Friday, March 31, 2006

LiveJournal

I've followed Yvonne over to LiveJournal and I'll prolly be posting more frequently there. It's pretty easy and they have new stuff so it's novel.

I couldn't get the list of links I use here as a Portal of sorts so I'll still use this but for now I'm posting there. The MySpace stuff will prolly fall by the wayside. Their tech side is lame and their uptime is spotty. Overall not very impressive.

Erik thinks I should go with http://spaces.msn.com to use as a portal. While I'm not, strictly speaking, a microsoft basher, I've used enough of their stuff to not be terribly impressed by it, at least to not be impressed by the sound of it (showme!). He used the wrong phrase to try to convince me when he said it was "sort of like sharepoint" (which is apparenty very hard to support/run/etc.). I know I haven't been terribly impressed by sharepoint, but then I use Firefox and that browser doesn't support all the whohas and widgets, but then I've also (because I use Firefox) avoided all the headaches and pain of using IE with it. But at least it's better than Cold Fusion (which is every manner of headache to *everyone* associated with it, users, web authors, sysadmins, even browsers). That's become the "Barometer of Badness". If something is as bad as cold fusion it's gonna be terrible.

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

My Chief of Staff

Oh, and this Bolton guy? I'm sure he's just right for the job since he did so well at OMB, increasing the deficit to the highest point it's ever been in US History!

But wouldn't it be kinda cool if you had a Chief of Staff? I've no idea what I would do with one or what she would do, but I'm certain it would be cool!

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Frustrating

As I get ready for work in the morning I listen to NPR. They have pretty decent news even if most of the personalities on the morning show have the interview skills of a dead wombat ... (goes off to find out what a wombat is) ... hehe, Northern Hairy Nosed Wombat ...

Anyway I listen to the news and most of the time I hear something I have some comment on, something I want to blather on about in my blog. But by the time I get to work and start my morning checks (which include my servers, news pages, blogs and some comics) I usually can't remember what I wanted to say. I do remember one from this morning though.

The president (little 'p' since I don't like him) let his chief of staff quit and picked another. It wouldn't be any sort of deal except I truly fear that these men think this guy is a "Great Man" and "Can Do No Wrong". So there exists a distinct possibility that they'll act as yes men the next time he comes up with some hair brained idea ("invade Iran? yes sir, great idea"). Or they will engage in some sort of illegal activity which does even more irrepairable harm to the country in his name.

And the Republicans think that he should further shake up his house and bring in some greybeards. That's just what we need, even more old fat rich republicans to rape the country some more. Cause you know lawyers are back in season!

Monday, March 20, 2006

What do I believe?

I was listening to NPR on the way home as I always do. On Mondays they have a segment called "This I believe" which originally aired in the 1950s. They've brought it back and I manage to catch it periodically.

Today's was by Eve Ensler, the playwright who wrote "The Vagina Monologues". Her essay talked about crimes of violence perpetrated upon women and her list of them made me angry, Very Angry! Wanting to go find the men who did these things and hurt them sufficiently to make them stop. It felt like hurting these men who hurt or abused women would feel good and still be a good thing. A right thing.

Then a bit later it occured to me that more violence wouldn't solve the problem of violence against women. Hurting, or even killing, the men who did those acts wouldn't solve the problem either, as good as it might momentarily make me feel. Since rape is ultimately a crime of violence not a crime of sex. And more violence is ultimately just perpetuating the problem, as those who support the violent men exact their violent vengence against me and even more women.

I have no answer to violence against women, no solution or final option. Just a realization that violence will only bring about more violence and a sadness that I don't have an answer.

Friday, March 17, 2006

Missouri to join Kansas

In refuting science.



I had heard on NPR this morning a piece in the local news segment about a Missouri legislator who wanted to alter the teaching of evolution but now I can't find anything on it. D'oh. It's not the first time I've heard something on KBIA and been unable to find anything on their site or in any other local sites with information on it. It speaks to their competancy, doesn't it?

