connection between his lifestyle and his diagnosis, he doesn't rail against the universe, but accepts his outcome while still acknowledging his disappointment that he won't be able to do the things he had planned for the next decade. He's honest about his feelings, concerns and perceptions about being a cancer patient.

I certainly wish the man a full recovery (although I know it's not likely), but regardless of the outcome, he's earned my respect as a role model for intellectual honesty when facing adversity.

2010 Flower Pr0n - Quebec City

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Sleepfail

Saturday, August 14, 2010
I'm so sick of not sleeping through the night, I can't even tell you. On weekdays, I usually end up with five or six hours, since I waste a number of hours in the middle of the night laying there wondering, "would it really be so bad to be addicted to Lunestra?" On the weekends, I can usually total 8 hours of sleep - it's just not all in a row. As the Smart Man notes, I am a failure at sleeping.

I think what pisses me off the most is how much time I waste laying there not sleeping. In a normal week, I spend 10-15 hours laying in bed in the middle of the night, doing nothing but wishing I was asleep. I don't think there's anyone on the planet who couldn't find something to do with an additional 10-15 hours a week.

Stupid insomnia. Stupid sleepfail.

Boogie Blogging Friday - Feeling Better Edition

Friday, August 13, 2010

Boogie's nose is feeling a bit better after two weeks of A&D, although the ointment is making his beard kind of dirty and greasy. He's still stuffy, though, so we've switched to the Chlor-trimaton as an anti-histamine. Hopefully that'll dry the river the snot.

He really prefers winter, delicate flower and lover of snow that he is.

Quit Asking or I'll Hit You in the Face with a Shovel

Thursday, August 12, 2010
When people won't take 'no' for answer, they're trying to control you.

Whenever someone asks me to do something I don't want to do, and I say "no," I have to keep this truism in mind. Mostly because I'm the kind of person who doesn't like to say no. If I can perform a task for someone, I usually like to do so, especially if it leads to an outcome that will make me satisfied or happy. So if I say 'no,' there's a pretty good reason - usually it's because I have a previous commitment that will not allow me to commit the hours necessary to the new task. And occasionally, it's because I simply don't want to, which is also a perfectly valid reason.

But that doesn't stop some people from asking again. And again. And AGAIN, until I tell them to fuck off and never darken my doorstep again.

Now, I understand it's okay for people to try and convince me that their priorities should be my priorities. Negotiation and influence are part of the human condition. So it's not like I'll bite their face off and dig their eye out with fork if I initially say 'no' and they make an attempt to convince me to change my mind.

But if they make their case, and I tell them the answer is still 'no' because I believe my reasons for answering that way are still valid, they should do us both a favor and drop the subject. Because if they don't, I'll take their insistence as an attempt to control me. And make no mistake - that's exactly what it is. Since time is pretty much the only thing we can't get any more of, when someone insists I should shove aside my own priorities and desires and spend my time the way they want me to, they're implying their priorities and desires are more important than mine.

So my response to this bit of disrespect is probably going to eventually head into ugly territory. How fast it goes there depends on how much I like the person, what I feel I owe them from a relationship point of view, how often they've pulled this little maneuver, and how ridiculous their request is.

As my Hot Mom used to say - "no" is complete sentence. Get over it.

The Mythical Adult

Wednesday, August 11, 2010
What is "adulthood?" When do we become "adults?"

Prompted by a comment from a friend, I've been giving this some thought. There are times when I look at my life, my accomplishments, and I think, "I've arrived!" Other times, I make some bonehead mistake or act like a goober and I feel like I'm an awkward teenager again. Since I'm in my mid-forties now and I still don't feel like an adult all the time, I have to say that adulthood is a continuing process, with milestones that push you from one phase to the next.

For me, my first milestone came when I joined the Navy and realized that this was a career where I could excel, do meaningful work, and contribute the well-being of others, without having to worry about being one of the popular girls. I'd always had a good work ethic, but finding my niche in a community that valued my skills and natural abilities (who would also pay me for the privilege of belonging) was my first step into adulthood.

