draft
A woman I only know on Facebook said how happy she was that I had given up on politics because now I could be funny again. If only she knew what I was really like. Maybe I should get a date before she finds out?
But it is true that my attitude has changed about politics and I think I have learned some things. Most of my friends wont agree with these but that is just too bad isnt it? Maybe they learned something else? This is what I learned.
For those of you who are too fragile to handle my reality, go to the end, because I say a few positive things. I mark such items with an (*).
1. Protests dont matter, at least peaceful protests dont. Yes, it does build morale, and I suppose it is better than doing nothing, but not by much. You are ignored, it makes no difference that I noticed. Go ahead and protest all you want, I will certainly be with you. But know up front, you are going to come home and discover that you were laughed at by those in power.
2. Calling your Congressperson (or sending email or ...) almost doesn't matter. It might matter a little bit more than participating in a protest, but that is not saying much. By all accounts, the helpful assistant will verify your residence, put you in a database, and your opinion is likely to be part of a weekly summary that goes to Congressperson or one of their top aides in aggregate form. Ironically, my Republican congressman, Duncan Hunter of CA 50, was much more responsive than Salud Carbajal, my current congressman from CA 24 who is a Democrat. I never hear back from the latter. From Hunter's office I would actually get a phone call or two, and I was invited to a nice town meeting. Ultimately it would not have changed his vote on anything, because Hunter is a hardcore Republican, but it certainly felt nice.
3. Your vote is almost useless. If you are voting for a congressman, you have probably been gerrymandered out of existance. If you are allowed to vote, it is perfectly likely that those on your side have not been permitted because of the Republican efforts to control voter registration.
4. There is no point in discussing politics or even facts with a Republican. They are just going to insult you and couldnt care less what you think.
5. The judiciary has been destroyed by Republicans. Do not expect justice from there.
(*) 6. On the other hand, Actblue has made it very easy to give small donations to pretty much any progressive candidate and I hope you will do so. I try to give $25.00 to any cause or person I believe in. I always leave a tip for Actblue for their incredibly useful service. I know it is having some impact because the Republicans hate it.
(*) 7. Direct action of some non-violent type is likely to make some impact, even if it only just gets attention. Doing so requires serious work.
(*) 8. AOC proves that we can run candidates who can make a difference. Find this person in your area and work for them! It wont always work, but sometimes it will and it is one of the few things the elite pays attention to.
(*) 9. Even though I dont believe that protests, calling your Congressman or voting actually makes much of a difference, I plan to keep doing so for its symbolic value. I expect that I will be characterized as a "crank" for expressing my opinion. Thats OK with me, I expect it.
Wednesday, October 9, 2019
Meta Textual Issues with Thor Ragnorak
draft
I think very highly of Thor Ragnorak (2017) and would never in a million years say anything negative about it. But there are some notes I have after watching it maybe 50 times. For those of you who perhaps may say that I am taking this a little too seriously, well, sure, of course I am.
And so a few things that felt a little wrong to me:
1. Why are Hela's warriors evil, demonic looking bastards? These are the ancient warriors of Asgard! They should be handsome if a little scarred and maybe worse for wear. Why would the predecessors of Vikings be ashamed of killing people and stealing gold? They did that all the time. That was their raison d'etre by all accounts. Well, of course there is an answer to this and it is straightforward. We are looking at Norse culture through our own, and if we are ashamed of our violent past (stealing the land and murdering the native Americans / first peoples, for example), then they should be as well. Simple enough.
2. From what I know of this period, I would expect a lot more drinking, a lot more hosting people in big halls with drinking, bragging and toasts, and a lot more riddles. They really liked their riddles, it seems to be a major part of their culture. Depending on who you believe it is even possible that riddles were a part of their religious beliefs (as we would call them, I doubt they would see them that way). See (1) for some entertaining theories on that whole topic.
3. As for Valkyrie being gay and Loki bisexual, well that is possible but with stern restrictions. One was expected to get married and have children, more or less, without exception. If you were male, it was OK to be bisexual as long as (a) you were married and had kids, and (b) you were on top. Seems a little weird, doesnt it, since if you are going to have a top, you pretty much are required to have a bottom, but whatever. I will let you read what Hallakarva says on these topics (2). The evidence on lesbians is far less substantial, presumably for all the usual reasons involving historical survival of sources (generally speaking, women and poor people are not well documented).
So what is our conclusion? Not much. Maybe it is foolish to look for such things in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? But they did such a great job with historical accuracy with Captain America!
