I have a new name, a new look, and a new URL. Go to http://www.horologium.net, and don't forget to update your bookmarks.
Totally devoid of original thought.
Monday, June 17, 2002
Sunday, June 16, 2002
I am infected (infectuous?)
Check out the Human Virus Scanner. Here's my result: (some of these are not accurate!)
Human Virus Scanner
The virus that have infected you will be show here along with thier cures, if known.
Viruses you suffer from:
Eat some real food. Something which you can identify the source of every ingredient, not the point of manufacture.
Gnome is better than workbench. BEOS is better than Amiga OS. The TV Modulator was a pain in the arse and an EXTERNAL power pack? I ask you. And it didn't have a built in MIDI port like some of its rivals.
Read "God's Debris" by Scott Adams (yes, the Dilbert guy)
Try MacOS X. It's based on UNIX, it has a smoother UI than Windows and it doesn't suck.
As an extra feature the boxes look nice.
Having a well-known name doesn't make it good.
Free love is passe and potentially dangerous, and patchouli smells like cat piss.
Face it, the elected government is in control. Actually that's quite scary.
Consume more stuff! It's easier to buy new stuff than to recycle.
Viruses you might suffer from:
Install the latest version of Microsoft Windows. Learn to love it.
Rule, Britannia! Britannia rule the waves! [repeat]
Life is not a game. Roll 3D6. On a 4 or more go out and do something with your life.
Stop wearing the stick-on ears.
Buy a suit. Invest your money. Eat hotdog buns on a friday.
Computer Games (90%)
Stop staring at the screen and get some fresh air. You should see a doctor about the RSI in your thumbs.
Use a mouse with more than one button.
Link courtesy of Doug's Dynamic Drivel, by way of Patio Pundit.
Saturday, June 15, 2002
Civil Unions for All
While doing a little surfing today, this article in the Manchester Union-Leader caught my attention. Now, for those of you who are not familiar with this paper, it makes the Washington Times look like the New York Times; they supported Steve Forbes in the 2000 GOP primary, and it wasn't because of his position on the flat tax. I found it absolutely incredible (but gratifying) to see an article supporting gay rights in a publication of their reputation.
Although this article was written in October, I did not see the article before today. Nonetheless, it very closely tracks with one of the very first items I blogged here, after following a debate between Shouting 'cross the Potomac's Tony Adragna and Zonitics's Edward Boyd. What I wrote was:
What I propose is a radical redefinition of marriage--only marriages performed by a religious leader shall be defined as a marriage. Any other type of joining, including heterosexual unions performed by a justice of the peace, shall be considered a civil union, with the same legal priveleges.
What Mr. Swayne wrote:
Enact a federal civil union law. Change the laws with property, representation and dependent protections from “marriage” to “civil union.” Eliminate penalties that keep blended families and elderly couples from getting hitched. Make civil unions available to gays and straights alike. And give marriage back to houses of worship. You want legal protections? Get a civil union. You want marriage? Go to your faith community.
While we are arguing from fundamentally different viewpoints, we arrived at the same conclusion.
Friday, June 14, 2002
Sorry for the low post count over the past few days, but an attack of Real Life intervened. Couple that with some changes for this blog, and you end up with a disincentive to post.
Posting will be light until Sunday evening, unless the middle east blows up, or the EU dissolves, or somebody says something monumentally stupid (Robert Scheer and Cynthia McKinney are excluded, because they always say monumentally stupid things).
Tapped vs. the Green Party
Tapped has been on the warpath lately regarding the Green Party (this post has links to a Salon piece--which requires a subscription-- and an American Prospect article, which does not). Seems they are bent out of shape at the fact that the Green Party is now running candidates against "good" liberals such as Paul Wellstone, and it may be hurting the Democrats in their efforts to retain control of the Senate, and to take control of the House of Representatives. Tapped feels that the Greens should support the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, in order to keep the evil Republicans from running the show, even if the Democratic Party isn't an exact ideological fit with Green Party issues.
I wonder if they felt that the Reform Party should have supported the reform-minded wing of the GOP in 1992 (when Perot's candidacy doomed Bush's chances for a second term). How about the Libertarians? They scored enough votes in the 2000 election to topple Slade Gorton and make Maria Cantwell the junior senator from Washington. Neither of these groups have views entirely congruent with the GOP, but they could have worked inside the GOP to achieve their goals, but instead ran candidates which sucked away votes from the Republican candidates.
