Progressaurus Rex

you can't spell WORST without W!

2007-01-12T02:17:00.000+11:00

interesting. and not in a good way.

last night in wimpy chimpy's acceptance speech for winning the 2007 Incompetence Award™ (that's 7 years running- way to go, george!), he unceremoniously mentioned that patriot missile defense units were being sent to iraq.

these units are used as defense against long-range missile threats. there has yet to be a single attack by iraqi insurgents that employs the use of long-range missiles, nor is there any intelligence that would suggest that any insurgents -- not al qaeda, the sadrists, the sunnis in anbar province, etc. -- possess long-range missiles.

so let's consider this "surge" soft drink strategy (like the pepsi challenge -- 7 out of 10 people prefer surge to escalation!): it would appear to involve sending units that, one would assume, serve no purpose, given what we know about the threats on the ground.

so why send patriot missile defense units to iraq?

I just had a revelation! maybe we'll all have one this year!
who has long-range missiles?

ily,sds

it's official: bush supporters are psychos.

2006-12-01T09:38:00.000+11:00

no, really. according to a new study, it turns out that there's a direct link between mental illness and support for bush. part of the conclusion:

“Our study shows that psychotic patients prefer an authoritative leader,” [social work graduate student at Southern Connecticut State University Christopher] Lohse says. “If your world is very mixed up, there’s something very comforting about someone telling you, ‘This is how it’s going to be.’”

a previous study found similar results for a republican candidate, with psychiatric patients preferring nixon over mcgovern in the 1972 election. but this is hardly news, as studies have shown that many conservatives seek authoritarian leadership -- ie. as long as they're told everything's going to be fine, they're happy to take orders (and happy to call those who question the authority "traitors", happy to support journalists being thrown in jail for embarrassing der führer with such trifles as revelations of his lawbreaking, happy to support massive foreign policy blunders, and so forth). just so long as there's order.

perhaps the ideal conservative candidate for 2008 would be the stepfather. ORDER, damn it! what we need around here is some ORDER!

ily,sds

shorter conservatives: IT'S ALL ABOUT US!

2006-11-11T06:25:00.000+11:00

you, charles krauthammer, are a silly man and a hopeless partisan.

montana will have made no difference; conrad burns is set to be indicted. had he won, once he was forced to step down the democratic governor of his state would have appointed tester, anyway.

this election wasn't about dem/rep or lib/con, it was the year of the INDEPENDENT, and the great repudiation of karl rove's belief that there is no longer a center.

this was a major earthquake for the center, who firmly declared their belief that the ship of state was listing to starboard.

ideologues like krauthammer really want to believe americans love the right's radical ideas. well, radical ideas are fine -- when they move the country forward, and not sideways.

americans want "full speed ahead"...republicans lost because they had revealed their true intent: FULL SPEED TO THE RIGHT!

here's a hint for you and the republicans, charlie -- get rid of that social conservative, culture war baggage you're carrying. you're losing sensible conservatives to the libertarian party; one more "minor earthquake" like this, and all you'll have left are the snake-charmers and rapture-seekers.

believe me, charlie, if the last six years have taught me anything, it's that you don't want the rapture-seekers in charge.

ily, sds

save the balls! drown the cards!

2006-08-05T21:59:00.000+10:00

for those of you that either followed baseball or collected baseball cards at any time in your life, there's an interesting article over in slate about the death of baseball card collecting.

i'm glad this article confirms the suspicion that i had all along -- that the glut of cards thrown on the market in the 90's made collecting them confusing and, frankly, no longer any fun.

but it stops waaaay short of addressing the further issue of the decline of baseball itself. i have to wonder if any others that read this article quit collecting -- or following baseball at all, as i did -- in 1994, the year of the last baseball strike. it was that year that i decided that in no way could i support those overpaid crybabies anymore (and to that end, i give you exhibit a: barry bonds). and i can honestly say i don't miss it one bit. thank you, nfl!