_______________________________
1. The White Goddess by Robert Graves
2. See The Vikings and Homosexuality by Hallakarva
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/pwh/gayvik.asp
I think very highly of Thor Ragnorak (2017) and would never in a million years say anything negative about it. But there are some notes I have after watching it maybe 50 times. For those of you who perhaps may say that I am taking this a little too seriously, well, sure, of course I am.
And so a few things that felt a little wrong to me:
1. Why are Hela's warriors evil, demonic looking bastards? These are the ancient warriors of Asgard! They should be handsome if a little scarred and maybe worse for wear. Why would the predecessors of Vikings be ashamed of killing people and stealing gold? They did that all the time. That was their raison d'etre by all accounts. Well, of course there is an answer to this and it is straightforward. We are looking at Norse culture through our own, and if we are ashamed of our violent past (stealing the land and murdering the native Americans / first peoples, for example), then they should be as well. Simple enough.
2. From what I know of this period, I would expect a lot more drinking, a lot more hosting people in big halls with drinking, bragging and toasts, and a lot more riddles. They really liked their riddles, it seems to be a major part of their culture. Depending on who you believe it is even possible that riddles were a part of their religious beliefs (as we would call them, I doubt they would see them that way). See (1) for some entertaining theories on that whole topic.
3. As for Valkyrie being gay and Loki bisexual, well that is possible but with stern restrictions. One was expected to get married and have children, more or less, without exception. If you were male, it was OK to be bisexual as long as (a) you were married and had kids, and (b) you were on top. Seems a little weird, doesnt it, since if you are going to have a top, you pretty much are required to have a bottom, but whatever. I will let you read what Hallakarva says on these topics (2). The evidence on lesbians is far less substantial, presumably for all the usual reasons involving historical survival of sources (generally speaking, women and poor people are not well documented).
So what is our conclusion? Not much. Maybe it is foolish to look for such things in the Marvel Cinematic Universe? But they did such a great job with historical accuracy with Captain America!
_______________________________
1. The White Goddess by Robert Graves
2. See The Vikings and Homosexuality by Hallakarva
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/pwh/gayvik.asp
Monday, October 7, 2019
Rebuttal to Rumor about House Impeachment and Subpoenas
draft
I
have done a lot of reading on the issues of (a) what the House has to
do to start an investigation and (b) who can issue subpoenas. This
email is a report on what I have discovered so far and what my sources
were. If you can point me to any other relevant material, by all means
do so.
So far as I know the following is accurate but
somewhat simplified. In broad strokes, the situation is clear and
unambiguous although when it comes to the individual merits of a
specific subpoena and whether executive privilege or attorney privilege
applies then that opens a different set of issues that we are not
addressing here. What we are discussing is the assertion that the House
did not follow the rules when it came to starting an investigation and
that therefore all the subpoenas are invalid. Both of these assertions
are false.
The primary sources are (a) the
constitution, (b) articles about the constitution and impeachment
written in various law journals (Harvard and Georgetown seem to be the
leading ones so far), (c) Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports
which are a fabulous resource see below, and (d) a funny blog I read a
lot called www.lawfareblog.com,
which is a blog about congress and national security. They try to be
bipartisan, but I think in this case what it means is that smart people
of different opinions write articles on a topic and then ignore each
other. Theoretically, one should be knowledgable about all the times
the House has investigated someone to see what the precedent is, but
that is going to be much harder to do. (As an aside, I love the CRS
reports and they are a great resource. The idea is that you are (for
example) a new member of Congress and you have no idea what the history
of our relationship with Turkey and the Kurds are, and you dont have
that much time to read. So the CRS will probably have written a nice
background paper for you. Many of the papers can be found at https://fas.org/sgp/crs/)
So
as I understand it, it goes something like this. The constitution
gives the sole right to the House to "impeach" which is essentially to
act as a grand jury (i.e. to choose to bring an indictment, or not) in
any matter involving the executive, the judiciary and, for that matter,
themselves. The Senate is not involved unless Articles of Impeachment
are passed by the House by a simple majority of the present and voting
members. Both the House and the Senate may investigate pretty much
whatever they want, but only committees can issue subpoenas. Each
committee has its own rules and its own traditions about all sorts of
things, but certainly about subpoenas. In general the rules are voted
on, accepted, and then published at the beginning of each session of
congress. Sometimes the rules are modified in mid-session, for example
the House Judiciary Committee recently changed the rules to allow more
time for a witness to be questioned. So far as I can tell, there is no
special procedure which has to be followed before an impeachment
investigation has begun. I find no reference to one anywhere. There is
however a variety of rules involving what a committee must do to issue a
subpoena and those rules seem to be different between the different
committees.
