The Hanged Man

Pittsburgh Pride 2006

2006-06-17T18:17:00.000-07:00

I'm in Pittsburgh this weekend kitten-sitting for Melissa and Matt, my friends and former roommates. It also happens to be Pride weekend here in Pittsburgh, which I had been hoping to take in anyway, and of course I never miss a chance to visit Jesse, my BFF.

Pittsburgh has an interesting gay community. For those of you who don't know, the real Pittsburgh is NOT (wish I could make those letters bigger) the Pittsburgh of "Queer as Folk." However, for a city it's size (only about 300,000 people) I think Pittsburgh has a BIG gay community. There's at least six major bars and several other small ones, and though the gay community is not integrated with the mainstream the way it is in cities like Philadelphia and New York--you won't see any rainbow flags outdoors in Pittsburgh, except on Pride Day. In fact most of the gay bars are completely unmarked from the outside (I can only suppose to avoid vandalism) and you have to be "in the know" to find them, even if you walk past every day.

The funny thing is that the gay scene here is expanding, and has been fairly rapidly for ten years or so. Sure, this might be the same phenomenon other cities have seen, with homosexuality becoming more socially acceptable and gay communities becoming more visible, but I personally believe there's been a major influx of gays to Pittsburgh BECAUSE of "Queer as Folk." I'm amazed at how many people I meet in Pittsburgh who say they moved here because of the show--to which my reaction is always, "didn't you think to VISIT first? Or maybe ask around." For those of you who don't know, "Queer as Folk" is filmed in Toronto. Liberty Avenue is Church Street. The real Liberty avenue looks like this:

But I digress.

The point is, I certainly wasn't expecting something on par with Philly; I thought maybe a small parade with a fair-sized crowd. In fact I got the reverse; the parade itself was probably as big as the Philly parade in population (granted, with lower production values--more walkers and fewer floats) but the crowd of spectators was much smaller than I expected. The photo below is of the crowd near us to watch the parade; compare that with the photo in my Philly Pride entry of spectators lined up at 12th and Locust Sts!

Differences in theme abound as well. There were more bikes, more bears and leather daddies, and a car club--neither of which should really be surprising in a city that's solidly in NASCAR country--and a larger contingent of drag queens. For whatever reason, I find that Pittsburgh has a huge drag queen population, relative to size. I can't figure out why, though I'm evolving a theory.

PFLAG Pittsburgh mustered a HUGE turnout, which I mostly attribute to the young age of the parade itself (only seven years) so the novelty of marching hasn't worn off the way it has for parents and friends in Philadelphia. That's my guess, anyway.

So anyway... the parade started in the heart of downtown Pittsburgh and proceeded across the Roberto Clemente bridge to a park beside the two stadiums and the Del Monte Factory. I have to point out here my amusement at the Gay Pride Festival happening in the shadow of the fruit factory. Unlike the Philly Festival, which is fenced, private, and carries a ten-clam admission ticket, this was set up in a field and free. The organizers make their money on beverages, but they were only charging $2 instead of the $3 I pay in Philly. I hope that the city gave them that park for free to keep their overhead down, because they were out $11 a visitor, relative to Philly's Fest.

Nothing too special to report; there were no protestors, which was only moderately surprising. Though Pittsburgh is a fairly conservative area, it's a city that's grown up with diversity since the very beginning--for those who haven't been here, Pittsburgh is MULTICULTURAL, mostly thanks to the various minorities who were brought in to build things during the Steel Era. Polish, Slovakian, Irish, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Italian, French, Russian, Middle-Eastern; they all have HUGE populations here, and so it's a pretty easy-going city as far as minorities. It also strikes me as a city where religion is not an overwhelming force in peoples' lives. Certainly there's lots of churches, but I don't get the sense there's the same number of Holy Rollers as in Berks and Lehigh Counties, for instance. Of course, the lack of protestors may also be due to the low profile of the day--my guess is that in the future they'll have more of that to deal with.

One funny thing on that note--apparently there's a furry convention in town as well, so all morning there were people walking around Downtown with animal tails hanging out of their pants. Kinda takes the edge off the queers, I think.

Pretty much the same sort of festival booths I'm used to; one unique booth was the STD awareness booth, which was giving out all sorts of pharmaceutical-branded goodies like pens, highlighters, and pill boxes. Jesse's friend Kandrea positively cleaned them out; she got armloads of crap including two HUGE pillboxes that I'm pretty sure are intended for HIV patients... I just hope no one recognizes the names of the drugs on her pens and highlighters and assumes she's got something. Ha!

As always, some other pictures from the day:

Philly Pride 2006

2006-06-12T20:58:00.000-07:00

I know, I know, you're still waiting with baited breath on my Ketchikan post... I wish I could say that I'm like polishing it or something, but that's not it at all. You're just going to have to keep waiting.

In the meantime, I hit the Pride Parade and Festival in Philly yesterday. This is the third year in a row that I've attended (the second year in a row I've attended ALONE--no thanks to my ingrate friends who all vanish with a myriad of excuses when I suggest we go watch drag queens and leather daddies on parade floats) and I think this was the best year in a lot of ways. The parade was a bit short, but that was really the only drawback that I saw.

I just generally love the whole Pride Parade experience. What a feeling to be out in the Philly gayborhood and see thousands (upon thousands upon thousands) of fags, dykes, trannies and freaks that are out en masse, crowding eight or so blocks and frightening the suburban families that drive through in their minivans, most of them I suppose ignorant to what Washington Square West has become in the past 15 or so years. I absolutely love seeing the straights react to the parade. It's by far my favorite thing about the whole event.

The line for the parade (12th and Locust):

I arrived about an hour early, grabbed a smoothie at Cosi (one of my favorite Gayborhood destinations) and chilled with the paper for a while. Saw a boy that I often run into out at the clubs, but he didn't recognize me. I've been trying to get his attention for a while, but just didn't have the energy at that time of morning.

Parade started a little after noon--by then crowds were lined up all up and down 12th Street, around the corner onto Locust, and I assume the whole way down the parade route. At the first rumbling roar of the Dykes on Bikes (the traditional first entry in every Pride Parade, for the uninitiated) everyone stood and clapped. We then spent the next hour or so watching the floats go by (my winner was definitely the black jeep from Phillygaycalendar.com that was loaded with gorgeous young boys--see the photos below) and then moved along to the Festival Grounds. The Pride Festival was back at the Festival Pier at Penn's Landing this year, after being in a vacant lot at Broad and Washington for the past two years, which was something else. The whole place was packed with vendors, booths, and queers. Oh, and Paula Poundstone, whom I did my very best to avoid as if she were on fire. Yeah.

The hot boy flaot (in three variations):

Oh, and lest I should forget the protesters... Repent America, the same ten or so people who protest all the Philly gay events, were out as usual. They were particularly vocal this year, which was fairly entertaining. I actually appreciate the protestors--their presence makes us aware that our message is getting out, and I'm confident enough in who I am that I don't get upset hearing someone else complain about it--but I am definitely in the minority on that one. An awful lot of homos get VERY agitated and VERY mad at the presence of the protestors. Luckily the police are there to protect democracy. In truth I shouldn't make fun--the Philly cops are very good at their jobs, and they are extremely respectful of the Pride Parade each year. Considering these are older heterosexual men of generally Italian decent that are escorting and protecting middle-aged gay guys in pink feather boas and rainbow capes, I think that's saying something.

Protestors:

In the end, I got a nasty sunburn (especially on my feet, which didn't have any sunscreen on them), paid WAYYYY too much for Budweiser (yuk--but they were out of Bacardi Silver) and got blisters from walking 60 or so blocks in $3 Old Navy flip-flops. But I also got a new HRC sticker for my car, shook hands with Frank DeCaro, and got a picture with a HOTTTTT boy named David from Phillygaycalendar.com (note the second plug--he was THAT hot.) More importantly, I shared the day with thousands and thousands of my fellow queers and recharged my gay batteries, at least for a little while. I can't wait until I can move to the Gayborhood!

Some more pics:

Paula Poundstone's still got it!!!

Apparently my friend Jesse works at Shampoo:

I found the hot boy from the hot boy float! (his name is David)

My favorite time at Woody's is when they have all the pride flags out:

Taking a break...

2006-06-02T12:00:00.000-07:00

Busy weekend coming up. Have a hockey game, my cousin's wedding in NYC, and various social functions to orchestrate and ruin around the Valley Forge area. As such I won't be able to update here for a couple of days. For those of you who have been reading my Alaska journal with rapt attention (you know who you are...) you'll have to wait until Sunday night at the earliest to continue with my adventure in Ketchikan.

Did I wrestle a grizzly bear? Fall off our raft and into the freezing water? Catch a bald eagle out of mid-flight and steal his magic talisman? Tune in to our next episode to find out...

For now, here's a picture that a couple of people have been waiting for me to post.

Hubbard Glacier: "All Business"

2006-05-23T22:12:00.000-07:00

Slept the night at Dans. Around 7 AM the ship arrived at the Hubbard Glacier, the northernmost point in our cruise. We dont dock, we just float around in Disenchantment Bay (the real name; more on that in a second) and get as close as we can to the glacier.