i'm glad i got out when i did. now, true to the "little investor" premise, i held on to what cards i had by putting them in storage, expecting they'd continue to appreciate in value and that i'd eventually sell them for much more than i had paid.

four years later, 1998, i found myself in a bit of a financial crisis, so i decided to liquidate the cards. now, i thought i was making a great compromise in my original plan, which was to ferret the cards away for decades and then, at last, reap the rewards. to my surprise, i found that already the market was falling. the truth was that aside from some notables (mcgwire, for instance, who was in the process of hitting 70+ home runs that year), many of the other previously valuable cards were now next to worthless. it seemed that the whole market, which before had been roughly broken into major star/minor star/common value categories, had devolved to merely major or common (yes, the disappearing middle class). ALL of those $1-$5 blue chips now garnered no interest whatsoever.

"what gives?" i thought. then i went to a baseball card shop for the first time in years. it only took a moment to figure it out: there were so many special edition, collector's series, new brands, special sets, subsets, 3-d, jumbo, all-star, and other cards that i can't imagine how anyone could've even started to collect them all; you wouldn't have known where to begin. closer inspection revealed that many of these cards were just too expensive right out of the box. sure enough, the card companies had gone upscale -- five cards in one pack for $1? just because they've got shiny gold-colored foil on them? whatever. even a kid knows that's a ripoff.

ultimately this was the death of baseball cards as we knew them. the card companies had succumbed to greed, just as the players that adorned those cards had. they had diluted the market by juicing the cards, just as baseball had diluted the game by juicing the balls.

it reminded me, however, of an interesting card collecting anecdote from the 50s, though: the topps company, faced with too much leftover stock in 1952, dumped thousands of cards into the atlantic ocean. this actually increased the value of the remaining cards; indeed, the topps cards from the 50s are some of the rarest and most valuable of the mass-produced, post-ww2 baseball cards, and will always have a higher value-to-age ratio than any of the cards made since (by this i mean that when the cards made in the 80s are fifty years old, they won't be as valuable as the cards made in the 50s are now).

therefore, i propose that we dump half of all the cards produced since the 1980's, and also half of all baseball players currently playing into the atlantic ocean. this will add value to both the remaining cards, and the game of baseball.

ily, sds!

critical thinking: which war do we fight?

2006-05-27T13:15:00.000+10:00

does anyone else find it ironic that the many of the same people that dismiss global warming are the same ones that bought the rationale for the iraq war?

let’s compare global warming (present tense) and the iraq war (past tense):

both are (were) based on the same premise that something bad might happen that we could stop by taking preventative measures now.

both have (had) “experts” that support the reasoning behind the need to act, and “experts” that deny there is (was) a need to act.

pursuing the iraq war was clearly going to lead to death and destruction, the threat of disrupting the entire volatile middle east region, and alienating many of our allies. being wrong, or lying, about the rationale for war is at least gross incompetence and at most a crime against humanity.

yet that was an easy decision for many to embrace. $300 billion later, iraq is a mess, thousands are dead, terrorists have a new playground, oil prices are through the roof, leaders are dissembling or claiming they didn’t actually say what they actually said, and there’s no end in sight.

pursuing global warming will not lead to death and destruction. it will hopefully lead to lower pollution, cleaner air and water, a vast new renewable energy industry, energy independence (which, as we all should know, makes for better national security) and will have the added effect of weakening the oil companies that have a death grip on our country that adversely affects our foreign policy, economy, and political process.

yet this is heresy to some. instead, they’d prefer to protect the oil industry, which continually chooses profit over american wellbeing and security. they’d prefer to demonize the scientists that contend there is a problem, which is exactly what the oil industry would have them do. they prefer to demonize the media while failing to address the clear interest the oil and coal industries have in the status quo.

so the reality is there are those that willingly accept the path of death and destruction with unverifiable proof and shaky reasoning, but when it comes to making a positive change that is better for our communities, our country, our political process and our future, no matter what proof exists…well that’s too hard to accept, more proof is necessary.

that, my friends, is almost literally the definition of hypocrisy.

