Who Cares? Magazine, Volume 2, Issue 18

Mariah Carey marries Nick Cannon in surprise wedding! The couple impulsively wed on a Caribbean island Nick just bought! Is Nick marrying her for her money? For status? Who Cares!

Bleh

It's snowing here this morning. Disappointing after yesterday's 75 degree day...

Well Behaved Women Rarely Make History, Volume VII

This is Johnnie Carr. She died of a stroke on February 22, 2008 in Montgomery, Alabama, at the age of 97.

While the name "Rosa Parks" is the one people usually associate with women of color in the Civil Rights Movement, I would submit that Johnnie Carr is the unsung heroine of that story.

Mrs. Carr succeeded the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as president of the Montgomery Improvement Association in 1967, a post she held at her death. It was that group that led the boycott of city buses in 1955 after Mrs. Parks, a black seamstress, was arrested for refusing to give up her seat to whites on a crowded bus. As the civic group’s president, Mrs. Carr helped lead several initiatives to improve race relations and conditions for blacks. She was involved in a lawsuit to desegregate Montgomery schools, with her son, Arlam Jr., then 13, the named plaintiff.

In a time when women were considered second class citizens, and black people were considered third class citizens, Mrs. Carr not only stood up, but did so in a way that resulted in real change. Articulate, dignified, and tenacious, her work helped lead the way at a time when those in power were ferociously defending the status quo.

When asked about her life in civil rights, Mrs. Carr responded, “When we first started, we weren’t thinking about history, we were thinking about the conditions and the discrimination.”

Dedicated, feisty, unrepentant, and yes, ill-behaved. A life well-lived, Mrs. Carr. Thank you for your work.

H/T to The Associated Press, for the background material.

Shame, Shame

Yesterday I learned that ABC News broke a story about "Principal's Meetings," where interrogation techniques were discussed and approved by "principals" in the administration. From the article:

"Highly placed sources said a handful of top advisers signed off on how the CIA would interrogate top al Qaeda suspects -- whether they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding.

"The high-level discussions about these "enhanced interrogation techniques" were so detailed, these sources said, some of the interrogation sessions were almost choreographed -- down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic.

"The advisers were members of the National Security Council's Principals Committee, a select group of senior officials who met frequently to advise President Bush on issues of national security policy.

"At the time, the Principals Committee included Vice President Cheney, former National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General John Ashcroft."

My concern about the content of this story is the identity of these "principals."

Vice President Cheney, Secretary Donald Rumsfield, and Attorney General John Ashcroft came as no surprise to me. These men have specialized is doing evil in the name of righteousness, and my expectations of their moral behavior are already pretty low.

Secretary Condoleezza Rice and Director George Tenet have already proven that they were too weak and incompetent to successfully execute their duties morally and successfully during W's first term. Again, my expectations of their ability to stand up and do the right thing are already low.

But General Powell. Oh, General Powell.

Of all the statesmen that have come and gone in my adult life, you were the one I most admired. While I recognized that you were, by definition, a politician, I also thought that you were a professional warrior and an honorable man. Obviously, I was wrong, for what professional, honorable warrior would sacrifice our country's honor and morality by approving torture to be carried out in our name?

I'm ashamed of you, General Powell. I'm ashamed for you. Even if your opinions were steamrolled by Cheney and Rumsfield, how could you not resign over this issue? Remaining silent was the act of a coward, and you've compromised your legacy. Or do you really believe that water-boarding our enemies is a just and moral act?

Shame. Shame, shame.

Get Over Yourself - Please

I had lunch with Hot Chick Anne today. While I was waiting for her outside our favorite lunch-time Mexican eatery, I overheard a phone conversation. The speaker was in a shirt and tie, and was obviously leaving a message for someone. Only the names have been changed to protect the pretentious:

"Yes, this is Sam Schmuckatelli, and I have the 411 on the Smith project."

Really? Really? Seriously, dude, no one uses that expression. No one used that expression when it wasn't out of date. Because it's pretentious. And dumb.

Get over yourself - please.

The Moral Code

This is today's Austin Cline poster, and it alludes to a topic that I think is fascinating.

I know that the people who visit this blog come from a variety of religious backgrounds, and have a variety of ethical frameworks. The question at hand is, where did that framework come from?

While I don't think we have any screechy fundies that hang out around here, I have been asked how I can determine a moral code without a belief in a religion or a creator god. This question always baffles me. Do fundamentalists honestly believe that those of us who don't believe as they do are out there killing and eating babies since we don't have the restraining influence of a punishing god to restrain our behavior? Seriously?

However, the question at hand, i.e., where do derive your moral code, is an important and legitimate one. For some people, the guidance provided by their faith is the cornerstone of their ethics, and it works for them. But what about the rest of us?

The discussions of objective and subjective morality has been beaten to death, so I'm not interested in rehashing it here. I am interested in how agnostics and atheists determine their moral code. Is it enlightened self-interest? Social-contract ethics? Kant's Categorical Imperative?

For myself, I'm a fan of Kant. Thinking of my choice in the context of everyone in the world making the same choice gives my actions context and scale.

I don't pretend to know all the answers, or to have a corner on moral and ethical behavior. I guess it just bothers me when the fundies claim they do.

Vacation Day

I'm taking a vacation day today. Not for any particular reason - I just realized last week that I had 16 days of vacation left for the fiscal year, and my company has a "use them or lose them" policy. So if I don't get to slacking before September 30th, then I'm out of luck. That's certainly not going to happen - sticking it to the man is one thing, but letting the man stick it to me is out of the question. Seriously.

The reason I had so much unscheduled vacation is because my Smart Man is currently working as a contractor, and as such, gets no paid time off. He does take a couple days off here and there, but longer vacations are kind of out of the question until the company hires him as an employee. Since I've been with my company for 11+ years, I get 7 floating holidays and 15 vacation days a year, plus sick time. I rarely take the sick time, but it's nice not to have to burn my vacation if I do need a day off because I feel like poo.

So my big plans for the day include:

• Completing some homework
• Playing Age of Empires III (with the Conqueror's Expansion Pack)
• Ignoring Nathan's Meme
• Watching Tania on Jeopardy!
• Babying Boogie the Giant Schnauzer
• Making Toll House Cookie bars for the Smart Man and the Smart Boy
• Boggling over the idea that giving a masseuse a chastity belt will prevent her from performing other sex acts. (No, I'm not making that up.)
• Trying to shake off the vague feeling of regret I've had about my life since late last night.

What are you all doing today?