Some committees need a vote before a
subpoena can be issued. Some committees delegate this ability to the
Chairman or to the Chairman and the ranking minority leader acting as a
team. Some committees allow the minority members to block a subpoena.
An excellent discussion of this is
Each
committee has its own rules about what can be delegated to the chairman
of the committee, what the ranking minority member can do, how much
notice must be given, whether the ranking minority member can, for
example, block a subpoena, and so forth. There is no one standard here,
each committee has its own rules. I recommend you read the CRS report
on the issue which can be found at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/
As
I suspected there is no magical procedure that has to be followed to
start an investigation. Do you really think that the Democrats would be
so stupid as to "forget"? I sure dont. But I was surprised a bit at
the different rules of the different committees, that was news to me.
What is not at all clear is what Congress can do when you have a rogue,
obviously corrupt administration like the current Republican/Trump one.
Ultimately, Congress has the power to put people in jail for contempt
of Congress and I think that is likely to be where this leads. You can
do your friends a favor by feeding this back to them. Its their
credibility that gets hurt by stuff like this.
Android Voice to Text Fails
On my Motorola phone, every once in a while the voice-to-text just stops working. It just sits there and looks at you and says go ahead and say whatever you want I am not going to do anything.
Wednesday, October 2, 2019
What Can I Tell You?
draft
When this is all over, we are going to need major surgery to the Constitution to prevent this from happening again and, frankly, I dont think our government is up to it.
In other news, a Lyft driver accused me of being "a Jew" and offered to drop me off in the middle of the freeway.
When this is all over, we are going to need major surgery to the Constitution to prevent this from happening again and, frankly, I dont think our government is up to it.
In other news, a Lyft driver accused me of being "a Jew" and offered to drop me off in the middle of the freeway.
Tuesday, September 24, 2019
What Would a Reasonable Criticism of Greta Thunburg Be Like
draft
Greta Thunburg spoke at the UN about global climate change and of course there has been a huge reaction from our right. As we would expect from the right, all the arguments are ad hominem or worse. So lets ask what a proper response would be if people were actually being constructive here.
In the following, I am not saying that she is wrong and these arguments prove it, I happen to think she is fundamentally correct and serving a useful purpose.
They might say "We are already in the midst of doing everything humanly possible to ameliorate global climate change, but thank you for your reminder." Of course that wouldnt work because no one in the world would believe it.
Or they might say "Creating a binding international agreement that affects so many parties and costs so much money today (however much it may save money in the future as well as lives, etc) is by definition incredibly complicated, takes a long time, and in the past has rarely worked". That would be historically true but one could easily retort "yeah, but not only are you not trying, you are actively impeding progress".
Or they might say, "You are right and we have dropped the ball, but you cant just say "fix it", you have to build a consensus for a solution and that is nearly impossible in this case". A good response to that is that "We dont care".
But none of this matters. Greta has the moral high ground. And a Child Shall Lead them.
Greta Thunburg spoke at the UN about global climate change and of course there has been a huge reaction from our right. As we would expect from the right, all the arguments are ad hominem or worse. So lets ask what a proper response would be if people were actually being constructive here.
In the following, I am not saying that she is wrong and these arguments prove it, I happen to think she is fundamentally correct and serving a useful purpose.
They might say "We are already in the midst of doing everything humanly possible to ameliorate global climate change, but thank you for your reminder." Of course that wouldnt work because no one in the world would believe it.
Or they might say "Creating a binding international agreement that affects so many parties and costs so much money today (however much it may save money in the future as well as lives, etc) is by definition incredibly complicated, takes a long time, and in the past has rarely worked". That would be historically true but one could easily retort "yeah, but not only are you not trying, you are actively impeding progress".
Or they might say, "You are right and we have dropped the ball, but you cant just say "fix it", you have to build a consensus for a solution and that is nearly impossible in this case". A good response to that is that "We dont care".
But none of this matters. Greta has the moral high ground. And a Child Shall Lead them.