Okay finally found it in the Kansas City Star.
House panel pushes bill calling for analysis of science concepts

The intial blurb sounds very reasonable. The bill's sponsor doesn't want high school students to view the Theory of Evolution as fact. That makes sense, but Hello, do you know what the word theory means???? (I gather his education may have been somewhat lacking. Or perhaps his common sense. Oh wait, a politician with common sense HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)

But it seems like just a more subtle way to try to sneak this crap called "Intelligent Design" into the classroom. When are these guys (legislators - including the women) going to finally realize that they shouldn't legislate cirriculum. It should be left to the educators with input from parents and (mainly) considering the (educational) needs of the students and their further education (college) and preparation for life.

But sorry, that makes sense so we can't do it. Prohibited. Against the law (as written last Tuesday by the neo-cons). Sorry!

"The biggest air assault operation

since the war began."

That makes it sound like something BIG. When in fact, technically, while it is the largest simply because it has the highest number of helicopters used to transport the troops into the area of operation, it isn't really as significant as all that hype makes it sound like.

This is a perfect example of a situation where a reporter has absolutely no knowledge of military can hyperbolize something and make it seem bigger than it really is.

U.S. and Iraqi Military Push Forward with Offensive
U.S. Military Continues Sweep for Insurgent Bases in Iraq
U.S., Iraqi Troops Continue Their Sweep
US presses assaults on guerrillas
Iraqi Security Forces, Coalition launch Operation Swarmer

There were only 1,500 US troops involved and now that it's been running for a day or two, they're scaling back to 900 troops. And there are a bunch of Iraqi troops involved. And there were only 50 helicopters involved and there were no big airstrikes by ground attack aircraft or air-to-ground fire from the helicopters.

So the actual facts of the situation show something different entirely (just like the $600 toilet seat of the mid 1980s). Consider this when reading or listening to media coverage of the war. (i.e. they've got no fscking clue what they're talking about most of the time)

Well, to be fair I took a look at Google News so I could see what the media were reporting and almost universally they said "US Military sources reported the biggest ..." which seems to indicate that the actual term misapplied was used by someone in the Army PR system. Digging around the Army site to see who it was that has no clue I found no byline, very odd in the journalistic community if I understand things correctly. So the Doofus Journalist is actually an Army doofus journalist (or one of those embedded reporters).

Thursday, March 16, 2006

The military, eh?

I read daily (well week-daily) BlogHer, a collection of blog entries by an interesting assortment of women bloggers. I was lead there from Kim Ponder's blog Femme La Guerre (I read her book too and anxiously await her next one). There always seems to be something there to spark my mind and make me think about things I may not usually consider.

Now I found "Blogging for Books" and their weekly contest. This week they challenge us to enter a blog post about the military. Given that I spent 5 years on active duty and 13 years in the National Guard (just like the Boy Scouts but without Adult supervision) I guess I'm qualified. I know most of my friends (and thus most of the audience of this beast) have heard most of my stories but I find that very few of them are down in writing anywhere. What is down is exerpts from other places, Colby Buzzell's book on his time in Iraq and a piece I really like about a British steamer lost of South Africa at the turn of the century. But nothing of my stories (a few of which are good, some funny but most just me).

However there is one thing that I occasionally ponder (without a real conclusion so far). Why is it that we (service men and women and former service "people"?) are so difficult to understand? Why is it that the preponderance of the American public don't get us? Why we do(/did) it, how it felt doing it and how we feel about having done it now, afterwards. I don't speak from the perspective of a combat veteran, I was on active duty as an Army Corps of Engineers Officer (I was a 21 juliet 5 papa, jump qualified combat engineer officer) serving in a mechanized combat engineer battalion assigned to V Corp in Central Germany from 1983 to 1986 (a year before in training and a year after at Fort Leonard Wood as a staff officer). So that makes me what had come to be known as a "Cold Warrior".

And now the cold war is over and we won. It was a hollow sort of victory since none of what we ever trained to do was necessary. Kind of like practicing as hard as you can for the Big Game for twenty five years only to have the game called on account of rain. However many of us realized what it would have meant if we had been called off the bench and sent into the game and are glad we didn't have to. It's a very sobering thing to think about what war means when your only 22. To deal with the idea of getting killed and know how likely it might have been. Or (what was more disturbing to me) to realize that if you didn't know your job inside and out, upside and down, you might make a bad call and get one (or more) of your troops killed. Having to write that "we regret to inform you ..." kind of letters. To go to the funeral service whose centerpiece is a pair of highly shined combat boots with a kevlar helmet on top of them (we only had to go to two in my three years in Germany).