Next came the birth of my children. I'm sure 99% of the parents out there have had this experience, but when they were admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (9 weeks premature, so low birth weight), the incredible responsibility of what I had done - brought lives into this world for which I was 100% responsible - was simply crushing. I had done this - I was the one who made this decision, and was now responsible for the outcome. First came the thought, what the fuck was I thinking?, followed by the realization that it really didn't matter what the fuck I was thinking, THIS was my new reality. Thankfully it all seems to have worked out okay, at least so far.

When my kids were two years old, my father died at a relatively young age. It's almost impossible to describe what this feels like to people who have not yet lost a parent who raised them. The safety net is gone - losing a person who has raised you makes you feel very alone, and rocks your world. It's a tough realization, that it really is up to you, to make your own decisions and find your own way. Scary - and liberating, to a certain degree. The death of my father, whose pride in my military service knew no bounds, freed me to make different decisions about my life from that point forward.

When I was in my very early thirties, my life fell apart. Not in an irrecoverable way (obviously), and the details aren't important, but the lesson was. The realization - the deep-down, no holds-barred, rock-my-world realization - that I was responsible for every aspect of my life, and had the power to change the parts I didn't like. What followed was some damn hard work, and a new, fully adult life. Or so I thought.

Then my kids graduated from high school and started making their own adult decisions, and I realized I wasn't as adult as I had thought. Watching them struggle, make mistakes, fail, without my being there to pick them up and steer them in the right direction was an aspect of adulthood I wasn't really ready for. I had to remind myself, again and again, that allowing them to make what I perceived as bad decisions was an aspect of respecting them as young adults. We've managed, and while they're not completely off the payroll just yet (the Smart Boy ships out for the U.S. Navy in September and the Smart Girl is a college sophomore this fall), they're making their own way, and making good decisions. And I'm on my own again, living a life unhindered by daily obligations to my children.

I'm not naive enough to think that I don't have many more phases to go through on my journey to adulthood. My Hot Mom is self-sufficient and living independently, and while she really hopes she just drops dead one day, there's no guarantees she won't need help at some point. My children may eventually choose to have children of their own,* making me (shudder) a grandmother. Eventually, I'll retire and face the challenges inherent in having an older body and a fixed income.

I'm sure all of these experiences will bring me one step closer to this mythical "adulthood." I don't know that I'll ever feel entirely like an adult, though. Maybe when I'm dead.

____________
*MANY, MANY YEARS FROM NOW.

Feminism and Moral Relativism

Tuesday, August 10, 2010
It seems like this topic has been coming up in my life quite a bit lately. During my Global Studies class at DU this summer, the subject of multiculturalism and moral relativism was very much a topic of discussion, and I also recently finished Nomad, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who is a former Muslim and a political activist, especially as it relates to Muslim women.

The two sides of the argument appear to be that either we owe non-judgmental cultural respect to non-enlightened societies,* or we owe the members of those societies, especially women, the benefit of a more liberal way of life to include the core principles of the enlightenment.

People much smarter than I have debated this issue, of course, and they don't seem to have come to any hard and fast conclusion. And yet, even if I'm not as smart as the heavy-hitters in this debate, I have a vested interest in feminism, and it seems that if I self-identify as such then I have a moral obligation to decide how I wish to approach this question and act accordingly.

From my point of view, I have an ethical dilemma here. I value self-determination, both for individuals and for societies. My expression of that value is that I tend to abhor the paternalistic assumption that the west needs to "educate" other cultures on the "right" way to conduct their governments, their culture, their religious belief. Such self-involved snobbery has led to some pretty barbarous behavior in the past, and I'm not sure we have an historical leg to stand on when we try to justify it.

Competing with this value is the fact that I don't think certain cultural aspects of tribal and Islamic societies can be justified on any level. Genital mutilation, for example. I really don't care if this practice is rationalized as a cultural norm, a religious obligation, whatever - I don't think it can be ethically justified, and the young girls who are subject to this practice deserve protection. Genital mutilation is just a single aspect of female subjugation in traditional tribal and Muslim societies, of course, and from my point of view, none of it can be rationalized away.

I have to admit that most religious practices, restrictions and dogma strike me as equally ridiculous. Because that's the case, I try not to comment on specific practices of specific creeds, unless it's particularly egregious or pertains to secular law. To be honest, it's mostly because I have the luxury of not caring - I live in a liberalized society protected by the Establishment Clause.