Thursday, September 12, 2019
Regularly Send Complaints To Your Congressman
draft
Anyone who regularly contacts their Congressperson is considered a crank. I have decided to definitively become a crank because clearly my Congressperson (or Congress, or the US Government) is failing to achieve even minimum goals as a responsible democracy, instead being led down the garden path to a fascist future by our lovely Republicans (who are all traitors as far as I can see).
A recent problem: The EPA approves asbestos for use but refuses to allow studies. See
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/is-epa-allowing-asbestos-products/?fbclid=IwAR2hhfuyctJZkiarsNFD4LSOk5OboXs5Rv2Q7xstHCeGBUr8YXgov0aSiA8
A second problem: having to explain to a conservative friend of mine that the process that confirmed Kavanaugh was an abomination and many Americans (possibly most) do not consider him a legitimate member of the Supreme Court.
I encourage you to join me in becoming a crank and exert pressure on your congressperson in a regular and timely fashion. It only takes a few minutes every other week and at least you are doing something instead of just sitting there.
Anyone who regularly contacts their Congressperson is considered a crank. I have decided to definitively become a crank because clearly my Congressperson (or Congress, or the US Government) is failing to achieve even minimum goals as a responsible democracy, instead being led down the garden path to a fascist future by our lovely Republicans (who are all traitors as far as I can see).
A recent problem: The EPA approves asbestos for use but refuses to allow studies. See
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/is-epa-allowing-asbestos-products/?fbclid=IwAR2hhfuyctJZkiarsNFD4LSOk5OboXs5Rv2Q7xstHCeGBUr8YXgov0aSiA8
A second problem: having to explain to a conservative friend of mine that the process that confirmed Kavanaugh was an abomination and many Americans (possibly most) do not consider him a legitimate member of the Supreme Court.
I encourage you to join me in becoming a crank and exert pressure on your congressperson in a regular and timely fashion. It only takes a few minutes every other week and at least you are doing something instead of just sitting there.
Blogger Problems
draft
Blogger has informed me that it is no longer reliably displaying features of this blog, but it doesnt tell me why or what to do about it. I dont know what this means really but it must mean something bad.
Blogger has informed me that it is no longer reliably displaying features of this blog, but it doesnt tell me why or what to do about it. I dont know what this means really but it must mean something bad.
Saturday, August 31, 2019
Losing Weight
draft
The medical checkup found nothing of concern beyond some vitamin deficiencies and of course I am overweight. Can I really succeed at a diet? Food is my number one mood elevating device. Two weeks into it, I have the various scales, I have been working on limiting the number & size of portions and off schedule eating. This looks like its going to be a lot of work.
The medical checkup found nothing of concern beyond some vitamin deficiencies and of course I am overweight. Can I really succeed at a diet? Food is my number one mood elevating device. Two weeks into it, I have the various scales, I have been working on limiting the number & size of portions and off schedule eating. This looks like its going to be a lot of work.
Sunday, August 25, 2019
If By This Time They Dont Hate Trump
draft
If by this time, someone does not hate Trump and/or think that there has been important damage to the Republic and/or does not think that the Constitution has failed and requires significant changes, then I think it is very unlikely that you or I are going to change their mind.
Unless they have been living in a cave, cut off from the world, then they could only think that the situation was not serious because ...
(a) they only get their news from Fox News and that has got to be a conscious choice on their part, or
(b) they have important philosophical differences from us, and these differences are not going to go away because of anything we say, or any evidence that we show. They have made up their minds, and that is that.
I mention this because I dont want you (or me) to waste our time arguing with such people.
Furthermore, unlike the mainstream Democratic party, I dont think there is any point in pussyfooting around this issue. You may as well take a stand on the issues and get to the heart of the matter. Pretending to find a moderate center that does not exist is not going to win any elections. Just ask Hillary.
If by this time, someone does not hate Trump and/or think that there has been important damage to the Republic and/or does not think that the Constitution has failed and requires significant changes, then I think it is very unlikely that you or I are going to change their mind.
Unless they have been living in a cave, cut off from the world, then they could only think that the situation was not serious because ...
(a) they only get their news from Fox News and that has got to be a conscious choice on their part, or
(b) they have important philosophical differences from us, and these differences are not going to go away because of anything we say, or any evidence that we show. They have made up their minds, and that is that.
I mention this because I dont want you (or me) to waste our time arguing with such people.
Furthermore, unlike the mainstream Democratic party, I dont think there is any point in pussyfooting around this issue. You may as well take a stand on the issues and get to the heart of the matter. Pretending to find a moderate center that does not exist is not going to win any elections. Just ask Hillary.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)