But why don't they get us, why don't they understand? The intellectual side of me thinks back to John Keegan's book "The Face Of Battle" where he considers why men (and women) fight. His conclusion is that they don't fight for grand national ideals, they fight for their squadmates and for survival. And I think that's the key of why servicemembers have such a strong bond that seems to defy interpretation and understanding by outside people. "Shared adversity" is such a simple sounding phrase and fairly easy to decipher and understand. But such understanding remains only intellectual. It lacks the depth which is implied by night watches in freezing cold temperatures on wind swept hilltops when you have to stay behind as guard before your vehicles can be loaded onto the trains for the trip home tomorrow, when everyone else is on the bus on the way back to their own beds. The depth of wearing a chemical protective suit, gas mask (with hood), rubber gloves and boots for five hours to complete the annual training requirement, sweat pouring off your back unable to see clearly through the lenses because you don't know where you put your glasses inserts. The depth (and perhaps satisfaction) of watching four hours of hectic work putting in the last of the fake "minefields" to a defensive plan work exactly as you forecasted and allow your side to win the wargame after ten days of 23 hour workdays. The depth of working for two weeks before the annual inspection counting every darned screwdriver, hammer and wrench, every record of every soldiers who fired at the range, every counseling record for every one of your soldiers and every other little bit of minutea that even might be looked at and getting a superior rating by the inspection team. Of working for a week on a briefing for the colonel so hard that you think you got tunnel vision and could only see the colonel and the map, then briefing so well that months later your boss noted it on your annual performance review.

And yet still after coming up with these examples I don't think mere words, especially my words (since I'm not very talented at this) can convey the meaning of all of this and the kind of bond it forms between me and the sergeants, specialists and my brother officers who were there with me then. Men who drove across a state and a half to visit me when my dad told them I had had a motorcycle accident. Men who I seriously considered trying to find a way to fly to Baghdad so I could attend the ceremony when he took command of a battalion shortly after they had been deployed to Iraq.

But if you can't understand, many of you know someone who has served and perhaps you can see it in their eyes when they tell you stories about "from when they served". I know I loved the stories my dad told me from when he was in WWII, even if he was only in the merchant marine. Talk to them. Try.

Monday, March 06, 2006

"And on the third day,

God gave man the Remington bolt action rifle so he could fight the dinosaurs ... and the homo-sexuals."
Mean Girls

Sure, it sounds funny (it's a reference to home-schooled children in the intro of the movie), especially knowing Jack, Will & Robin. But when the book "And Tango Makes Three" is banned in Missouri by parents concerned about homosexual themes, life imitates art.

At least it sounded ridiculous when I heard about it on the NPR station during their local news segment. It was being moved from the children's section to the non-fiction section (of the St. Louis library I think but I can't find the piece now) so we wouldn't have any kids asking pesky questions we don't know the answers to. Or have any of our kids accidentally become gay because of a book they read when they were eight.

And we certainly wouldn't want to foster any intelligent thought on the subject or list any talking points that teachers could use to address these sensitive topics that curious kids would ask about. Because you know we have to protect our kids from dangerous ideas after all.

Humanity never ceases to amaze me!

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

New music

I don't find as many new musicians whose work I like as I used to since I stopped listening to BXR in the mornings (I listen to NPR mostly). But I found two new women I liked on myspace today.

KT Tunstall at kttunstall.com (but you have to use IE to get it to load) or www.myspace.com/kttunstall. You could have heard some of her stuff, the one that I recall hearing is called "Black Horse and a Cherry Tree". And someone called Kat McGivern (www.myspace.com/katmcgivern, her katmcgivern.com address doesn't seem to be working now - or yet) asked to be my friend and she turned out to be a musician. I like one she did called "Burn It Down" but I'm not sure if I like her as much as some other people I enjoy. It certainly doesn't hurt that both are pretty young women, but I do enjoy their music. Perhaps I'll order KT's first CD next week.