But the one value that trumps the others, and the one value on which other freedoms are built, is that of free expression. So, even when I don't care about what others choose to believe in a religious context, I do care about whether or not those people have the opportunity to speak freely without the threat of violence. It seems evident that such expression is not really permitted in many tribal and traditional Muslim cultures, which means the women in those cultures are doubly damned - not only are they subjugated to men, they're not allowed to complain about it, either.

That's not okay with me. And the fact that it's not okay with me means that my decision regarding multiculturalism and moral relativism is pretty much made. I do believe there are some absolute ethical guidelines associated with the way individuals interact with others, and with their government. Those guidelines should not be based on belief, which is a chimera in most cultures, but should be ethically defensible using logic. If a belief system (such as the aspects of Islam that permit the subjugation of women and the destruction of infidels for the crime of not agreeing with you) cannot be justified on that basis, then perhaps Ayaan Hirsi Ali is correct, and it's past time for the opening of the Muslim and tribal mind and the liberalization of those societies.

After all, if a belief system has to threaten (and carry out) violence in order to protect its status quo in the marketplace of ideas, how defensible can it be on an intellectual and ethical level?


__________
*In this context, non-enlightened societies are defined as those who do not embrace the values and mores of post-enlightenment western societies such as personal determination, responsibility and freedom; free expression; the reservation of violence as the sole province of the state; enabling the ownership of personal property, etc.

Perfession-el Edu-macashun

Monday, August 9, 2010
This week I'm going to be in a week-long training session on how to implement and program a Small and Medium Enterprise Telephony Solution.*

What that means to you is that I won't be around as much to keep you yahoos in line, although I have tried to pre-post. I try to take my responsibilities as your dancing monkey seriously, I do.

What that means to me is that I'm making progress towards one of my professional goals this year, which is essentially to become a Subject Matter Expert on this particular product. While I consider it a worthwhile goal in its own right, I'm not sure how excited I am about it - I've always been a LARGE ENTERPRISE engineer, and I still harbor some residual snobbishness about the whole thing.

In the meantime, feel free to talk about me behind my back - I (probably) won't see it until I get home, and by then I will have started drinking, so it won't matter, anyway.

___________
*See? Now most of you don't know any more than you did before you started reading, and I put myownself to sleep just writing it out.

2010 Flower Pr0n - Quebec City

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Boogie Blogging Friday - Cat Friday Edition

Friday, August 6, 2010

I'm not usually a fan of cats (which is why we do "Boogie Blogging Friday" around here rather than "Friday Cat Blogging), but I'll make an exception in this case.

Here, kitty, kitty...

'Tard of the Week, Special Edition - Bruce Hausknecht

Thursday, August 5, 2010
California's Proposition 8 has been overturned by Federal Judge Vaughn Walker. Hurray!

The whackadoos are now clamoring to have their voices heard as they claim this decision portends the end of civilization as we know it. Boo!

I think we all know that this issue will eventually end up in front of the Supreme Court, and I think it's fair to say that eventually, this civil rights issue will finally be put to rest from a legal point of view. That being the case, I'm content to pretty much ignore the bleating of the religious right. Their protestations smacks of the arguments made by the proponents of Jim Crow, and at this point, engaging with them typically just makes me sad as their relevance in a modern world slips further and further away.

But for Mr. Bruce Hausknecht, I'm going to make an exception.

Brucey apparently has many jobs within the media, but the most common one appears to be "Judicial Analyst." He fulfills this role for a variety of fundamental Christian and right-wing groups, including CitizenLink, Prayer and Action, and the EVER POPULAR and LOVING Focus on the Family. He's also evidently an attorney who received his J.D. from Northwestern University, although the only place I was able to confirm this was on CitizenLink's website.* I understand Northwestern University is a highly ranked institution, which means they must be so very pleased when one of their distinguished alums comes out with drivel like this:
Judge Walker’s ruling raises a shocking notion that a single federal judge can nullify the votes of more than 7 million California voters, binding Supreme Court precedent, and several millennia-worth of evidence that children need both a mom and a dad.
Really, Brucey? Really? You graduated from one of the most prestigious law schools in the country, and you can't see how, within the context of our Republic and the checks and balances that come with having three branches of government, the judicial branch might overturn a popular vote that violates the rights of a minority under our Constitution? REALLY? Northwestern's standards must have really slipped.