The Hubbard is one of the most active calving glaciers in the world. For all you uninitiated, calving in glacier-talk means that large chunks of the glacier are falling off into the ocean and becoming icebergs. When they fall, they make spectacular loud cracking noises and enormous splashes. Ive seen it on video. Its quite something.

We didnt see any calving this morning. We also didnt get closer than five miles from the glacier. Thats because there was an enormous ice sheet blocking our way. As a result, the glacier was not nearly the awe-inspiring sight we were expecting. Oh well. One more reminder that this is land under natures control, not a choreographed fireworks show.

The Hubbard Glacier:

The ice flow that kept us from getting closer to the Hubbard Glacier:

We did get a good look at a whole lot of icebergs, floating all around us in the Bay. Oh yes, that name. In 1792, Captain Alessandro Malaspina sailed up in the Inside Passage, searching in the name of Spain for a northern passage from the Pacific to the Atlantic. He was apparently pretty excited by the Bay until he reached the glacier. That was where he gave up and headed back to Spain. Hence the name.

Now back to the icebergs Its funny to see so many of them floating all around us. I think most people who havent sailed hear iceberg and immediately think of Titanic, as if icebergs were somehow the natural enemies of cruise liners. Certainly much of the conversation on board the ship centered around what if we hit one?! Considering we were barely moving, I doubt if it would have done more than just bounce off of us. They did make for some very pretty photography, though. Its funny to look at the photos from the rest of the trip, compared with these, and see how much brighter and bluer these photos are.

The icebergs that broke off the ice flow that kept us from getting closer to the Hubbard Glacier:

The Hubbard is also one of the few glaciers left in the world that is advancinggrowing larger. Because of its position, as the glacier advances is blocks a nearby fjord. If the fjord outlet is blocked completely, it floods and forms a lake. If the lake grows large enough, it swells the river that feeds it and threatens nearby trout habitat and an airport. This has happened once before, and was approaching disaster before the lake finally overcame the glacier and sent millions of gallons of water flooding into the Bay.

Okay, enough about the freaking glacier. As you can see from the photos, the information Ive learned about it was far more interesting than seeing the thing in person.

We left the glacier around 10 or so, and spent the rest of our day at sea. First stop was breakfastDan and I noted an old man at the next table who was settling in with a cup of coffee and a great big bowl full of prunes. With the whole day to kill, Dan observed, this guy was all business. Coffee and prunes.

With breakfast concluded, it was time to start drinking! I honestly cant remember all that much about the day in general, but there was an abundance of alcohol. I think I slept for a while somewhere in there. Dan and I did a martini tastingsix martinis of various recipesjust before dinner, and by the time we entered the dining room I was fairly well sloshed. So naturally, it was time for champagne and several types of wine! My dad got us some Riesling, Dan picked up another bottle of Perrier Jouer, and by the time dinner was over I was further sloshed. It was time to party!

The martini tasting:

Made a brief stop at the big party in the Pavilion Loungethats the club for old folksand ran like hell when we saw the senior citizen conga line. Chilled in the Navigator instead, until the Pavilion let out and the younger folks from there bar hopped onto our dance floor. Theres a guy here who (at least with my glasses off and some booze in me) looks exactly like Anderson Cooper. Dan hates that I say so, because he has a big crush on Anderson Cooper, but I calls em like I sees em.

The conga line:

Tomorrow we stop in our last port, Ketchikan. Its a big fishing town thats south of Juneau, and one of the busier cities in Alaska from a commerce side. Its also the second-rainiest place on earth after the Amazon Basin, and were doing a wildlife tour through a temperate rainforest. It sounds like fun.

At this point I should also point out that my brother and sister and I are living like total slobs; me worst of all. We're going to be tipping our stateroom attendant, Maria, quite well.

Our room (in two views):

A few other photos from the day....

This is my current desktop wallpaper:

A photo of an Alaskan mountain (from my collection of 150):

The deck of our ship, in the rain:

Dan, happy to be hanging in the Navigator:

Skagway: Gateway to the Yukon / City of Souvenirs

2006-05-22T21:43:00.000-07:00

Missed dinner last night; the Salmon Bake excursion kept us out too late. Im not even sure if I could have eaten, after pounding back salmon just before returning to the ship. I got a couple of text messages from Dan while he was at dinner, so we met up afterward. Terrible night in the Navigator Club. Daniel says its because they did something (Juneau) that day, and Americans can only do one thing a day. I think thats party true (I know its true of some of my friends, and of myself at times) but I also think its because the crowd on this ship is, on average, quite elderly.

Stayed at Dans til quite late, then back to my stateroom to get about an hour of sleep before we docked in Skagway. I think in the past two days Ive had a total of about four hours of sleep, and yet somehow I still feel fantastic. I think its the energy of this place, and the energy of getting to know Danor, well, actually both the Dans. It also helps, Im sure, that it never really gets totally dark here. Last night around 3 AM, we could still see dusk on the horizon, and by 4:30 or so its BRIGHT daylight. Im especially shocked because Ive always been terrible on lack of sleep; I expect Ill either have to catch up on my sleep soon, or this is going to catch up to me fast.

Skagway (yes, its an awesome name, and yes it represents the city quite well) is a tiny city with exactly 862 permanent residents, located at the northernmost end of the Inside Passage. During the gold rush, this was the place that prospectors would be dropped off to begin their long hike into the Yukon territory. In that era, the citys population was more than 10,000 peoplelargely prospectors waiting to go into the Yukon, store owners who supplied them, and prostitutes who entertained them. It was the largest city in Alaska, and it was as lawless as any western frontier town; as one of the tour guides said, if you walked the streets of Skagway, with one step someone stole your shirt; with the next, someone stole your pants; and with the next, someone stole your skin.

The streets of Skagway:

The whole gold rush history is stunning. These men were dropped in Skagway with 2,000 pounds of supplies (one years worth, as mandated by Canadian officials to cross their border). The men carried this into the mountains by themselvesmaking 20-30 trips up the golden staircase, a miles-long stair carved in the ice and snow of the mountain pass. It took 6-12 months to get all your gear across the mountains; at that point you were at Lake Bennett, and only a hundred miles or so from the gold fields.

The Golden Staircase:

Dan demonstrates the gay version (complete with Louis Vuitton fag-bag):

In 1898, the White Pass and Yukon Route train was begun to carry prospectors from Skagway into the Yukon, rather than make them hike. It was a project deemed impossible by many, but the railroad tycoon who built it declared that with enough dynamite and men, he could build a train to hell and back. By the time the train was completed, running across cliffsides and mountain passes, it featured the worlds longest cantilevered bridge. Today its listed as an International Historic Civil Engineering Landmark, along with the Panama Canal and the Eiffel Tower, etc. Of course, by the time the train was completed, the gold was mostly gone. Today, the train runs in the summer months for tourists.

We rode the train, which comes literally right to the pier where the ships dock. It took three hours total, mostly worth it for the views of the mountains and to say that in the course of a morning youve been to the Yukon and back; definitely another of those "this isn't fake / this isn't Disney" experiences. It feels very much like Big Thunder Mountain Railroad--and one has to assume that this train was at least part of the inspiration for that ride. Of course once we returned, I realized I wasnt missing much in Skagway.

The train ahead of us:

The famous cantilevered bridge. I'm pretty sure "cantilevered" is engineer-speak for "made of wood, and ready to plummeting into the chasm at any moment."

A closer view. Look how cantilevered it is!

A photo at the summit. Note that in Skagway, it was sunny and 65 degrees with no snow. Here, there were eight feet on either side of the tracks.

Not to diminish the city of Skagway entirely; its certainly something to stand in the middle of a city that, even in the 21st century, is really little more than a toehold in the frontier. Look down any city street and see how the city just stops, and the forest begins. The objection I had to Skagway is that its gone from gold rush frontier town to giant tourist trap. Literally every business in the city is a souvenir store or jewelry shop, all aimed at the tourists who clamber of the ships in port. Not that I can blame the residentswhen the ships unload, the population of Skagway goes from 850 to as many as 7,000 people, and thats where the moneys at. The bad feelings I have fall on my fellow tourists and Ihere weve turned a relic of the gold rush into one more tacky tourist trap.

A Toehold in the Frontier:

I thought this was funny:

I was hoping to have time to go see Dyea, the nearby port that ghosted in the late 1800s, but as there are no souvenir shops there, there are also no shuttles that run to it. Instead, we toured the city for a while, and then Dan and I did the Bordello Tour at the Red Onion Saloonwhich, as they say, costs $5 for 15 minutes, just like in 1898. Well worth the money to learn how prostitutes did business in those days. My favorite part, though, was learning how the building had been relocated from one block to another, but when it was settled it was backwards. Rather than pick the whole building up again, the men who moved it simply cut off the front and back facades, switched them, and reattached. As a result, the building is sort of inside-out. Its very Alaska.

The girls who host the Bordello tour:

I still think the best part of the Bordello tour was taking it with Dan. Its nice to have someone who looks for you to stand next to them, and just makes sure to keep some part of his body in contact with yours whenever possible. A relatively new sort of experience for me (or at least one I havent had since high school) and I rather appreciated it.

