Wow, I'm not sure where I've been recently, but I'm extremely excited for October 30th. I LOVE Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert. They are definitely my type of people. I won't be able to attend, but my heart is all there. I also love that it's also a campaign to raise money for schools.
I didn't realize how serious this was until I saw Colbert's speech to congress. Wow. I have to say that I think I've used similar arguments while being sarcastic to friends and family about this. I like that as I post this someone thought it fitting to complain in the comments section about his "lying" to congress by being in character. I don't know how it can be called lying when it's his way of expressing his opinion. This debate has been going on for at least a decade with parties on both sides using formal, traditional tone. And it's getting no where. What they need to hear is what everyone's too afraid to say; what they all say behind closed doors. He gives a quite reasoned argument, which few people do when being themselves. Ask Mr. Glenn Beck: he's quite fond of contradicting himself within one sentence. What I find upsetting about this is the lady of congress who is spotted texting while she should be listening. Something tells me that this was more performance than actual speech for someone in that room, and I don't think it was Mr. Colbert.
Please check out the Rally to Restore Sanity or Keep Fear Alive.
More interesting information found at: http://www.jonstewartrally.com/ and http://www.colbertrally.com/
Thursday, September 30, 2010
The power of a voice.
I had an interesting thought while at dinner tonight.This year is the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy/Nixon debate. Everyone says that Nixon lost because he looked so bad and Kennedy looked so good in front of the camera. I started thinking about other speeches/debates and then thought about the mock debate a few years ago between "The West Wing" characters. So I wondered what would happen if we handed the speeches to different people to read, what would happen. Would the public feel the same way if personality didn't matter? It would definitely help Obama since he's quoted as saying that it didn't matter if he claimed the earth were round, the republicans would vote against him.
And it's not just the Kennedy/Nixon debate to test, anything would work. I had to look up speeches for an english class back in 11th grade and it was funny how it didn't much matter who I was reading, the tone was exactly the same. Subject might change, but the same allusions were made. I think it would be an interesting test to do a bit like Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert are doing on the October 30th, only without letting the public in on it. Take a generic speech and some unknown actor and give it in town hall style. Maybe bill it as being partisan. Then judge people's reactions--cheers and jeers should be enough. The last lines could be that this was a "test of public sentiment" and give them information on where to find results if they care at all. I wonder what kinds of things all Americans would be able to agree on.
And it's not just the Kennedy/Nixon debate to test, anything would work. I had to look up speeches for an english class back in 11th grade and it was funny how it didn't much matter who I was reading, the tone was exactly the same. Subject might change, but the same allusions were made. I think it would be an interesting test to do a bit like Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert are doing on the October 30th, only without letting the public in on it. Take a generic speech and some unknown actor and give it in town hall style. Maybe bill it as being partisan. Then judge people's reactions--cheers and jeers should be enough. The last lines could be that this was a "test of public sentiment" and give them information on where to find results if they care at all. I wonder what kinds of things all Americans would be able to agree on.
Random bit of Thursday
I've been having a heck of a month trying to remember all that I've been thinking of--I think lack of sleep is the reason for it. Anywho.
I read about Dairy Queen going to open about 100 stores in China. My question is...for those who always complain about the US sending jobs overseas, I wonder whether they are for or against this.
Have you ever realized how similar to Christianity Buddhism is? We were sitting in discussion for Early Japanese History chatting about what Buddhism was doing in year 1100 or so. Let's just say that I was quietly giggling to myself about belief in mappo (the decline of humanity/end of days), the formation of various sects of Buddhism with similar but different core beliefs on sin and enlightenment (read: salvation) (including campaigning that only through belief in their sect would save the soul from the mappo), and how one of the most important Bodhisattva promised in life that he would not go on to nirvana without knowing that all the humans are saved. Then there was the whole fact that at this time there was a focus on getting Buddhism to the masses, not just to the aristocracy.
I read about Dairy Queen going to open about 100 stores in China. My question is...for those who always complain about the US sending jobs overseas, I wonder whether they are for or against this.
Have you ever realized how similar to Christianity Buddhism is? We were sitting in discussion for Early Japanese History chatting about what Buddhism was doing in year 1100 or so. Let's just say that I was quietly giggling to myself about belief in mappo (the decline of humanity/end of days), the formation of various sects of Buddhism with similar but different core beliefs on sin and enlightenment (read: salvation) (including campaigning that only through belief in their sect would save the soul from the mappo), and how one of the most important Bodhisattva promised in life that he would not go on to nirvana without knowing that all the humans are saved. Then there was the whole fact that at this time there was a focus on getting Buddhism to the masses, not just to the aristocracy.