Judge Walker, who was appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush, is not a "single federal judge" in this context. He is the representative of the judicial branch of our government, and his appointment and decision were executed in accordance with the U.S. Constitution. Is Brucey seriously suggesting that the Constitution should be amended to disallow the judicial branch from overturning state laws that do not pass constitutional muster? Or (more likely) is he suggesting that only right-wing Christian zealot approved decisions should pass constitutional muster? Nice job upholding your oath to the constitution, there, 'tard.

Brucey's twitter page describes him as "Husband, father, follower of Christ, culture warrior." Nowhere in there does it claim "defender of the Constitution" or "critical thinker." May I suggest, Brucey, that you follow your version of Christ and take your sorry ass to a culture that wants to stay in the 18th century? Because around here, the values of the day are equal rights, inclusiveness, and upholding the Constitution.

What a fucking 'tard.


____________
*After the imbroglio the UCF went through to try and chase down the credentials of the LHC doomsayer and all-around whackadoo Walter Wagner, I now take claims of educational achievement with a grain of salt. Sad, but there it is.

Who are the Real Americans?

Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Yesterday's discussion surrounding the possible modification of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution got me thinking about how this country defines its "citizens." Smart reader David, a historian, made what I consider to be an important point:
First, as has been pointed out, this was an attempt to enshrine the values of the 1866 Civil Rights Act into the Constitution, and if this represents a problem to some folks, well, I can live with that. Both were explicitly aimed at overturning Dred Scott and making sure that people couldn't be denied "inalienable rights" simply because the majority decided they were unworthy. Remove those protections and there is nothing in the laws to prevent such artificial distinctions from being reimposed - once you start making value distinctions on citizenship (do we like your kind?) rather than objective ones (were you born here? Did you pass the naturalization process?) the potential for abuse is clear and inevitable.
I had not thought of the 14th Amendment in this light (to my shame - I should have), and my mind went immediately to those that are constantly talking about how we need to "take America back" for "REAL Americans."

Usually I consider such rhetoric to be thinly veiled racism, but really - such a yardstick could be applied to anything at all.

Consider my own family - we count as members people who could reasonably be considered white, black and Vietnamese. We run the gamut from Christian (in some cases fundamentally so), to Buddhist, to Atheist, to agnostic. We're Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. We have both natural born and naturalized citizens. Our opinions on abortion, evolution, creationism, entitlement programs, divorce, the role of government in daily life, state's rights, defense, the role of the establishment clause, and every other matter is so diverse you couldn't get us to agree on anything without large amounts of Thorazine and a fully charged cattle prod.

And yet - we're Americans. All of us. From my Smart Girl who is eligible to join the Daughters of the American revolution on her father's side to my Hot Cousin's Smart Husband, who is a recently naturalized citizen, all of us count ourselves Americans.

So by what yardstick does one of us become "not a REAL American?" Am I not a real American, in spite of my years of service to this country, because I don't share the religious beliefs of the majority of my fellow citizens? Are the evolution deniers among us not real Americans because they deny the scientific consensus of those who are qualified to judge? Is my Smart Girl not a real American because she finds other women attractive instead of men?

Who gets to judge? Surely not Sarah Palin and her ilk - and surely not me. I am no more qualified to accuse someone of not being a "real American" than the Palinistas, and for the same reason - my yardstick is not objective. I may think those that don't agree with me regarding science and religion are misinformed, misled or even intellectually dishonest, but that doesn't mean they're not American.

As David pointed out, the objective standard is the 14th Amendment. Long may it remain the law of the land.

My Ambivalence - Let Me Show You It

Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Last night before bed, I was reading the August 1st edition of Newsweek. There was an article in there about how Lindsey Graham and other political figures have decided to push for a change to the U.S. Constitution to deny citizenship to babies born on U.S. soil who do not have at least one parent who are legal residents or citizens.

My ambivalence on this matter is legion.

The first source of my unease is the fact that I take the Constitution very seriously. I spent the first half of my adult life with the understanding that I would die to protect the ideals it represents, and that oath has permeated every aspect of my self-image and my values. So when someone pops up and says, "Hey! Let's amend the Constitution to keep those brown folks from dropping their anchor babies here and sucking up our entitlement money!", I tend to narrow my eyes and put the burden of proof on those who want the change. And that burden is heavy. VERY heavy. Aside from the fact that the U.S. Constitution defines the law by which all others are judged in this country, it also has an enormous significance as an historical document. Changing it should never be taken lightly.