Returned to the ship after the Bordello tour and headed to dinner, then out to the Navigator Club again. Were getting pretty chummy with the waitress there, Isabella, and were starting to really know the crew of passengers who gather there. It was 80s night tonight, so even Patrick headed down.

Thats it for now, I think. Tomorrow were at sea for the day, which will be something of a welcome reliefthese port excursions are enjoyable, but they break up the day and wear us out a bit. Itll be nice not to have any schedule to keep, and just be able to relax for a while.

A few of my favorite pictures from the day...

Dan and I being on a totem pole:

Funny t-shirt (my favorite part is fishing for halibut - they weigh up to 500 lbs):

No, it's not a jackalope. It's a HAREABOU!!! (lol)

Juneau: Please report to the water

2006-05-21T22:13:00.000-07:00

Jeez.

My last entry was just before dinner. I realized there that the Dans had both been at the "Friends of Dorothy" meeting and I'd missed them. I made sure to indicate that I'd been there, though, and that I had looked for them last night and missed them. After dinner we all chilled--turns out they're not a couple at all. One of them is straight, the other gay. I'll leave it at that for now.

We stayed up all night in preparation for whale watching: went to the Navigator Club and had drinks, then back to their room for more drinks, then down to the deck around 5 AM for the supposed whale watch. Little did we realize that the ship was running 4 hours behind schedule; the best whale watching, which was supposed to take place at 5, in fact took place hours later, after one of the Dans (this naming system is not working--let's say 'Dan' for the gay Dan and 'Daniel' for the straight one); so after DAN and I turned in, DANIEL saw a 40-foot humpback breach completely out of the water. Damn.

The big bombshell of the night was that our Captain was removed from command after his Coast Guard breathalizer test turned up over the established Celebrity Cruises limit. That was a laugh; in fact, you might have seen it on the news.

Grabbed a couple of hours of sleep before we arrived in port at Juneau, our first stop in an Alaskan city. Right off the bat, it's not at all what I expected. We're greeted by throngs of other passengers, tour buses, and dozens of souvenir shops. At first it's a turn off, but I realize that this is only the section nearest the port, and that this is probably one of the largest industries in Juneau. I live with it, and try to walk up and see some of the "real" city before I leave for my expedition to the Mendenhall Glacier.

Juneau is of course the capitol city of Alaska, and it's unique in the nation in that there are no roads that lead into it. The only way to approach is by ship, by plane, or by dogsled. It's no wonder why; the city is surrounded on all sides by either mountain (Mount Juneau rises seemingly out of the middle of the city) or by sea. It's quite a sight.

The buildings here were all built during the gold rush era, and most of them have only been cleaned and repaired to retain that appearance. Still, it has something of that Disney feel, like I'm walking through Fronteirland, and I must constantly remind myself that this is real, this was not built for my entertainment. It's the first time in my life that I've had negative feelings about Disney's attention to verisimilitude; I never realized it would cheapen the feeling of seeing the real thing. This feeling will intensify at the Salmon Bake later.

So from downtown Juneau, we take a bus to the Mendenhall Glacier, located within Tongass National Forest (AKA "Rimjob National Park" - just kidding). As we travel we see more of Juneau than I did walking--some of the government buildings, including the Federal Building (which looks exactly like every other Federal Building in any other city). I'm glad I get to see some of the real city before we leave. If there's one problem with cruises, it's how little time you actually get to spend in each city along the way.

We park at the visitors center and take a short hike along a gravel trail to a beach directly across Lake Mendenhall from the Glacier. Apparently in the 1960s, the lake was mostly part of the glacier, but since the glacier retreats about 30 feet a year (if I remember that number right) there is now a mile and a half of water between the viewer and the glacier itself. It's still quite a sight--I made sure to dip my hand in the water, which was not as cold as you might expect, and even challenged an old British woman to go swimming with me. She declined.

We saw our first Alaskan wildlife alongside a small pool near the lake: a very large porcupine who was busily devouring the greenest parts of a budding tree. I tried to take photos, but my lens is just not long enough. My father and sister, meanwhile, were having their bike expedition rerouted because of the black bear they encountered. Lucky bastards.

Originally, I was supposed to go canoing right up to the front of the glacier itself, but because we were four hours late arriving in Juneau that opportunity was cancelled. Instead I explored the shore with my mother and brother. It was thrilling, but not nearly what approaching the face of the glacier itself would have been. Oh well.

After the glacier we went to the famous Juneau "Salmon Bake," an all-you-can-eat Salmon cookout. The food was great, but I was in truth pretty stuffed and not feeling so great (a respiratory issue, plus moderate exhaustion). After a mere two helpings, I hiked up a short trail along a salmon run (they don't run until Fall, unfortunately) and found the ruins of an actual gold mine. Once again that sense of Disney magic and the need to remind myself that no, this was in fact real.

I was struck by the fact that the mine is restricted only by a pair of boards that cross in front of it, rather than the concrete they used to fill the coal mines in Lackawanna, PA. I was also amazed at the waterfall nearby, which sprayed a constant mist over everything. Within that mist, moss grew to three inches thick over everything, and trees took root in the moss. Tongass Forest is a rainforest--not tropical, like the Amazon, but temperate--and life is everywhere. Even on the sign itself, moss took hold of every surface. It was stunning. I stood in the mist from the waterfall for quite a while, just feeling the cool water settle on me. For the first time, I started to feel the fronter around me--that this was not some cultivated, created experience, but real honest-to-God magic. I wanted to hold it somehow--I took photos, and a stone from the creek--but I knew that there was no way I could possibly capture this feeling. How frustrating.

After the Salmon Bake we headed back into Juneau and had just a few minutes to explore before we had to be back on the ship. My mother and brother and I did some souvenir shopping, I got Ryan a birthday gift, and we stopped in at the Red Dog Saloon, where Wyatt Earp once had drinks and forgot his gun. We walked deeper into the city as well, but as dusk was settling there were undesirables emerging in some of the bars, and they didn't seem too keen on tourist company. We retreated to the ship.

Tomorrow we're stopping in Skagway, the smallest city on our tour and the one with perhaps the richest history, tied as it is to the Gold Rush in Alaska. I'll go more into that tomorrow. For now, a few more photos from the day:

Me being mauled by a bear statue at the Salmon Bake:

Some nature photos from various parts of the day:

Juneau in the Magic Hour:

Dan and I drinking champagne at 7:30 AM "whale watching"

Daniel and Dan

"Alaska Speaks"

2006-05-20T19:15:00.000-07:00

Meant to do some of this last night, but I was just too tired So, first impressions. The ship is massive. I think slightly larger than I was imagining. It really is like a self-contained floating city; somewhere between seven and ten bars, a small shopping mall, gym, casino, restaurants, etcetera As we boarded we were handed glasses of champagne. They work hard to put on the opulent luxury atmosphere, and its fairly obvious why when you look at the clientele. This is obviously the most luxury any of these people will ever experiencenot that theres anything wrong with that, but you feel a certain amount of responsibility to put on airs, even though thats really not my style.

We boarded earlyspent about four hours on the ship before we left port in Seattle. Just before we left we did an emergency drill: put on our life vests, met in our musterstation (one word on all the signsdont know why) and went to our lifeboats. Sort of a morbid way to start a vacation, but I suppose getting it out of the way is a good thing.

The feeling of being at sea is fairly unique. Its certainly less isolated than I would have thought (though considering we have 2,000 friends to share this experience with, that shouldnt be surprising) and the rolling of the ship doesnt affect me as much as I expected, but there is a sense of how should I put it? Independence, I suppose, that overtakes you as soon as you leave the port. Theres no big city, no great land, no list of possibilities confronting you, dwarfing you. Theres only you and the ship, and the sea. Theres nothing visible in any directionthe sea is always changing, but its all basically the same. We are aimed at Alaska, but we could just as easily be aimed at Japan or at Russia or at California. Its simultaneously a world of options, and yet one of singular focuswithout a map, there might be nothing. I try to imagine myself as an explorer, in the days before completed maps of the world and GPS and internet, just cast out in the hope that I was somehow aimed at land. Even just imagining that, theres a fear that grips me instantly. Perhaps those sea monsters drawn on ancient maps were not in fact physical entities at allperhaps they were the monsters of fear, of being cast in the middle of a desert that is entirely hostile. The sea offers no respite, after allthere is nothing here to sustain a man. No water, no plants, and though there are fish by the billions beneath us, they are invisible and impossible to capture without foresight and preparation. Seventy percent of our world hates us. Perhaps the sea itself is the monster.

After wed set sail there was a show in the theater that introduced the recreational staff, and then a lecture about Alaska from our on-board naturalist. The guy is kind of a character, and his energy means that suspension of disbelief is a necessity in appreciating his presentation, but the way he spoke of wildlife and the natural landscape was truly inspiring. The first lecture centered around Alaska in generala history of the place, how it has evolved, the native culture, and the nature of the place. The slideshow itself was so inspiring, I can only imagine the feelings seeing the actual landscape will evoke. Tomorrow we dock in Juneau; the first shore excursion Im embarking on is a canoe trip to the face of the Mendenhall Glacier. According to the guidebook, we actually canoe past icebergs and get as close to the face of the thing as anyone can. I wasnt sure at first, being that its two hours of rowing, but Im imagining something so spiritually moving that I dont want to pass it up.