Monday, September 13, 2010
I hate stereotyping
In response to the Islamophobic comments to this article.
I'm sorry. But why the heck does EVERYONE insist on grouping EVERYONE into categories that they don't belong in?!?! I personally think that 90% of the people who bother to comment on this rubbish news site are ignorant homophobic bigots who never leave their 5 acre farm and insist that their wives and female children wear skirts at all times and can't read anything other than the Bible. But no. I know enough females that choose to only wear skirts, enough people who live on farms, enough people who are opinionated to fall into my own trap. Why must we propagate the ignorance? Instead let's treat individuals as they really are.
How many Christian groups promote intolerance? I can give you 2 that have done something news worth in the past year: Dove World Outreach Center in FL and Westboro Baptist Church in KS. Does that mean that we should think all Apostolic and Baptist Churches are centers of intolerance? No. Heck. You know what the problem with the Christian faith is? It's that there is so much schism that you CAN'T group them all together. Why do people have fuel to hate the Catholics? Because you can go into any Catholic church and hear the same sermons. But that's not what makes a church it's own body. The Catholics use the same Bible as the Protestants and the Mormons and ALL those people who believe in Christ. Unless they are the group that thinks that only the KJV is correct which means that those people will want to kill me. And those folks over there who say that Catholics worship the Devil, Mary, Saints as equal to Jesus (take your pick)--I'm on their hit list too. There is no such thing as the Christian faith, because no one wants to admit to it because then you have to include "all of them". Poor Muslims for having a unified faith. Because then no one believes you when you say "that person is crazy--he doesn't really believe in what I believe". I guess that's what happens when your god doesn't allow for division. Oh wait. Doesn't it say somewhere in the bible that the Church (god's church, not a building) cannot be divided? OOPS...someone broke the rule.
If a church with only 50 members has a website, you can be sure that those with 100 have them too. Yup--the church I used to go to (Catholic--you can see that I'm biased) even has a website. Look them up. How many can you find with racist (pick your definition: religion, country of origin, etc) underpinnings. If they aren't bold enough, look for those groups to know to be racist (see above) and see what kind of faith they support. Neo-Nazis attack a number of races "and people with different political or religious opinions"--from Wikipedia. See--there's some "Christian" church out there with people who use their faith as some basis of their bigotry. Why Christian? Because they hate everyone else (see the community approved list.
What does it mean to have a religious community? Why is it that individuals walk into and out of churches of supposedly the same denomination and can only find one that they can actually agree with? As a former Catholic, I have to say that I don't agree with some fathers who think gays are unholy sinners, and to have one's tubes tied is a sentence to life in Hell. Actually, the priests who have had the longest tenures at my church were of a more moderate belief. To live in love free of lies is more holy than lying and cheating to protect against a fate that God gave you. To sentence your children to suffer in a life in which you had them but cannot pay for their well being is a similar sin. I know that this is the same difference you find in your own churches. I know that there has been some time that whatever denomination you are, you have seen a church of the same which you just think are a bunch of crazy nuts--either too liberal or too conservative. The Anglican church is splitting as we speak.
Christians have this luxury--to say "they aren't of my faith". We don't extend this luxury to those of other denominations. To the mainstream American, a Jew is a Jew and who cares if he's orthodox or non, kosher or not. A Buddhist is a Buddhist, etc. The same is true of the Muslims--are they Sunni or Shiite? Do we care? And why do we? At the end of the day we are all individuals with our own beliefs characterized by our own experiences. Why do the radicals attack? Is it because they've heard the snide remarks? The FL pastor didn't want to believe that his burning of the Qur'an caused violent protests in the middle east. All actions have reactions. Why do we only pay attention when the story turns violent and claim "we didn't see it coming"? Columbine, VA Tech, 9-11, that guy who killed a security guard at the Holocaust Museum, Ft Hood, that guy who just killed 6 people this morning when his eggs were cold because that was the last straw. How often is the newsworthy story that "last straw"? What really are the causes behind the effects? Again, do we care? At what point will YOU attack someone? When does it quit having viable causes and becomes merely a matter of insanity--drowning your 5 children, microwaving your newborn, etc.
And one last thing, I promise. How many truly evil people have hidden their intentions behind benign faces?