(ily, sds)

a message to our dear american friends from exxonmobil

2006-05-18T15:29:00.000+10:00

don't trust al gore!

yes, america, here’s someone who is concerned that we may be endangering our future by damaging our eco-system irreparably. sure, maybe he has some “alleged scientists” with so-called “facts” to back up his claims.

but you know what? al gore is obviously a nutjob. he must still be pissed off from that whole 2000 thing. we’ve got a better idea — let’s ignore all the experts in meteorology, oceanography, climatology and so on who spent years getting an education and studying these things. let’s ignore the historical record that proves a climate change is occurring.

there’s no reason to change your habits, america! let’s not let these ‘dead-enders’ and ’sore losers’ convince us that we have to make difficult choices for the benefit of future generations. that’s just defeatist liberal talk. the world is here for us, right now, and we should exploit every last resource we’ve been given by the lord god almighty. to not do so would be denying our devine right as masters of this dominion.

just have faith, and trust us, the oil companies. we’ve been drilling oil for a long time and we’re here to tell you that it will last FOREVER, and our earth is COMPLETELY IMPERVIOUS to EVERYTHING. in fact, the more oil we use, the stronger we make the earth, so just get used to the idea of being dependent on oil until the end of time — which of course, will never come, because our use of oil has actually turned the earth into an INDESTRUCTABLE SUPER-PLANET. you don’t have to thank us. we thank you, the loyal oil consumer. keep up the good work! and remember, al gore is that crazy guy who claimed he invented the internet, so he can’t be trusted.

love,
exxonmobil

(ily,sds)

first post of the year -- and it's only almost may!

2006-04-23T02:06:00.000+10:00

what can i tell you?
i've been busy.

most recently i've been to new zealand and the united states. wellington, nz really impressed me, with a compact and negotiable central business district and a perfect range of activities for 20- and 30-somethings: good food and bars, natural terrain featuring a harbor surrounded by hills and low mountains (for you sailing/hiking/camping types), many non-traditional and locally-owned shops, the national museums, library and galleries, good public transport (like the cable car, offering spectacular views of the city), and most important of all- an impressive selection of BELGIAN BEERS available in the grocery stores.

so of course i had a fantastic time in wellington. i think if i ever had the chance to live in new zealand, which i would love to do, wellington would be my first choice. not the destination for those of you that like beaches and sunny weather, however.

in the states, i spent the entire time with seréne, my lovely companion in this world. she lives in nashville,tennessee, but while i was there we visited my parents in florida and friends in indiana. florida is almost the exact opposite of wellington -- sunny days, beaches everywhere, very touristy. still, even that's fun to do every so often.

and so much has happened in this crazy world i can't even begin to get into it. maybe next time.

laterer!

(ily,sds)

2006 shaping up to be a fantastic year...

2005-12-30T14:50:00.000+11:00

everything going off all at once:
so let me get this straight- we're about to have a constitutional crisis. we're in the middle of a war within an interminable war (and about to bomb iran). we're essentially broke, in hock to china. and now the russians are ramping up their nuke programs again?

that's what i call leadership! bring on the champagne!

(ily,sds)

impeach jesus!

2005-12-20T17:53:00.000+11:00

ahh, that feeling... you know the one.
maybe you get chills, or goose bumps. or maybe you just have the feeling that you're "not alone."

you know what that is?

that's jesus, spying on you. yep. it's jesus, conducting an illegal spiritual wiretap on your ass, and there's nothing you can do about it. and he's gonna keep doing it. because he's more powerful than santa claus. and you know what santa claus can do.

there are at least 30 million people in america that might feel that it's completely alright for jesus to watch your every move. jesus knows what you look like naked. and they're fine with that. jesus doesn't care about the constitution. jesus was around long before the constitution ever existed.

hell, for all they know, jesus coulda freakin' wrote the constitution.