Tomorrow morning around 5 AM were supposed to have some great whale-watching. Im not sure if Ill be able to drag myself out of bed, but Ill do my best. Supposedly well again be surrounded by humpbacks once we arrive in Juneau later in the day. There are so many of them in the area, says our naturalist, that were virtually guaranteed to see some. Ive never been that moved by the idea of a whale watch, but I expect that will change when I actually see the animals up-close.

At the moment were still at seafor most of the day we were surrounded on all sides by ocean for as far as the eye could see, not a ship or an island anywhere on the horizon, but now the horizon to our left (port side?) is capped by about a quarter inch of landscape. I dont know whether its Alaska yet, or still only British Columbia. Im in the Navigators Lounge, the foremost (heh) lounge aboard the ship, where panoramic windows reveal what we approach and whats on both sides. Im here because our event calendar indicated an assembly of the friends of Dorothy. Im fairly certain that I correctly understood the meaning behind that name, but theres only one small table of men to back up my understanding. Im not holding out much hope of meeting anyone on this cruisethe crowd is on average a bit old, to start with, and it seems mostly to be couples of varying ages. My best hope is that the experience is fulfilling enough, and I dont doubt that will be the case. We did meet at least one gay guy last nightor perhaps two? Ironically enough, they are sharing our table at dinner, which means we should see them pretty much every evening for the rest of the trip. Theyre definitely here together, but I really cant tell for sure in what capacity. Anyway its nice to see at least one queer face on the ship. Tried to meet them for a drink last night and must have arrived to late at our designated assembly point. I guess Ill try again tonight.

Its formal dinner night tonightIm just going with a suit, although I understand some will opt for a tuxedo. Im half tempted to do so myself (in fact Id love to wear one at all times, even up on the pool deckand carry a glass of scotch at all times) but its just a bit much.

Attended a lecture on bears this afternoon, which was enthralling. Ive learned how to survive encounters with both blackor properly, American bears (look big, dont stare, back away at a diagonal, and if it attacks, always fight back) and grizzlies (pretty much the same as above, except if it attacks play deadand NEVER run away). Oh, and the first and most important rule, apparently. Dont smell good.

The whole ecology of the place is amazing. Juneau is the only state capital in the United States that cannot be approached by highwaythe only ways in are by plane, boat, or dogsled (I suppose one could take a snowmobile, but wheres the romance in that?). Skagway was built during the gold rush, and has not been improved upon much since. Learned about the golden stair last night, where prospectors would arrive. Under Canadian law, one could not enter the Yukon unless he had at least a years worth of suppliesthats 2,000 pounds. Theyd drop these young guys off on the shore all alone with their gear, and theyd have to carry it by backpack to the top of the mountain path (golden stair) that was the gateway to the Yukon. This meant anywhere between 20 and 40 trips, up a steep 3-mile hike. To make it worse, there were so many of these guys doing this that the line would stretch all the way up. Word was, if you fell out of step on the stair, it would be five hours before you got back in line.

At some point, a famous railroad tycoon (dont remember his name or the yearhopefully when I get to Skagway I can update this with more information) decided that a railroad was needed to get the prospectors to the gold. Though the terrain was treacherous, he boasted that with enough dynamite and steel, he could build a rail to hell and back. It took time, but eventually he completed his railroad. It stretched from Skagway to the Yukon, over terrain that could not even be hiked. Mountain passes, cliffsides, vast gorgesit traversed them all. Of course, by the time it was completed, the gold was gone. This is a pattern in Alaskaboom and bust, boom and bust. First it was sea otters, hunted by the Russians. When that dried up, Russia sold the territory to the States, famously, for two cents an acre. The media branded it Sewards Folly, after the Secretary of the Interior who made the purchase. Twenty years later gold was discovered, and the rush began. That lasted a few decades. Then it was timber, then oil. Its not unlike celebrity, in a way. Alaska grabs the interest of the general public (the mainland?) for whatever reason, remains hot until that reason grows old, and then fades from interest until its next big thing. Meanwhile, the wild territory struggles to get by. Glaciers, rivers, bears, eagles, moosethese are the things that persist, the things that make Alaska who she really is, and that which only those closest to her ever really get to know. Of course, her periods of fame threaten to undermine what makes her truly special.

I think thats it for now. Just a couple of things I want to remember from our presentations:

To truly enjoy this, you have to leave your comparisons behind. Leave the city behind.

The natives here have an expression. They say that when a pine needle falls in the forest, the eagle sees it, the deer hears it, and the bear smells it.

T-Shirts of Protest...

2006-02-03T07:36:00.000-08:00

Amazing that we can have such blatant violations of constitutionally protected expression in front of a national audience, and most people don't seem terribly upset. Meanwhile we're at war to liberate another country.

I wonder, if Cindy Sheehan were an Iraqi, would we invade to defend her right to wear t-shirts?

I like him Alito! (ooh, that's terrible)

2006-01-11T08:18:00.000-08:00

Spent a good portion of the morning reading transcripts of the Alito hearings. I have to say, I kind of like the guy. I like what he says about the role of a judge, and I like what he says about the difference between a lawyer with a client, and a judge. My fear, of course, is that it's a load of crap.

The history of the Supreme Court has no shortage of people who've totally changed their politics after appointment. Some of the more liberal justices on the court were appointed by conservative presidents... So it's entirely possible that this guy everyone is frightened of could wind up being a moderate--or even better, liberal--justice. I don't see much chance that he won't be appointed, so I expect we'll all find out together.

My conversation with Bill O'Reilly

2006-01-09T17:18:00.000-08:00

Man, so much to post about.... So this morning on my way to work, I started thinking about the questions I would ask Bill O'Reilly if I had the chance to interview him. I'm still contemplating my podcast radio project, "The Average American," and after seeing Letterman lay into O'Reilly I pondered the questions I would ask, if I had the opportunity:

1. Drawing an analogy between television news and newspapers, do you consider your show more of a news report, or an opinion piece?

2. On a related note, you are an outspoken critic of the media and a believer in a liberal media bias. Firstly, how do you think this bias is exercised? What do you think of the current state of journalism, especially ethics? What repairs do you think need to be made to fix this? Lastly, you air on a network that uses slogans like "fair and balanced" and "we report, you decide." Do you believe this network is truly free of bias? How do you respond to those who accuse Fox News of being a mouthpiece for the conservative movement?

3. You've gone on record as saying that certain news stories or opinions hurt our war efforts and/or embolden our enemies, and that people should not say these things. How do you justify that statement in a democracy, however? Some would say that it's the responsibility of the citizens to criticize and debate the war; that debate and analysis is the citizen's role in the democracy that soldiers fight to protect. How do you respond to that?

4. I myself am proud to be a liberal. To paraphrase something George Clooney recently said, liberals have been on the 'right side' of most major conflicts in the past 100 years. Liberals supported civil rights, the rights of women to vote, freeing the slaves, leaving Vietnam, etcetera. Yet you use the world "liberal" as if it were a curse, and portray liberals as villains, or at best radicals. Why? Do you feel it would be better to take a less vehement approach and examine both sides of an issue, rather than demonizing or lessening one viewpoint as inherently wrong?

5. Another word you've recently begun to speak with loathing is "secular," especially in the context of your "War on Christmas" series, is 'secular.' Do you view secularism as a bad thing in general, or only in the specific context of the Holidays? Do you feel that the United States should have a secular government, or that a Judeo-Christian ethic is implied in our law and should be acknowledged and honored rather than eliminated?

6. Regarding gay marriage, your position seems generally to be as an opponent. You recently ran an article about a woman in the UK who married a dolphin, and implied that this was a natural progression of a movement toward gay marriage. First off, do you really believe that, even if this slippery slope argument holds true, that wackos marrying animals is motivation enough to deny a sizeable population of Americans something they fight for? I feel I can give you a solid argument in favor of gay marriage simply by saying that there's no basis to deny it except on religious grounds, which is unconstitutional. Can you refute that argument?

7. Lastly, I have to ask, how much of the persona you affect would you say is an assumed character? In other words, how much of your approach is a virtue of the nature of television and radio, and an effort to retain or appease your audience? Is the Bill O'Reilly we see on TV and hear on the radio the same guy who eats his dinner at night, and the same guy who rides the train and goes to Church? Or is some quantity of that deliberately amplified for the sake of presentation?

OK, so those are my seven big questions. What I really want is to get honest answers to those questions, and maybe to debate his responses to clarify his positions. I realize that someone like Bill O'Reilly is never going to agree with me, but I would like to hear clear, articulate arguments relatively free of rhetoric. That's my biggest problem with the pundit philosophy as I see it: these people rely mostly on kneejerk reaction, rhetoric and fear to make their arguments. I can't believe that someone intelligent enough to have a show like this, and intelligent enough to understand rhetoric, can be personally motivated by the same logic.

I realize I'll probably never get to ask any of these questions; O'Reilly seems mostly to make his interview appearances based on the publicity it's going to generate for him. So if by any chance you're reading this and you might have the chance to talk to the guy, feel free to steal my questions. No need for acknowledgement; I'd just like to hear his answers.