I'm sorry. But why the heck does EVERYONE insist on grouping EVERYONE into categories that they don't belong in?!?! I personally think that 90% of the people who bother to comment on this rubbish news site are ignorant homophobic bigots who never leave their 5 acre farm and insist that their wives and female children wear skirts at all times and can't read anything other than the Bible. But no. I know enough females that choose to only wear skirts, enough people who live on farms, enough people who are opinionated to fall into my own trap. Why must we propagate the ignorance? Instead let's treat individuals as they really are.
How many Christian groups promote intolerance? I can give you 2 that have done something news worth in the past year: Dove World Outreach Center in FL and Westboro Baptist Church in KS. Does that mean that we should think all Apostolic and Baptist Churches are centers of intolerance? No. Heck. You know what the problem with the Christian faith is? It's that there is so much schism that you CAN'T group them all together. Why do people have fuel to hate the Catholics? Because you can go into any Catholic church and hear the same sermons. But that's not what makes a church it's own body. The Catholics use the same Bible as the Protestants and the Mormons and ALL those people who believe in Christ. Unless they are the group that thinks that only the KJV is correct which means that those people will want to kill me. And those folks over there who say that Catholics worship the Devil, Mary, Saints as equal to Jesus (take your pick)--I'm on their hit list too. There is no such thing as the Christian faith, because no one wants to admit to it because then you have to include "all of them". Poor Muslims for having a unified faith. Because then no one believes you when you say "that person is crazy--he doesn't really believe in what I believe". I guess that's what happens when your god doesn't allow for division. Oh wait. Doesn't it say somewhere in the bible that the Church (god's church, not a building) cannot be divided? OOPS...someone broke the rule.
If a church with only 50 members has a website, you can be sure that those with 100 have them too. Yup--the church I used to go to (Catholic--you can see that I'm biased) even has a website. Look them up. How many can you find with racist (pick your definition: religion, country of origin, etc) underpinnings. If they aren't bold enough, look for those groups to know to be racist (see above) and see what kind of faith they support. Neo-Nazis attack a number of races "and people with different political or religious opinions"--from Wikipedia. See--there's some "Christian" church out there with people who use their faith as some basis of their bigotry. Why Christian? Because they hate everyone else (see the community approved list.
What does it mean to have a religious community? Why is it that individuals walk into and out of churches of supposedly the same denomination and can only find one that they can actually agree with? As a former Catholic, I have to say that I don't agree with some fathers who think gays are unholy sinners, and to have one's tubes tied is a sentence to life in Hell. Actually, the priests who have had the longest tenures at my church were of a more moderate belief. To live in love free of lies is more holy than lying and cheating to protect against a fate that God gave you. To sentence your children to suffer in a life in which you had them but cannot pay for their well being is a similar sin. I know that this is the same difference you find in your own churches. I know that there has been some time that whatever denomination you are, you have seen a church of the same which you just think are a bunch of crazy nuts--either too liberal or too conservative. The Anglican church is splitting as we speak.
Christians have this luxury--to say "they aren't of my faith". We don't extend this luxury to those of other denominations. To the mainstream American, a Jew is a Jew and who cares if he's orthodox or non, kosher or not. A Buddhist is a Buddhist, etc. The same is true of the Muslims--are they Sunni or Shiite? Do we care? And why do we? At the end of the day we are all individuals with our own beliefs characterized by our own experiences. Why do the radicals attack? Is it because they've heard the snide remarks? The FL pastor didn't want to believe that his burning of the Qur'an caused violent protests in the middle east. All actions have reactions. Why do we only pay attention when the story turns violent and claim "we didn't see it coming"? Columbine, VA Tech, 9-11, that guy who killed a security guard at the Holocaust Museum, Ft Hood, that guy who just killed 6 people this morning when his eggs were cold because that was the last straw. How often is the newsworthy story that "last straw"? What really are the causes behind the effects? Again, do we care? At what point will YOU attack someone? When does it quit having viable causes and becomes merely a matter of insanity--drowning your 5 children, microwaving your newborn, etc.
And one last thing, I promise. How many truly evil people have hidden their intentions behind benign faces?
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Jobs
You'd think that there were no jobs in existence in this country (see previous post). Curious, I decided to do some job searching of my own. I found quite a few just in the state of Virginia. I've heard a lot about people who just don't know how to get hired and that's why they can't find work. I'm sure this is common knowledge to a lot of people, but I also handed out a lot of applications 2 summers ago when I worked at a small store down the street of my house. There are a few dos and don'ts to follow for those who are looking for work.
