Category: Uncategorized

Thanks to , I actually ended up watching the state of the union address, and ranting at about every other sentence out of bush’s mouth. It was entertaining for me, I hoped it “enhanced” his experience. Mostly it wasn’t about how incredibly wrong he was. More the dangerously deceptive simplifications which he promulgates, and frequently innaccurate.

For an example of what I point out, allow me to point out that Bush isn’t protecting straight marriage. While gay marriage is off limits, and homos are still regarded as somehow anathema in society, they’ll continue to fuck up the straight marriages they’ll get into because they can’t accept their own sexuality. Possibly their kids as well, who will learn what marital sanctity and stability mean from their parents. That is a far greater risk to stable, healthy, heterosexual marriages than the possibility that heteros will get seduced into gay marriage.

The real problem comes from what society sees and publishes all over the place, the brief, spectacular marriages and divorces of the people in the public eye. If you want to improve stability of marriages, either make sure that once together, they stay together (because we like abusive couples being forced to stay together) or make it harder for the fickle to get married in the first place (I’m sure a waiting period on marriage would be popular, especially compared to scapegoating). The final alternative is a cultural one, and thus not really within the power of political leadership: take away the splendor of the wedding ceremony. Quit weighing down marriage with impossible expectations of happily ever after. Make it a solemn declaration of mutual responsibility. No drunken bashes afterwards. No strippers at bachelor parties before (do people really do that?) The marriage ceremonies I’ve most admired were ‘s and ‘s and Virginia’s and . They were simple, respectful, and an affirmation of a commitment already demonstrated.

That’s the least in scope of his problems, but it is representative of his methodology. Hurting people and denying them freedom, for short term political gain, and hanging pretty words on it.

Yesterday I gave my presentation (along with a classmate) on the San Francisco school desegregation program, its tie-in to american segregation, desegregation, and resegregation. My professor thought it was good. Certainly a boost to the ego. As has everyone who’s talked to me about it. I’ve developed a new metric for whether one has properly prepared for a presentation as well. If you can think of a few different threads you didn’t pursue because you didn’t have time, then you’ve preparedd adequately.

In particular the ones that I didn’t get into were related to residential preferences, and whether segregated minorities are suffering under an imposed situation or whether segregation is the result of their preferences as well. And if so, what that implies about desegregation. I think it is, and it suggests to me that explicit desegregation programs works on something tangentially related to the problem, and exacerbates the problems of white flight.

It adds a (necessary) dimension of complexity to the problem. Desegregation will never be enough. And, to my mind, it will never be a huge benefit for the cost. The resources that would be applied to such a program can be better applied elsewhere.

A few months ago, I finally got around to reading the book Robert Reich suggested we the audience read at his presentation at UC Berkeley, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. It was a good book, and it certainly added depth to my thoughts on do I stay or no, though it didn’t really change it, or make it easier. While I was checking that out, I figured I’d read something Reich wrote himself, and so it was that I started reading “I’ll be short.”

It’s a great outline of the liberal/democratic philosophy. It does a great job of providing statistics to outline the current problems. It also presents solutions to these problems. I didn’t find his presentation of the solutions to be as compelling as I would have liked, but he was, after all, being short. Each of his proposals could easily have been the subject of many articles examining its effectiveness, which is about what it would have taken for me to give them enthusiastic support. I’d give it a recommendation as an interesting, and engagingly written starting point for people who’d like to go a little deeper on policy issues

Some have pointed out that the presentation of the voting in S Vietnam under US protection/occupation was very similar to the presentation of the voting in Iraq recently. They are definitely comparisons to be made. But I ask you, if Iraqi insurgents are comparable to the Vietcong, who do you compare to China and North Vietnam?

This says something about who I subscribe to

Let me know if you’d prefer not to hear more of what is turning out to be a minor medical saga.

another shade of denial removed

About that GAO thing…

Well, late monday, after I’d faxed my transcripts, etc, I got an email from one of my interviewers urging me to apply, and telling me that there were two rounds of application. I explained my last minute awareness of the opportunity posting, my unawareness of the second round, and my feelings of excessive haste in composing my application. I asked her for advice. She had hr dump my old app, and said I could reapply in wave 2. She then offered pointers on how to write the essays I glossed over earlier. (turns out I was on the right track, but needed more detail.) Does this sound like a high level of interest on their part? Sure does to me. I’ll take care of it within the next seven days.

Speaking of the next seven days, travelzoo is offering some sweet travel dears. 175 round trip to denver (where I’ve never been and know no one, the former is good, the latter is bad), 202 round trip to washington dc (vice-versa). It’s pretty sweet, and a nice fantasy, but both financially and temporally, not so swell. OTOH, minneapolis has been remarkably temperate the past couple days. After discovering I’d left my laptop on campus, I took the bus back to campus this evening without a coat, hat, or gloves, and never really felt uncomfortably cold. Have I seen the worst that the winter has to offer already? Sure, it sucked at points, but it still seems to have warmed up so quickly. Winter should involve doubt as to whether the sun and moon were eaten by a great wolf. 😉

Oh yeah, and I want to stab compstaff so much. They completely fucked up our departmental webpage in the transition between web publishing systems. I do not want to have to go through inordinate sums of effort just to straighten up this new “more convenient” system that I am at best skeptical of. They should be eaten by rabid weasels.

So, none of my 3 relationships to date have started with me being gaga over the good looks of my potential significant other. I always bonded over other things. With Steve there was a geek culture compatability, (star trek, the internet before it was universal, rpg’s, other stuff). With Josh (easily the best looking of the three; hi, josh), there was an incredible intellectual match, plus much similarity in the particulars of our life situations, though we dealt with it differently. And with Mark, I appreciated his style, which he had in abundance, though on substance, we were not so compatible. (I don’t regret breaking up with him when I did, but I do regret being an ass about it. A common theme for all 3, now that I think about it).

Now I’ve had engagements of varying lengths with people of various levels of attractiveness, ranging from “I’m sorry, did you say something? You seem to have taken my speech processing centers offline with your looks” to “that bag over your head makes you look so much sexier”.

So, what matters in a relationship? And how important are looks to the equation? Does it vary by the person? The last one may be the most important question, and I’d say the answer is a definite yes.

Do I shoot myself in the foot when dealing with the hot guys by either drowning them in drool or supressing the reflex so hard that I fail to show any interest? Maybe I just start seeing them as pretty and stop seeing them as people. That seems like a good explanation for how I sometimes feel about it. Ah, to have taken care of this shit when I was a teen, like most people do. Of course at that time I was mostly focused on appearances, as substance was so wildly out of my control. Hrm. Rambling. Done. Share your thoughts if you have ’em.

I figured out the other day what the movie was that I associated with “Saved”. And that is “Latter Days”. The thematic similarities are obvious, but I’m not sure why I thought they were at the same time.

As per usual, I don’t know enough to hold the opinions I do.

I was going to write something almost unabashedly positive. Then I read ‘s post on the matter. Now I’m not so sure. I value democracy, and I value freedom, and those two aren’t always the same thing.

I think it’s great that they got the voting going on, and such high levels of participation (usually a sign of dissatisfaction, maybe here a result of novelty as well), but I think that’s the lesser virtue. Particularly if it turns into a tyrrany of the majority. And I fear that it could end up leading to civil war for them. I hope that a restrained benevolence informs the new Iraqi government. And perhaps it will.