Thinking about these questions stirred my thinking to another couple of subjects, one of which is the death of logic in the modern United States. I think I might start a series of posts regarding logical fallacies, but I don't know if I have the energy to begin it tonight. Plus I'd like this post to get some attention first. So look for that later this week.

A lot to talk about!

2006-01-09T17:06:00.000-08:00

Jeez, it's been a while, and there's an awful lot to talk about!

Let's start with my favorite: have you seen Bill O'Reilly's appearance on Letterman yet? It's a hot topic on the web right now. You can view it at onegoodmove.org. Mixed reviews. I personally think Dave backed down, but I'm shocked that he allowed himself to get that involved in a political debate. If you know anything about David Letterman (I used to be a HUGE fan; I still love the guy, but just don't have time for network TV) then you know that he's VERY controlling of his show, and particularly of the character he portrays. He's always been very careful to portray "the dumb guy" in all situations, and he usually abstains from anything political or touchy. The only exception I remember prior to O'Reilly's appearance was following 9/11. Maybe Dave's like me, so upset by 9/11 that he's even more horrified at the way it's been used to manipulate the public by villainous politicians with dubious agendas.

It was great to see someone really lay into O'Reilly. I've seen Jon Stewart try to debate O'Reilly topic for topic, and the problem is that O'Reilly just slips into rhetoric mode, shouts, lies, and distorts facts so that it's impossible to have an honest debate with him. The only way to get an edge on him is to play his own game. "I just have the feeling that 60% of what you say is crap." I clap every time I hear it.

Of course the dedicated Factor-addicts are all over it. Dave's rude. Dave's dumb. Dave can't speak about a show he hasn't watched. You know what, folks? Dave Letterman is one of the smartest and best informed men in show business. He says he's dumb, and he says he hasn't watched The Factor, because he doesn't want the argument to degenerate too far. And for those who cry about how rude Dave was to his guest, I point to O'Reilly's own interview tactics, or to other show's he's appeared on--calling Jon Stewart a "pinhead" on TDS, for instance.

I'm told that there was one precedent for this interview in Letterman history. Supposedly there was a Letterman interview with Rush Limbaugh in the 1990s where Dave took a similar approach. I can only hope now that O'Reilly's popularity is going the way of Limbaugh's, where he'll soon be relegated to his base of fanatical fans, and disregarded by everyone else. We should be so lucky.

A meme to get things rolling...

2005-12-27T10:14:00.000-08:00

Sorry about the long break, kids... I was at the folks' house for Christmas, and they only have dialup internet, so there was no way I was going to spend any more time than necessary on the web. To get things going again, I came across this meme that I kind of like. It's challenging, but I'm going to do it. I added one list of seven (songs) because I thought it was missing, and the list of people to complete this hardly seemed to count.

Seven Things To Do Before I Die
1. Write the four novels that I have in my head (at least).
2. Publish those novels.
3. Write at least one play
4. Live in Center City, Philadelphia (preferably within the Gayborhood)
5. Visit Japan and Macchu Picchu (okay, so I squeezed two in)
6. Learn to really dance
7. Find (or win over?) that person with whom I can actually make a real relationship work
8. Learn how to relax and actually enjoy being in a real relationship

Seven Things I Cannot Do
1. Live forever
2. Write a song
3. Play an instrument
4. Dance any "real" step
5. A full split to my right (working on it!)
6. Speak another language (fluently)
7. A backflip

Seven Things That Attract Me to...Blogging
1. The minor sense of fame that comes from an audience
2. The idea that I might somehow influence politics for the better
3. Meeting hot boys
4. Developing an audience to read my fiction once it's finally published
5. It keeps me writing SOMETHING so I stay in practice
6. It gives me a (dubious?) feel for popular opinion
7. It FEELS like a pure way to share thought, philosophy, and opinion.

Seven Things I Say Most Often
1. "What?"
2. "See? There you go!"
3. "Oo, hel-lo!" (said as hot boy passes)
4. "This is ri-goddamn-diculous!"
5. "Fuck-a-diddle!" / "Fuck-a-duck!"
6. "Oh my God!"
7. "Dude!"

Seven Books That I Love
1. Rudyard Kiping, The Jungle Book
2. J.R.R. Tolkein, The Lord of the Rings
3. Sir James George Frazer, The Golden Bough
4. David Bowman, This Must Be the Place
5. Michael Crichton, Jurassic Park
6. Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
7. Stephen King, On Writing

Seven Movies That I Watch Over and Over Again
1. The Big Lebowski
2. Office Space
3. John Carpenter's The Thing
4. Apocalypse Now
5. Frank Oz's Little Shop of Horrors
6. A Few Good Men
7. Alien

Seven Songs That Have Special Meaning to Me:
1. Talking Heads, This Must Be the Place (Naive Melody)
2. The Platters, Save the Last Dance
3. Chemical Brothers, The Golden Path
4. The Flaming Lips, Fight Test
5. Bob Dylan, To Make You Feel My Love
6. Bob Dylan, Most of the Time
7. Carly Simon, You and Me Against the World

Seven People I Want to Complete This:
1. Jesse
2. Alex
3. Melissa
4. Peter J.
5. Ryan
6. Liz
7. Traci

Pause to breathe?

2005-12-22T06:41:00.000-08:00

Yeah, sorry no posts in a while... I've been kind of busy living, and not much time to be recording things here.

This past weekend a good friend came to visit from Pittsburgh; we went to see WICKED for Christmas, which was fantastic and every bit what I'd hoped for and more--except that I got these tickets explicitly because he wanted to see Rue McClanahan, and SHE WASN'T IN THE SHOW THAT NIGHT!!! It was fantastic anyway.

After the show we went to the Roxy, which was also quite an experience. It was my first time at a club in New York, and again it was everything I'd hoped for. I got a good look at the back room also, which was another first. ;-) Drove back that same night (which now seems nuts, but at the time seemed perfectly rational--and in case you're wondering, I was not drinking. Sleepy, yes, but not drinking.)

It was great to see my friend again, though the whole "three days and then he's gone again" thing just blows REALLY hard. Still, the whole weekend was fantastic and a nice reminder that there are things in the world far more important than politics and all that bullshit.

I'm not a Christian (I'm a homosexual who was raised Catholic, after all) so I'm not into the whole "put Christ in Christmas" thing, although I'm also not one of those "warriors for a secular Christmas" that the conservatives think are marauding... I was raised to know that Christmas was a time for togetherness, time with the ones you love, and a chance to show the people in your life that you care about them. You know, peace on Earth, good will toward men, etc. I am genuinely more excited about giving than receiving (as relates to Christmas, among other things) and this was by far and away the best gift I've ever given anyone. It was everything I hoped for, and I think the weekend was my REAL Christmas this year. Now I just wish it would have lasted all year--but then, isn't that how you're supposed to feel about Christmas?

So I'm left to bawl like a baby every time I hear "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas." It's my all-time favorite Christmas carol, so sweet with just a trace of melancholy. My favorite is the Bing Crosby version, and when he sings "someday soon we all will be together" it just sets off the waterworks. Sigh.

Went out to Woody's in Philly last night with another friend. Wednesdays at Woodys are my absolute favorite energy outlets. lol. Last night was fun--got stuck dancing with two guys most of the night, which normally would piss me off, but the second one turned out to be both cute and a pretty decent guy, so it's not a total loss.

So what now? Christmas shopping, which I put off until the last minute because of money constraints, and then it's the big weekend. I'm really not in much of a Christmas spirit this year; I've been so busy and stressed about things (what with moving to Pittsburgh and then back, and trying to find an apartment, etc) that I haven't been able to pause and breathe. Just this past weekend. I've got two four-day weekends coming up, but I want to spend them mostly working out. lol. Then we're going to see They Might Be Giants in Brooklyn on NYE. I don't expect to have anyone to kiss at midnight, which is probably way too important to me, but last year was the first time I ever really HAD anyone good to kiss at midnight anyway. He's the only one I really want to kiss this year, but he'll be in Orlando while I'm in New York, so I doubt if that's going to work. Oh well, maybe something else will crop up...

OK, I guess that's enough for now. I'm not going to get political, even though there is so much going on to get political about. It's just not the spirit that I'm in right now. Sure, we can all hope that George Bush gets a nice censure in his Christmas stocking, but honestly I only have the energy to wish for one thing from Santa, and it's much more personal than that. So have a happy holiday everyone (whichever holiday(s) you might choose to celebrate), drink too much egg nog, and try not to cry at the Christmas carols. That role is taken.

This is for that someone special:

"Someday soon we all will be together
If the fates allow
Until then we'll have to muddle through somehow
So have yourself a merry little Christmas now."

What's important to you?

2005-12-15T11:27:00.000-08:00

In a rather introspective mood today.

As I said before, I spend a fair amount of my time now reading other blogs. It's an amazing way to get to know people's feelings on things--but I find the political blogs disturbing in a lot of ways. Today's politics has become so polarized and partisan (I know what you're thinking--"Duh, Chris!") and so many people play their party lines. Personally, though I consider myself aligned with liberals (and the Democratic party to a lesser extent) that is mostly happenstance. I arrive at my political beliefs through careful consideration of each issue independent of each other. I have my priorities (personal freedom, the Bill of Rights, civil liberties--all of which are kind of the same thing) that factor heavily into those determinations, but each one is indepenent of the others.