1. Make sure you actually want the job you're applying for. With those applications, it was not uncommon for women to walk in off the streets and rudely ask for an application. We weren't really hiring (there was an 80 hour cap on hours per week, so employees were limited), but that didn't stop me from handing out the applications--at least these people were trying. Maybe 3 came back completed out of the 40 I gave out. And one of those was from a guy who included his resume then bugged us for the next 3 weeks that if we weren't going to hire him, he needed his resume back because it cost him money and he needed it to apply for another job. Seriously--when you're applying to a crummy job (i.e. one that's going to be long hours for minimum wage) apply in person if possible. I got the application on a whim, turned it in a week later (after having spilled water on it) and was just going to hand it over and leave, but ended up with an impromptu interview and tour and was hired right then and there. That help wanted sign had been up for about a month and had ANYONE showed the slightest interest would have gotten it. So, my advice is that you need to remember that you are competing against people who honestly are applying just because they have to in order to keep their unemployment benefits.
2. I've heard many people talk about their resumes and how they really look immature. Even the best educated people don't have the most talent with writing resumes--heck, I think of myself as a pretty smart person and I know that I'm not a very good writer of anything. I also hate to "sell" myself which is exactly what you need to do on a resume. So, best advice--get someone professional to look over yours. Employment agencies will probably do it for free, especially if it's for people who have been out of work for awhile--and I'm sure such agencies will do the review work online.
3. Do as your future employer asks. If they want a cover sheet, include a cover sheet. If they want a resume, include a resume, etc. Any applications that are missing items WILL be thrown away. To assume otherwise is a waste of your time. Also, if you want to keep your job, you should really assume that your boss knows best. Too often people get fired of quit because they think that their boss is an idiot. While this may be true, don't let it lead you back down the path of unemployment. If you absolutely hate your job, start job searching. Nothing says that you can't look for a job while you already have one.
4. Be willing to move. If you are one of those persons who doesn't want to leave your area, then I hope you are resigned to being unemployed for a very long time. Just saying--you have to go after the jobs, not wait for the jobs to come to you.
5. Be willing to work below your potential. If nothing else, you will learn a lot about the world. Working at that store did extraordinarily well in helping me decide that I want to do a whole lot better with my college education. But income is income. And if you have a problem with illegal immigrants taking your potential jobs, like I said to begin this, make sure you actually want the job that you are applying for.
1. Make sure you actually want the job you're applying for. With those applications, it was not uncommon for women to walk in off the streets and rudely ask for an application. We weren't really hiring (there was an 80 hour cap on hours per week, so employees were limited), but that didn't stop me from handing out the applications--at least these people were trying. Maybe 3 came back completed out of the 40 I gave out. And one of those was from a guy who included his resume then bugged us for the next 3 weeks that if we weren't going to hire him, he needed his resume back because it cost him money and he needed it to apply for another job. Seriously--when you're applying to a crummy job (i.e. one that's going to be long hours for minimum wage) apply in person if possible. I got the application on a whim, turned it in a week later (after having spilled water on it) and was just going to hand it over and leave, but ended up with an impromptu interview and tour and was hired right then and there. That help wanted sign had been up for about a month and had ANYONE showed the slightest interest would have gotten it. So, my advice is that you need to remember that you are competing against people who honestly are applying just because they have to in order to keep their unemployment benefits.
2. I've heard many people talk about their resumes and how they really look immature. Even the best educated people don't have the most talent with writing resumes--heck, I think of myself as a pretty smart person and I know that I'm not a very good writer of anything. I also hate to "sell" myself which is exactly what you need to do on a resume. So, best advice--get someone professional to look over yours. Employment agencies will probably do it for free, especially if it's for people who have been out of work for awhile--and I'm sure such agencies will do the review work online.
3. Do as your future employer asks. If they want a cover sheet, include a cover sheet. If they want a resume, include a resume, etc. Any applications that are missing items WILL be thrown away. To assume otherwise is a waste of your time. Also, if you want to keep your job, you should really assume that your boss knows best. Too often people get fired of quit because they think that their boss is an idiot. While this may be true, don't let it lead you back down the path of unemployment. If you absolutely hate your job, start job searching. Nothing says that you can't look for a job while you already have one.
4. Be willing to move. If you are one of those persons who doesn't want to leave your area, then I hope you are resigned to being unemployed for a very long time. Just saying--you have to go after the jobs, not wait for the jobs to come to you.