because jesus has a hand in everything. jesus made america. that's it. i said it. i wish i'd realized that before now but well, it took me moving to australia to finally get it. because i don't meet anyone from any other country that thinks jesus had anything to do with their country's creation.

and no, i've never met anyone from the vatican.

little did you know, but jesus and the holy ghost used to have equal powers, along with god. but god became almost ceremonial years ago, practically window-dressing in the world of spiritual power. jesus used to have to ask god if he could do things like enter people's souls, or create countries, but now he just does it without asking. after that, jesus and the holy ghost had a power struggle, and of course jesus won. the holy ghost was supposed to be watching jesus, making sure he didn't get out of line and start acting like a king or something crazy like that. but the holy ghost was sympathetic to jesus also, practically rubber-stamping everything jesus wanted to do. the holy ghost trusted jesus. nobody thought jesus was going for all the marbles, did they?

all i'm saying is that jesus has extraordinary powers, for a dead guy... who never mentioned once that he wanted people to worship him, or start a religion based on his teachings. just think if he had nukes, or a star wars program.

oh. i guess he does.

(ily,sds)

on ideological, illogical wars...

2005-12-09T07:25:00.000+11:00

having to do with drug culture and the so-called war on drugs in particular,
some recommended reading:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002661006_sunstamper04.htm
(authored by the former police chief of seattle. he advocates legalizing all drugs)

and

http://www.alternet.org/story/29113/
(by one garrison keillor. 8 years for murder vs. a life sentence for growing pot...?)

we sure do like to waste money on the fundamentalist agenda.
people need to start standing up to the hardline religious freaks. they're not just ruining a country, they're ruining a world.

separation of church and state?
how about separation of religion and society?
clearly religion -- not faith, or morality, mind you -- has done this world more harm than good.

i am an apostate.

(ily,sds)

my housemates are having sex right now

2005-12-04T14:37:00.000+11:00

yep. time to put on some music and do some bloggin'.
got a lot of things on my mind lately. very busy.
been thinking about copyright. and opposition parties.
and the drug culture. and music.
and sedition laws. and a woman.
probably should have put that last one first.

on copyright: how about overhauling all copyright on all artwork and literature completely, in favor of a system modeled after the audio home recording act of 1992? the article i've linked to begins:

Contrary to what the RIAA wants you to believe, it appears that making a copy of an audio recording may be perfectly legal in the US, even if you don't own the original recording, as long as it is for noncommercial purposes.

how about that? according to the act, there are already surcharges on digital recording devices and medium that are paid into a musical works fund. so any time you buy a hard drive or a cd burner, or blank cd's for that matter, you're already contributing to a fund that is distributed to record labels, publishers and songwriters yearly. something like this could extend to art and literature in the form of a similar surcharge on paper, printer toner, photocopy machines and other printing equipment. then the copyright authorities (which includes me) could focus on actual infringements for commercial gain, rather than wasting time hunting down university students who just want to download new music or artwork for their dorm rooms (or their websites).

incidentally, this witch hunt the riaa is on is a sham -- the system is already in place to allow for the public consumption of music online. just track the downloads and pay the royalties accordingly, i say. who's going to tell the public they already have the license to copy?!

speaking of opposition parties (was i?), here i am with opposition member peter garrett-

peter, for those that don't know, was for years the lead singer of the australian band midnight oil. there are now rumors circulating that he could be in a position of leadership by the time the next elections roll around. this would be most welcome news for labor voters who have most recently suffered through a host of walking, talking psychoses in labor leadership.

it would also be good news for me, because not only do i have this badass picture, i have some old signed midnight oil memorabilia from a 1993 concert in atlanta.

i also personally think that mr garrett would be an excellent party leader, and leader of a country, if that's the next logical step, though it would be good for him to get a bit more used to the political tradewinds. he's still catching up to his new life as a 'pollie', near as i could tell.

by the way, mr garrett and i talked about copyright. we also talked about the exxon valdez wreck in prince william sound, alaska, 1989. he noted that exxon has still only paid less than 10% of the $6.5 billion in punitive damages they owe from that oil spill. one interesting thing that i would add to that is how ironic it is that exxonmobil would have been able to pay that off with their third quarter profits from 2005 alone. with $3 billion to spare.

life must be tough at exxon.

and what of the drug culture, music, sedition laws...
and that woman?

well, next time, perhaps.