Just to illustrate my point (skip this paragraph if you're more interested in my general point than in a list of my stands on various issues): I am in favor of controlling guns, but stridently AGAINST banning or limiting posession of guns. I have similar feelings on drugs. I am pro-choice, though as a homosexual male I generally abstain from abortion debates, as I figure I have little reference aside from having been born. I am against the death penalty, I am in favor of harsher sentences for violent criminals. I am against hate crime legislation because I believe the punishment should fit the crime, not the motive. I believe in a strong military for the purpose of defending the U.S. and our allies, but I fought hard against our entering the war in Iraq, because I knew the justifications were bullshit. I remain opposed to the military action in Iraq and believe we should immediately begin actions to withdraw safely, but while we remain engaged I hope for success in our mission objectives. I believe that our government and all of its entities and extensions should be completely, 100% free from religious endorsement, influence, and imposition. As such, I think that the civil institution of marriage should be available to any two consenting adults. I believe that all businesses, including the largest corporations, should have to survive on their business practices alone, with no subsidy or assistance from the government; if the government is dependent upon some business for survival, there should be contingencies in case that business should fold. As you can see, all of these things add up to making me pretty liberal--but in no case am I taking my cue from a party leader, these are all determinations I have come to as an individual. Incidentally, I make charitable contributions annually to the ACLU, the HRC, and to random smaller institutions as strikes me. I DO NOT contribute to the Democratic Party, and I don't intend to start.

Anyway.... The reason I say all that is that I suspect a lot of Americans--MOST Americans, perhaps, at least those who are politically involved--don't think through individual issues, they take their cues from party leaders, civic leaders, religious leaders, or others whom they consider authoritative and informed. The problem with this, in my mind, is that so many in leadership roles have personal or party agendas that they are furthering. They don't choose a position on an issue based on logic or morals or the majority opinion; they choose a position based on what is going to secure their base, and ensure a maximum of votes. To assume that their stand is the right one--or, worse yet, that their given reasons for arriving at that position are true and logically valid--is very risky. But then I wonder, am I correct in this belief to begin with?

So what I'm doing here is asking a question: What's important to you? How do you make your decisions about politics, and what weighs heaviest in your evaluation? If you're reading this, I'm asking you to post a quick comment to answer that question. In the interest of brevity (I know, a foreign subject here, but still) please try and keep your answer to two or three sentences. Think about it this way: if the President asked you, what's the most important value I should apply to my decision making, what would your answer be?

I'll go first.

The most important thing, to me, is true liberty: the freedom of every American to make his or her own choices, and live his or her life in the way that seems best, no matter what other people may think, without fear of discrimination or reprisal from the government. (If you're wondering, the answer is yes, I confine this logic to those actions which do not impinge on the rights of others--ie, acts like murder, theft, arson, etc are not protected by 'liberty.')

There's mine. What's yours?

When all men on earth are gay, mole people shall rule the world!

2005-12-14T16:56:00.000-08:00

Stephen Bennett, host of Straight Talk Radio is telling peple to stay away from Brokeback Mountain because--and this is NOT a joke--it will turn them gay.

He's quoted in USA Today:

I just spoke with a married man on the telephone who is contemplating leaving his wife and children...He says he's gay, and Brokeback Mountain has influenced his decision. We can sadly expect to see a lot more men like former governor Jim McGreevey of New Jersey not only resigning from their jobs but from their wives, children and families."

Apparently in Bennett's opinion it would be better for these men to stay in their self-loathing, passive-aggressive mock-relationships, raise miserable children who have been taught that marriage has nothing to do with love, and to deny their true selves and what makes them happy. Wait, I'm starting to suspect something... Is Bennett a Christian conservative?!

OK, that was a dig. Forgive me.

Actually, on further thought, this might work out to my advantage.

Attention: Straight men! Particularly those of you in the 18-25 range, perhaps with soccer or baseball scholarships to a major university, dark complexions, and 4-8% body fat! Go see Brokeback Mountain! See it two or three times! In fact, continue seeing Brokeback Mountain until you feel like you are gay. Trust in the knowledge that all gay men look exactly like Heath Ledger, and all gay relationships are that passionate.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go stock up on condoms and lube.

Bob Novak ostracized by society at large

2005-12-14T16:16:00.000-08:00

There's Bob Novak, refusing to reveal the source of a nasty fart at the basketball game...

Yeah. Sometimes you just gotta go low-brow.

But they bring all the boys to the yard!

2005-12-14T13:03:00.000-08:00

I'm just about to leave for the day, but I had to get this up before I left. Thanks to Ethan for calling my attention to it. Hey, why don't you go vote for Brat Boy School to thank him?

500 Pound Man Arrested for Scamming Milk Shakes and Tacos

I think I'm filing this one under "There but for the grace of God, go I."

I'm ready for my closeup, Mr. Rumsfeld...

2005-12-14T09:22:00.000-08:00

Today we have a report from the "uh, duh!?" category. NBC has reportedly come into posession of a defense department database that lists anti-war protesters and reported peaceniks. There are indications that the government has been spying on protest groups, though to what end is not clear.

First off, can I say how offended I am that I'm not on this database anywhere? The closest I came is a protest at a recruiting office on the University of Pittsburgh campus that I considered attending, but missed because I was sleepy after being out at gay clubs all night. Tells you a lot about my priorities, doesn't it? How ironic, if my heathen lifestyle prevented me from being listed among enemies of the Bush administration...

In all seriousness, I have to say I don't really take issue with the existence of this database. What's dangerous is the potential applications of the data contained within--but a quick look at the PDF (thanks to Pam's House Blend) shows that 1) most of the protests listed were indicated as "Non-Credible Threats" and 2) some degree of respect is given to "US groups exercising constitutional rights."

Obviously, we do all expect our government to be on the lookout for terrorist activity, and while i am NOT SAYING that protest groups are terrorists, or that protest groups are likely to become terrorists, it does seem like there would be a logical connection between protest activity and potential terrorist threats. You know, perhaps terrorists might recruit there, or begin at a peace protest and move on to terrorism when they determine that non-violent resistance is not their style. What I'm saying is, if the government has access to this information and they DON'T catalogue it in some way, that strikes me as irresponsible.

I also want to point out that this is not the same as 'spying' into people's private lives. Most of this information was gleaned from public information--postcards, internet communication (blogs, myspace, etc) and other forums that are open to observation. They weren't tapping phones or turning apartments of organizers--at least, not according to this database. Yes, there's something a little bit creepy about this all being catalogued in an "anti-government" spreadsheet, but think about it another way: what's the purpose of protesting, if no one notices?!

Honestly, I don't really take issue with this. Now, if another spreadsheet were to turn up with a list of individuals who are being tapped/followed/photographed or something, THAT would be crossing the line. There were a couple of cryptic remarks about "recurring instigators at protests" and "vehicle descriptions" that some are saying indicates REAL spying, and cataloging of information. That may be the case, but at the risk of saying "I told you so," a lot of us have been complaining since September, 2001 that THIS is exactly what the USA PATRIOT act allows the government to do. I was a little bit amused that the AP article says

"Congress held hearings in the 1970s and recommended strict limits on military spying inside the United States,"

without mentioning that USA PATRIOT rendered almost all of these "strict limits" meaningless.

Lastly, I clarify that though the existence of the database does not bother me, what does is the potential for exploitation of this data. The Bush administration has already shown itself to be an enemy of free expression. They remove opposing voices from their press conferences, stage fake "town hall meetings" with planted supporters and scripted questions, and push protest groups far away from media events (the 2000 RNC at MSG is the clearest example), ostensibly in the interest of safety and security. While a list like this is a useful tool for identifying terrorist threats, it is also a handy guide to "who to shut up," and would easily lead to police discrimination and harassment if it fell into the wrong hands. I'm hard pressed to think of wronger hands than those of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfelt, et al.

Is this database a smoking gun? No. But it may be a shell casing or a spring (if you'll allow me to stretch the metaphor), a small piece of a larger system that adds up to a smoking gun. Time will tell.

On another, happier note, rumor has it that Karl Rove may soon join the Tom DeLay club. Let's all wish him happy trails. It couldn't happen to a nicer monster.

I am NOT a copycat!

2005-12-13T20:25:00.000-08:00

So I think I've just been accused of plagiarism, which really bugs me. I've spent the last fifteen minutes scanning my blog for anything that may seem to have come from somewhere else. I'm paranoid that I might have quoted something or referenced something I saw somewhere else. I can't find anything.

I consider plagiarism to be a very serious accusation. As a writer, my ideas are entirely my own--mind you, this blog is a plaything for me, and I fill it with pop culture references to entertain myself (and hopefully my readers). Ah well. Perhaps the anonymous commenter doesn't really know the definition of plagiarism--though I'd hope that's something you'd learn, before you go around accusing people of it.

Still, my curiosity is piqued. Does anyone else see something that seems less than original? Let me know so I can at least figure out what this guy was talking about!