The second issue I have with this suggestion is that is seems more than a little mean-spirited, for a variety of reasons.

This smacks of punishing the child for the sins of the parents. Yes, the parent or parents came here illegally. Yes, they should have followed the appropriate process to gain legal residency if they wanted to live here. Yes, they're gaming the system to a certain degree by having a baby that is entitled to U.S. citizenship while they themselves are here illegally. But I have a hard time believing they're doing these things because it's convenient. For the most part, I believe these people are making these choices because they want their families to have better lives and see the United States as the location where they can achieve that goal. Punishing these people unto the Nth generation because their ancestors couldn't get a Visa seems a bit disproportionate, and smacks of the "Fuck you, I've got mine" mentality that permeated the health care debate.

Additionally, I feel like enshrining such an attitude in our Constitution is very, well, unAmerican. If we, as a nation, have a set of values by which we live, I don't think they're personified by telling families who want to engage in American life as fully fledged and participating citizens to get fucked and get lost.

And yet...and yet.

Illegal immigration is a problem in this country, and it needs to be addressed, sooner rather than later. While our tradition of allowing a constant stream of immigration into the U.S. has kept our culture and our economy vibrant, it needs to be regulated and managed in a way that benefits both the country as a whole and those who wish to join us. I don't think we should lose our damn minds and attempt to seal the border against the influx of unskilled labor - a quick comparison of the results of our immigration reality compared to that of European countries pretty much tells the tale of how that would work out. Nor do I think we should throw open the boarders indiscriminately singing "come on down!" with no regard to the skills of those who want to come and the needs of the communities they would join. 

I haven't entirely made up my mind about this proposed Constitutional Amendment. I lean towards "no," simply because I tend towards conservatism when it comes to changing the U.S. Constitution, and I believe we can address the issue with administrative law or enforcement activities. The proposed Amendment smacks of a zero-sum game to me, but we'll see how it plays out.

I Need a New Hobby

Monday, August 2, 2010
Well, I've decided not to take a class this fall at the University of Denver. Since I took two classes this summer to accommodate my required study abroad requirement, I've used up my tuition assistance entitlement for the year, and I'd have to pay out of pocket. Since the classes offered didn't appeal to me, and my Smart Girl still requires financial assistance for her own college experience, I've decided to save the money and goof off for the rest of the year.

The problem with that plan, of course, is that for me, going to school is almost a hobby. My company requires that I have a degree plan and that I work on it in order for me to receive tuition assistance, but really - I'd go regardless. I like the structure of learning in a classroom environment, and the degree plan requirement has actually forced me to take classes I would not otherwise have taken. I consider broadening my intellectual horizons a good thing, especially when my awesome benefits foot the majority of the bill.

So I think I'm going to find myself somewhat at loose ends for the rest of the year, since I won't have any homework or discussion board requirements.

Of course, I am in the middle of a mini-remodel of the Big Yellow House which is consisting of painting one room a month and changing the accessories and decorations while I'm at it, but that's still only one room a month - I can usually pick at that over the course of a single week and get it done without too much stress.

So I need a new hobby to tide me over until January. Suggestions from the peanut gallery are, as always, welcome, unless you suggest I learn how to pole dance, or insist that I train to run a marathon. Then I'll break out the Shovel of Doom™ on your sarcastic ass.

Wall of Shame - August 1, 2010

Sunday, August 1, 2010

"Hey! Look at me! I'm totally parking in a handicapped parking space without a placard, but guess what? It's okay, because I'm waiting in the car!"

Guess what, driver of the Honda minivan, license plate 076-ENN, parked in the handicapped spot in front of the Parker, CO Safeway on the corner of Main and Parker on August 1, 2010 at 6:45 p.m.? It's not okay. It's against the law, and doing so makes you a huge ASSHOLE. And you know what makes this even more egregious? The fact that you chose to exhibit this behavior while your kids were in the car.

Yeah, nice job, douchebag.

Cross posted on Colorado Assholes.

2010 Flower Pr0n - Quebec City