are the three reasons that I am opposed to her
George Bush nominated Harriet Miers because she is an evangelical Christian, because she is his good buddy and because no one knows anything about her.
1) I am not an evangelical Christian. Evangelical Christians think that I am going to hell or at least limbo. They think that they need to make me live by their rules. Why is it that no one ever was nominated because they were a devoted Catholic, Jew or Muslim? Why is religion a litmus test only if you are of the most narrow minded brand of it?
2) George’s good buddies are there because they serve his needs. Not the American people’s. “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job” indeed.
3) Bush wants us to trust us on her. You know what I think about that if you’re read any of my posts. I don’t need a litmus test, but I want to know everything I can about someone who will be making decisions about my life and my children’s lives and their children’s lives. I think to ask me or anyone to support someone blindly is utter stupidity.
I just posted my first podcast
It is a semi-lame one, but it is also long overdue
Creating a podcast using Adobe Audition
The Seattle Times just published an excellent set of articles on global warming.
The Truth About Global Warming
Even the government thinks that the government is lying to us.
Why hasn’t there been more coverage of this? Why, because George Bush’s announcement of his Supreme Court nominee sucked all the air out of the other news stories. Coincidence?
Just a thought about Ms. Miers, the stealth candidate
There is rampant speculation about George Bush’s candidate to fill Justice O’Connor’s seat on the supreme court. This is due to the very little information known about Ms. Miers, and this is exactly how the Bush administration wants it. What we do know is that she is an evangelical Christian and that she has been George Bush’s great buddy for decades. So everyone is guessing about how she’ll vote on the hot button issues, including the republicans. Some of the more right wingers in the party of exclusion are claiming that they will vote against her because she hasn’t been vocally conservative enough. A part of me wonders though, what if this is all a screen? What if Rove and Bush are getting the right wingers to voice opposition to make their stealth candidate sound more moderate? I wouldn’t put it past these devious liars. Just a thought…
Are the Republican’s chickens finally coming home to roost?
Tom DeLay has finally been indicted. This is for his financial improprieties dealing with his TrimPAC. The spin machine going full speed and talking points are being distributed, but the Republican blame deflectors have been working overtime lately and maybe they don’t have enough power to save Mr. DeLay. If this is all this ultra-corrupt politician goes down for, it will be like when the FBI took down Hoffa for tax evasion.
While DeLay alone should make party loyalists question their contributions; add to that Bill Frist’s possibly illegal stock dealings, Karl Rove’s illegal outting of a covert CIA operative, the rising mound of evidence against Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the rampant cronyism revealed by the Hurricane Katrina disaster, the rising American body count in Iraq, the rising gas prices, and the rising deficit. You have to wonder how these people are still in power. Maybe, finally, the sheer mass of their mistakes will finally shake the O’Reilly wax from the ears of moderate and conservative Americans and make them realize that the party they elected doesn’t have their interests at heart. They have their own interests at heart and they don’t care about the rest of us.
Kinda makes you miss the days when Monica Lewinsky was the big scandal.
Great and affordable French
Le P’Tit Bistro is a small, unassuming new spot a bit out of the way on Second Ave in Belltown. The staff is friendly and the food is excellent, especially for the price. The Crepes are very good and the entrees are wonderful. Given its out of the way location, it has been having a hard time attracting more than the neighborhood traffic. It definitely deserves to stick around and thrive. I definitely recommend giving it a try if you are looking for some non-stuffy French food or a non-overly-hip-overly-crowded Belltown meal.
[I updated this review in Jan/06 because they’ve made some really positive improvements in their atmosphere, it definitely has a more cozy feel now]
Even more on why this is bogus
In my earlier post, I mentioned why I disagreed with this, but today I came across the Trendwatchers site and not only do they disagree with this, but they predict the exact opposite. Then again, they make their living watching trends and doing actual research, so they are probably wrong. (yes, I’m being sarcastic here)
The transition is complete.
I remember when MTV started. It was an little sort of DIY channel with cheap sets and a sense of promise. I think while everyone understood that they were a corporation with profit as a motive, we all enjoyed it when they would play punk and alternative videos. MTV actually was the conduit for a lot of teenage rebellion during the Reagan/Bush 80s and 90s. At least a few people felt some credit for Bill Clinton’s win should go to MTV.
Yeah, that has all changed. With shows like Laguna Beach, Sweet Sixteen, Road Rules and The Real World; MTV is now promoting consumerism and a sickening shallowness of character. The personalities that this channel chooses to promote are the saddest people I have ever seen. Do-It-Yourself has been replaced with Have-Your-Parents-Pay-To-Have-Someone-Do-It-For-You. MTV has gone from the channel that parents didn’t want their kids to watch because they were worried that they would start wearing funny clothes and listen to devil music to the channel that parents don’t want to have their kids watch because they don’t want to be continuously hassled for expensive parties, clothes and cars.
Maybe they are just going with the flow and this is what kids are like now. I don’t think so. MTV used to be the channel that was exposing urban youth culture out there to the burbs. Now it seems to be just showing the burbs to themselves.
If this is how far MTV has fallen, it might just be time to take it out back and put a bullet through its head and let the kids find something less lame to do with their time.
It has begun
I got my first bogus invitation from LinkedIn the other day. The person wanting to make a business connection had an undergraduate degree from Harvard and an MBA from Wharton in 1997, but only had a two year internship at Real Networks and was now a major manager at Microsoft. I had a friend check the Microsoft address book. This person wasn’t in it. Yet somehow this person had amassed hundreds of links. I contacted LinkedIn to find out what to do and was basically patted on the head and told to mail some generic e-mail address related to Privacy. They obviously didn’t care.
LinkedIn has a few major flaws. The major one has to do with it’s main concept. It wants to be a source of trusted business contacts by brokering your network. You are only supposed to connect with people you know (and can vouch for) and they you can contact new people through your trusted contacts. To ensure this, LinkedIn requires you to know the e-mail address of someone you want to add to your network. This is good, and bad. It makes it difficult to add people to your network whom you’ve lost contact with (like former co-workers). LinkedIn solves this by letting you invite people who worked for companies that you’ve worked for without knowing their e-mail address. This has been good for me as I’ve re-connected with co-workers I worked with years and years ago. The problem is that there is no way for LinkedIn to verify your information, you contacts are supposed to be that. So anyone can say they’ve worked for Microsoft and instantly invite everyone on LinkedIn who have every worked there to join their network. Now, theoretically, you aren’t supposed to add anyone to your network that you don’t actually know. The problem is that having a small network goes against your better interests. You want to have a big network of contacts, not a small one. Also, people are starting to treat LinkedIn like other social networking site, trying to see who could have the most contacts.
I’m getting regular invitations from people I don’t know these days and I’ve stopped adding them now that I realized that people are just faking their virtual resumes. The problem is that at first I did add one or two people to my network who I might have known, but wasn’t sure. Here is another LinkedIn flaw. There is no way to remove people from your network.
Now that people are taking advantage of LinkedIn’s flaws and they seem uninterested in doing anything about it, I think that you will quickly see LinkedIn go the way of Friendster, Orkut, etc…