*sigh*

What I learned from Narnia: being in the closet can be fun!

2005-12-13T09:23:00.000-08:00

Went and saw The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe last night with my friend Alex. Not bad; very faithful to the original book, with a few cheesy chase scenes and things thrown in to add excitement. I read the book recently (for the third time--I have a terrible memory for all but summary and major details in literature) and it was pretty interesting to see the whole thing played out on the big screen.

I read recently where C. S. Lewis was strongly opposed to having his books adapted to film. His greatest objection was that talking animals never looked right in the movies. Mind you, Lewis died before CGI special effects, so his reference for talking animals was from "Mr. Ed" and "Lancelot Link, Secret Chimp." Nowadays it seems like they can make almost anything talk, emote, and look convincing--and in this movie, they do. Beavers, a fox, wolves, a horse, a gryphon--even floating leaves talk. All in all, it looked pretty good. I would say 'cheesiness' was among the least of the film's problems.

I should say 'problems' lightly. There aren't many. My biggest complaint was just that the whole thing fell a little bit flat. They were obviously going for a grand "Lord of the Rings" style epic (and rightly so!) and the pacing just didn't keep up. It takes a special kind of director--Peter Jackson, for instance--to be able to sustain the peaks and valleys of a large-scale narrative, and still build up to one great crescendo. It's rather like conducting a large orchestra. Narnia is a noble effort, but it doesn't inspire the same level of awe with its scope and meaning that Jackson's "Rings" trilogy did. I compare, for instance, the "great battle" at the end of this film with the battle of Pelenor Fields from "Return of the King" or with the MASTERFUL battle of Helm's Deep from "The Two Towers," and it pales by comparisson. While it's cool to see minotaurs, centaurs, griphons, cheetahs, tigers, et al engaging in battle with one another, the emotional investment is just not there.

Mind you, saying "this movie is not quite as good as the Lord of the Rings movies" is hardly an indictment. I definitely enjoyed Narnia, and I think it would work much better for children, whose short attention spans would probably not abide the pacing of Jackson's trilogy. Narnia is also much milder in its violence (yes, there are creatures killed by swords, but it's usually off-screen or in a very fast pan, rather than the lingering delight with which Jackson gave us beheadings and eviscerations). Queen Jadis is scary, but I'm not sure if she would have given me nightmares as a child. She comes across as sort of a tranquilized Cruela DeVil--though I couldn't help thinking of the Cate Blanchett's Lady Galadriel, a comparisson I'm sure many people will make due to physical and vocal similarities between Blanchett and Tilda Swinton.

Lastly, I was pretty satisfied with the weight the Christian element was given--in fact, even as a practicing godless heathen (in truth, a spiritual agnostic) I thought the film could have safely been a bit heavier-handed with the Christian element. While I'm sure Disney did not want to alienate any potential viewers, and I appreciate the effort at making the film more epic than parable, the Christian element is played down enough to almost be unnoticable. As it stands, only the [spoiler:] ressurection of Aslan and the phrases "son of Adam" and "daughter of Eve" stand to remind viewers of Lewis's intentions. I think without prior knowledge, it would be entirely possible to sit through the whole film and never notice a parallel with Christian mythology. While I'm not personally a fan of Christian allegory, I do think it's a disservice to C. S. Lewis to present his masterpiece without honoring his deeper spiritual intention for the work.

So, long story short, Narnia's a good movie. It's not as great as I hoped it might be, and if you're looking for "Lord of the Rings, Part 4," you're going to be a little let down. If you're a fan of the books, however, or just looking for an enjoyable (if maybe a bit defanged) fantasy epic, then by all means go drop your $10 on this movie.

Sell your stock in NyQuil!

2005-12-12T12:33:00.000-08:00

The federal government is about to make it more difficult for Americans to buy cold medicines. Why? Because apparently you can cook NyQuil and Sudafed down to make crystal meth. I wish I'd known that sooner--it would have been a nice way to pad my income. Stupid A.P.

Here's what's interesting to me: the bill is co-sponsored by Senators Diane Feinstein (D-Calif) and Jim Talent (R-Mo) (and BTW, wouldn't it be cool if the other Senators call him R-Mo (pronounced "Ar-mo") around the Senate floor? As in, "Hey Armo! Nice bill!" or "Ar-moooo! Way to crack down on cough medicine!").

Feinstein has voted against strengthening gun the laws for penalties for violations of gun and drug laws. She has voted against spending more money on drug control. Talent has voted in favor of shortening mandatory gun waiting periods from 3 days to 1, and is rated "A" by the NRA, indicating he has a pro-gun voting record.

My point? Apparently Feinstein and Talent feel that cold medicine should be harder to get. Handguns, on the other hand? Let's just give them out in cereal boxes!

Yes, I'm being extreme. AND flippant. The point I'm getting at is, while so much else is going on in the country (like the war in Iraq, for instance, or the still-destroyed city of New Orleans, or the renewal of the USA PATRIOT act) our Congress is tightening our restrictions on... cold medicine. Good to see something getting accomplished, I suppose....

Counting down to my next break from politics.

A Few Thoughts for Today

2005-12-12T10:32:00.000-08:00

Just a few things I figured I'd put up here.

1. There's race riots in Australia. Fairly disturbing stuff, but I'm looking forward to hearing all the Faux News pundits spin this into "look, another country that's WORSE than ours," op-ed pieces.

The part of that article that really catches my eye is: "men riding in up to 50 cars and wielding baseball bats converged on Cronulla." So there's thugs... with baseball bats... riding cars... in Australia... quick! Someone call Mel Gibson!

Just in case Australian police should fail, let me be the first to say "all hail the Lord Humongous, the Ayatollah of Rock-and-Rollah!"

2. Came across this site today on the Onion. Apparently they specialize in selling offensive products. The only problem is, I can't decide which ones to buy. The image to the left is pretty good, I think.

I get a kick out of the "abortion stops a beating" t-shirts, also.

3. Narnia has opened, and the A.P. is running stories about how there has not been a major religious outrcy or controversy. How helpful of the A.P. to inform us of that. Perhaps they'd be good enough to run a story following the King Kong release to inform us that there have been no giant killer ape riots. Just in case. I haven't seen Narnia yet, but I am really looking forward to it. Likewise for Brokeback Mountain.

4. Speaking of King Kong, here's a conversation I had with my brother immediately after the trailer aired in a movie theater:
Patrick (m'br'er): Wow. That looks awesome. I've been waiting my whole life to see that!"
Me: (Laughing) Your whole life?
Patrick: Yes. I have been waiting my whole life to see a monkey fight a dinosaur.

5. Bush's eulogy for the 30,000 dead in Iraq: "They certainly brought it on."

6. Wikipedia's under attack (albeit a small attack) by a guy whose friend posted a fake biography. He says the site invites controversy because it "allows irresponsible vandals to write anything they want about anybody." Jeez, that's a blanket accusation that could be applied to an awful lot of media outlets. The great thing about Wikipedia is that RESPONSBILE vandals can remove or edit the false information. Hence the "wiki." I think newspapers and television news programs would all be improved if the same principle were applied.

7. Been doing a little reading on September 11. One thing that's always bothered me about the official explanation of events that morning was the lack of response from the air force. This is probably going to get me on some FBI list (or maybe into a bunk at Gitmo) but here's a pretty good site that discusses why there was no AF response to the hijackings. I'll warn you now that it's real conspiracy theorist stuff, so if you're the type of person who brands any conspiracy theory as automatically 100% crazy, you probably don't want to waste your time.

And that's it for now, I think. Once I've tarnished my (less-than-sterling?) credibility by posting a site like that, it's time to call it a day.

Love in the Time of Toxoplasmosis

2005-12-12T10:08:00.000-08:00

I can't remember if I've mentioned this before, but I work for a zoo. My job is Marketing, Sales, and Development, nothing specifically animal related. I would call myself an animal lover though--well no, that's not quite right. Maybe an amateur zoologist? That's a little more accurate. Anyway, we just had two fairly major animals die in the past week; a river otter and a kangaroo. I say major because we're not the kind of zoo that has lions and tigers and things--at least, not yet. They were both unavoidable deaths, and in both cases our zookeepers and veterinarians did everything they could to save them, but it's still something that's a bit hard to take.

People sometimes get the impression that we in the industry aren't affected or don't care when animals die. See, when you work at a zoo, eventually you have to come to realize that animals die. At large zoos, where there are thousands of animals on exhibit, lots of animals die. Animals have short life-spans, and when you have enough of them that calendar gets full. In a way it's like being a doctor or a cop. You come to terms with the unavoidable tragedies that are a part of your job, and you develop a thick skin so that you can continue to do your job. The drawback is that some people get the idea this is just a meal ticket to us, or that we just let these animals die. That's not it at all.

At the last zoo I worked for, there was a cougar that I got very attached to. A lot of us did, really. He was very personable. He had an accident, though, and as a result he had to be euthanized. That was horrible, but the worst part was that the personal attachment people had developed made what was already a bad situation much worse. Staff and board members tried to keep the animal alive when the veterinarians insisted the only humane option was euthanasia, and as a result the cougar lived through almost six months of pain, for no good reason except that selfish people didn't want to be sad that he had died. So you understand why taking a 'professional,' if somewhat cold, approach to this job is beneficial not just for the people who work here, but for the animals as well.