The Green Party is currently the largest third party in the United States (in terms of votes received in the 2000 election), due for the most part of the self-destruction of the Reform Party. However, like all minor parties, they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of electing a major candidate (Jesse Ventura was a fluke, and Angus King of Maine doesn't belong to any party). The last person initially elected to congress as something other than a Democrat or Republican was Socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont; there has never been a Libertarian, Green, Reform, or Natural Law candidate elected to a statewide or federal post (except for Ventura, who has left the moribund Reform Party). The only reason the minor parties exist is for the electorate to express their dissatisfaction with the current platforms of the major parties. This is not Europe, where multiparty coalitions form the government; our system is not set up as a parliamentary democracy, which is why third parties are less relevant in the US then they are elsewhere.
Full Disclosure: I am registered as a Libertarian, although my voting record is mixed. I cannot see registering as a Democat, but as long as the Republican Party retains its current cast on social issues, they will not enjoy my support.
The Enneagram test
It seems to be taking the blog world by storm. I took it, and this is my result:
take free enneagram test
I'm not sure that that is all that accurate a reflection of myself, since this, totally dissimilar, result was tied with the above:
take free enneagram test
I'm not that empathic, but I'm also not overwhelmingly self-critical.
Thursday, June 13, 2002
Experts say study definitively shows kids' vaccines are safe
Not that yet another exhaustively documented, thorough study will have any effect on the anti-vaccination agitators.
I am a strong proponent of vaccination programs, because they work. Measles outbreaks are very rare in this country, because most kids are vaccinated.
One of the groups behind the anti-vaccination movement here in the US appears to be chiropractors. While I do not know if they are formally organized, many chiropractors are firmly in the anti-vaccination camp. While I believe that the chiropractic method has its applications (I've had several fix me up when I've been sore), I don't agree with their "all medication is bad" philosophy. For the same reason, I oppose any type of medical practice that eschews proper use of medication, such as holistic medicine or naturopathy.
I don't think that chiropractic can effectively deal with my condition, which is controlled fairly well by medication. A routine blood test 18 months ago revealed that I had an astronomically high triglyceride level of 977. After three months on Lopid, it had dropped to a high, but much more reasonable 229, where it has remained (with continued use of the drug). Such an abnormally high count cannot be accounted for solely by diet; there are strong indications that genetics are at work here, a view that is strengthened by my parents' medical histories. Consequently, I will most likely be taking this medicine for the rest of my life. Those who would advocate against medication argue that I am poisoning myself, whereas I believe that I am correcting a genetic defect.
Wednesday, June 12, 2002
Tuesday, June 11, 2002
Private Data Vs. Public War
The Christian Science Monitor takes note of Bob Barr's relentless work on protecting privacy issues with this editorial. Barr has proposed a bill that requires a "Privacy Impact Statement" that will assess the impact of any bill. It notes a few new bills currently making their way through congress, and points out how privacy may be trumped by a bureaucracy that wants unrestricted access to information, whether or not it is needed. The problem with centralized databases is that they can be hacked, and such a large target would be irresistable for those who want information for any purpose, nefarious or benign.
It's a shame that Bob Barr is such a wing-nut. He is the biggest advocate of privacy issues of the 535 senators and congressmen, but his bombastic, overbearing style (and his views on social issues) make him an easy target. He makes Newt Gingrich look like the Tooth Fairy. If he were to dial down the rhetoric just a tad, he'd be a far more effective legislator, but the damage is done, and his image is set in stone. If we're lucky, someone else will take up his drive for privacy, someone who is a little less over-the-top.
Victims need constitutional rights, too
The trial of David Westerfield, accused kidnapper and murderer of 7-year-old Danielle van Dam, began this week in a San Diego courtroom.
Two especially interested parties will be excluded from most of the otherwise public proceedings – the dead little girl's parents.
This is the beginning of an excellent Joseph Perkins column in the San Diego Union-Tribune, which details how a concern for the civil rights of perpetrators has trumped (or trampled) the civil rights of the victims, the ones who were wronged. Any time the concept of victim's rights is broached, the ACLU reacts, claiming that the laws already on the books adequately protect the interests of victims and their families.
Someone let the Van Dams know that the laws are looking out for them; they probably think differently right about now.