5. Be willing to work below your potential. If nothing else, you will learn a lot about the world. Working at that store did extraordinarily well in helping me decide that I want to do a whole lot better with my college education. But income is income. And if you have a problem with illegal immigrants taking your potential jobs, like I said to begin this, make sure you actually want the job that you are applying for.
Jobs Lost
Hmm...54,000 jobs lost in August. Ya know--that's a highly speculative number. I agree that when you know that 150,000 jobs were lost by the census workers who knew their job was only temporary (leaving a net increase in jobs of 67,000)and then you realize that August probably is a high month for job losses anyway because of the end of the vacation season. I know that everyone who was making a buck or 2 at summer camps, ice cream parlors, and souvenir shops in tourist traps either lost their job or is only working there for off season possibilities and/or just to keep the doors open all year. Similarly, I predict that business will begin to thrive in college towns. I know that I'm already used to coming back to school in late August to find 3 or 4 new businesses on the Corner because the previous ones didn't survive the deserted summer season. Do we need to do something to increase employment? Yes. But also remember, the "natural" unemployment rate is 5%. Which is low for most countries in this world.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Letter to Glenn Beck
was reading up on your 912 project and just about had an annurism from laughing so hard. I want you to think exceptionally broadly (which may or may not be possible) and look VERY closely at something.
"and when we demand that we are self-reliant, we will ensure that others can rely on us, not the government."--from your website
"b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed"--a definition from Marriam-Webster (I'm going to hold off on what it's a definition of for the time being so as to not throw you off).
So, to what extent do you propose that "others can rely on us, not the government"? Do you include things like, say, housing, jobs, food, etc? Those things that welfare and social security cover? That people can go to their community members and ask for help as they need it? So, if I'm a poor man trying to feed my family, say, with farming, the community will do it's best to help me to become self-sufficient. Would that include giving me land to farm on? When my baby gets sick, the community would do it's best to help her get better--even if that means asking the community doctor to help her free of charge? At what point does community assistance to self-reliance end?
Now, how do my questions relate to that definition? Aren't they mutually compatible--where the "goods owned in common" include what is "owned" by the community members that can be given freely to help the individual become self-sufficient--without the use of the government (I shan't debate the validity of saying (or implying) that there is no government in a community that you describe).
Getting the picture yet? Now....what do you say to the fact that that 2nd definition belongs to communism? Ignore all preconceptions and arguments about it, the society you envision with self-reliance regulated by the community is a communistic society. You don't say that "WE can rely on US", you say "OTHERS can rely on US"--so you agree with me that the only way to fix society is for the community to get off their asses and aid those around them--even if it means giving up the 80 acre PRIVATE PROPERTY compound that houses 4 people in a 4000 sq ft mansion VOLUNTARILY to support the upward mobility of a poor family of 10. That sure as hell isn't capitalism which would ask how much could you sell that property for nor is it socialism in which some arbitrary 3rd party TELLS you to do it.
"and when we demand that we are self-reliant, we will ensure that others can rely on us, not the government."--from your website
"b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed"--a definition from Marriam-Webster (I'm going to hold off on what it's a definition of for the time being so as to not throw you off).
So, to what extent do you propose that "others can rely on us, not the government"? Do you include things like, say, housing, jobs, food, etc? Those things that welfare and social security cover? That people can go to their community members and ask for help as they need it? So, if I'm a poor man trying to feed my family, say, with farming, the community will do it's best to help me to become self-sufficient. Would that include giving me land to farm on? When my baby gets sick, the community would do it's best to help her get better--even if that means asking the community doctor to help her free of charge? At what point does community assistance to self-reliance end?
Now, how do my questions relate to that definition? Aren't they mutually compatible--where the "goods owned in common" include what is "owned" by the community members that can be given freely to help the individual become self-sufficient--without the use of the government (I shan't debate the validity of saying (or implying) that there is no government in a community that you describe).
Getting the picture yet? Now....what do you say to the fact that that 2nd definition belongs to communism? Ignore all preconceptions and arguments about it, the society you envision with self-reliance regulated by the community is a communistic society. You don't say that "WE can rely on US", you say "OTHERS can rely on US"--so you agree with me that the only way to fix society is for the community to get off their asses and aid those around them--even if it means giving up the 80 acre PRIVATE PROPERTY compound that houses 4 people in a 4000 sq ft mansion VOLUNTARILY to support the upward mobility of a poor family of 10. That sure as hell isn't capitalism which would ask how much could you sell that property for nor is it socialism in which some arbitrary 3rd party TELLS you to do it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)