(ily,sds)

the congressional pay raise red herring

2005-11-27T11:51:00.000+11:00

there's an argument that comes up often this time of year -- especially notable in this time of expensive disasters, costly wars, record-breaking deficits and congressional lobbying scandals. the question is, amidst all of these financial turmoils, why did lawmakers in the republican-led house again vote themselves a pay raise? and why aren't democrats making an issue of it?

because the reason lawmakers, in general, give themselves pay raises is to keep their pay scales in line with inflation (that's almost always the foundation of an argument in favor - it's actually an annual 'cost of living increase' that is automatic unless it's voted down). and each lawmaker represents around 600,000 constituents (not all voters, mind you). if you break it down, however, it means that in a year, each constituent is paying their representative roughly 27.5 cents (165,200/600,000). even if you take all of those ineligible to vote out of the equation, it's still significantly less than $1 a year.

moreover, democrats would have had to be complicit in this bit of pocket-stuffing in a vote that passed by an overwhelming 392-31. my guess is democrats are wagering the pay raise question is, as it always has been, a non-issue.

certainly there is something to the argument that we're still not getting our money's worth, though! And furthermore, the timing of this pay raise is horrible.

nevertheless, i always like to bring this up around congressional pay raise time, because it puts some perspective into the "those money-grubbing bastards" argument. to most of them the congressional salary is a drop in their gold-plated piss buckets. the majority of our lawmakers are extremely wealthy and some are in the habit of contributing a portion (or even all) of their congressional salaries to charity. it takes far more money to run a campaign these days, and $165k is chump change that looks much better if it's used charitably.

it's far better to rail upon the shameless lobbying money the representatives make (one lobbyist's minor contribution can easily dwarf the $3100 raise they just got)... or how about cutting ineligible voting entities (i.e. corporations, unions and lobbies) out of the process? doesn't anyone else find it ironic that these non-voting goliaths have more influence on our elections than the voters themselves? certainly, the outcome of any election affects businesses; that is not being argued here. The point is that our elections are bought and sold on a market where lobbyists are the stocktraders, legislators (and their votes) are the stock, and corporations, unions and lobbies are the stockholders.

and individual citizens are merely bystanders with little or no influence on the outcome.

(ily,sds)

my cat has an abscess ... and other news

2005-11-26T19:54:00.000+11:00

ah. sydney. normally a sunny and very warm place this time of year... overcast and rainy all week. well, i'm not one of those sun-worshipping types, actually. i won't complain -- it does make my 20 minute walk to work quite pleasant. i work in woolloomooloo. that word's got eight O's in it. what i can't figure out, though, is why there are two L's and then one L.
Doesn't make sense.

today i drove my bitchin' van around sydney. had some errands to run, laundry, busted speakers to get reconed, etc. just an average saturday for anyone in a first-world country, i suppose. funny how we've made our towns and cities so convenient for people with cars. it's amazing to think how stifling a major fuel crisis would actually be. "running out to the store" and whatnot. sprawl is the symptom of an oil-soaked society.

oh yea, and mr boobs, the betesticled fellow he is, went out and got into a fight last week. got himself whacked pretty good in the head and now he has a stinky, scabby abscess.

this pretty much means the end of the halcyon days, the testosterone-infused antics of mr boobs. we'll have to take him to the vet and get him desexed and microchipped. i'm actually not a fan of the australian requirement to have pets micro'd. it pisses me off, to tell the truth. it just seems unnatural and weird.

and an uncomfortably short step away from human microchipping.

(ily,sds)