We still aren't sure why either of our animals here died. We're waiting for test results in both cases. We know it wasn't anything serious, and know that it wasn't something they caught from each other--there's no contact between them--but it's still bothersome.

There's a lot of good things about working for a zoo. Heh. That's probably a fairly obvious statement. It's great--I get to work in a place most people come on their days off from work. As of recently, I get paid pretty well for it, too. There are certainly drawbacks, though, and on days like today that's what I'm left thinking about.

Vote or DIE!

2005-12-11T08:43:00.000-08:00

I completely forgot to do this last night after I said I would!

Ethan over at Brat Boy School, one of the only blogs that I read daily, is trying to win the 2005 Weblog Award in the GLBT category. There's a site where you can vote for him here--you can vote once per IP address per 24 hours. As of now he's in second place, but I figured I'd give him a hand to get to first. I don't know if I exactly have loyal readers, but it can't hurt, right?!

The Lamb Lies Down...in Ardmore!

2005-12-11T00:27:00.000-08:00

Took in The Musical Box performing The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway tonight. Absolutely spectacular. They get better every time I see them. We are about eight rows back from the stage for this show (last time I saw them we were much further back) and it really made the show that much better.

A few photos from the show (camera phone, couldn't do better):

This is performing "Back in New York City," one of my favorite songs from The Lamb. Without getting into too much detail about the story, this is the song where the main character's rage and anger are really spilled out for all to see. Very dramatic, and the performance tonight carried it across 100%.

You can't see it that well (sorry) but this is the famous "slipperman" costume sequence, perhaps the visual highlight of The Lamb live show. The guy in the middle is the main character, who is transformed into a misshapen man whose features are not fixed to his body, but 'slip' from place to place. He has absurdly large genitalia, portrayed by an inflated balloon, which must be removed to cure the affliction. Again, a key point of the Genesis legend, and the boys from The Musical Box get it spot-on.

This is actually AFTER "The Lamb" was over, they did another Genesis classic--Watcher of the Skies--as an encore. I've seen them do this song now three times, and this was the best so far. The bat wings are kind of hard to explain--Genesis became famous in the early 70s for the wacky costumes Peter Gabriel would wear. The costumes themselves were a way of compensating for an early lack of lights or effects, and they became such a trademark that they stuck around when those things were added. Bat wings are perhaps the best known. Which leads me to my next photo.

I don't really dig on kids, but this one's all right by me.

My brother brought a couple of his friends to the show as well. I got a call just before the first encore to let me know that they'd left before The Lamb was even over--just after "The Light Dies Down on Broadway!" Not only did they miss the conclusion of the story, but they missed three of the best songs of the whole night--"Riding the Scree," "The Musical Box," and "Watcher." Why did they leave early? Well, not knowing the album makes it a bit harder to appreciate the performance, for one. Two, audience members were singing--nay, my brother says, "screaming"--along with the music and ruining the experience, and three, there were people smoking marijuana, and my brother and at least one of his friends are totally uncomfortable with that.

So overall, GREAT show, but I think you have to be a Genesis fan, or at least a fan of progressive rock in general, to truly appreciate The Musical Box.

Afterward, we grabbed a slice at Lorenzo's on South Street and then headed over to 12th Air Command for a little while. OK night, but I just don't enjoy their all-ages night as much as I enjoy all-ages at Woody's. The music's not as good, and the dance floor is actually TOO crowded, as impossible as that sounds. Anyway it was fun, and a good way to end the night. Very attractive crowd.

So that's it. Tomorrow I have to go to the gym, and I have a hockey game in the evening. In between I think I might try to go see Narnia or something. For now, though, sleep is the way to go. Jeez, it's nearly 4 AM! Yeah, sleep. Sleep is good.

A Break from Politics

2005-12-09T16:50:00.000-08:00

I'm going to try and take a break from politics here. I think I'm going a little crazy--as I peruse blogs through blogexplosion, the ones I stop and read are the conservative manifestos, and the more I object to them, the more I read them. I don't think it's good for me. Plus, I think I may be coming across as a crazy leftist maniac, which is far from my goal of creating consensus in America.

When I started this, it was not my goal to be so political, anyway. It just sort of happened that way. So I'm going to try and lay off for a while.

Tonight I'm going to play open hockey at an old barn near here called Melody Brook. It's half falling apart and barely heated, but it's usually a fun night, and I can use the exercise. After losing 30 pounds during my time in Pittsburgh, I've hit a plateau--which is frustrating when I still want to lose another 25-35. I'd say the plateau is about 30% changes in my eating habits for the worse, 40% decrease in daily exercise (due to work schedule and daylight savings) and 30% due to the "plateau phenomenon." Anyway, I'm playing hockey tonight and Sunday night, so hopefully that'll help.

Tomorrow I'm going to see The Musical Box at the Tower Theater. They're performing The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, which is possibly my favorite record ever recorded. I've seen the show once before, but this time we're sitting in the second row, and the Tower is a great venue, so I'm really looking forward to it. I think we're barred from bringing cameras in, but I will have my phone, so I will try and get a really low-quality shot of the band to show you all just how kickass they are.

By the way, if you're not familiar with the music of Genesis circa 1971-1974, you need to get familiar, fast. Especially if you ARE familiar with Genesis circa 1983-1991. They are COMPLETEY different bands. 1971-74 Genesis was one of the great progressive rock bands, at least as great as Yes or Rush, King Crimson or ELP. The Musical Box is a tribute band; the first time I saw them was as a lark, but they are SO thorough, it's as if you're really at a Genesis show. I enjoyed the hell out of it, and I keep going back.

After that? Sunday is an actual league hockey game ("it's a league game, Smokey") and my team got SPANKED 8-1 on Wednesday night, so I'm really motivated to get out there and redeem myself. I'm their goalie, by the way, and while the 8-1 was a team effort, my ego is more than a bit bruised. I put on a show, at least.

Next weekend is what I'm REALLY excited about. A good friend is coming to visit, and on Saturday we're doing something totally awesome, only I can't say what it is yet. It's his Christmas present, and it's a surprise, so I have to keep it quiet. But trust me, it's going to rule.

So that's it for now. I'm going to go bring my hockey gear in to warm. It's real cold outside. Damn Republicans.

lol

Church and State, Trial Separation

2005-12-09T15:40:00.000-08:00

Just posted this as a comment on another blog, and I was happy with the phrasing I came up with, so I thought I'd put it here, also.

There are those who say the separation of church and state has gone too far--that it's been taken to an extreme. I ask, how can there be an "extreme" separation? If two things are to be separated, then they are to be apart. There is no "degree" here, they are simply two separate things.

What I can see being taken to an extreme is the insistence on secularization of American CULTURE--but that is a far different thing from American GOVERNMENT. The citizens are free to express themselves as they see fit, but the government must be free of all religious affiliations and expressions. Entirely.

I personally don't believe that American culture is being oversecularized, or that there is a "War on Christmas." The sense that there is a war on Christianity is the logical result of media sensationalism. If Americans would just accept that religion has NO place in our government, then there would be fewer battles over (for example) the ten commandments in courtrooms, and Christians would be free to live their lives as anyone else. The supposed "War on Christmas" dreamed up by Bill O'Reilly is nothing more than sensationalist fiction, dreamed up to stir up the rage in his viewers that keeps them tuning in.

Sometimes I'm tempted to lose hope...

2005-12-09T15:29:00.000-08:00

Ugh.

IT'S A BOOK!!!!! WHAT KIND OF PERSON THINKS THIS IS A GOOD IDEA?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

All I can say is, most American adults aren't capable of understanding politics... Now we want to get CHILDREN involved?! This is great. Before they can understand what a government or a democracy is, before they understand money or rights or war, let's teach them the label "liberal" and why it's a terrible thing. That way, when they get older and might start to think for themselves, they'll be programed to know that anything labeled "liberal" is automatically a bad thing!

Sometimes, perusing blogs can just be soul-crushing. *sigh*

New Links

2005-12-09T14:05:00.000-08:00

So ok, I've put up my first few links. Google News is an obvious one--good place to get your info from. Wikipedia is an outstanding source of information on everything, and a tribute to what the human collective can accomplish when it sets its mind to it.

The Brat Boy Bulletin is one I encountered through a comment--an interesting blog of gay interest, well thought-out and insightful. I still can't figure out if Brat Boy School is a group of people, or just one guy (Ethan) pretending to be a group. Either way, he's pretty clever. I like that he's both Republican and open-minded, a rare bird in today's America. Check his site out.

Media Bias (AKA, Why I Want to Punch Lou Dobbs)

2005-12-09T13:57:00.000-08:00

“The most effectual [avenue to truth] is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.”
--Thomas Jefferson

“Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets.”
--Napoleon Bonaparte

So is our media really biased? Some of it is, undeniably. If anyone tries to say that Bill O’Reilly is not biased, they’re either stupid or they’ve sold their soul for the conservative cause. The same for Tucker Carlson, or really anyone on Fox News, or for Al Franken in the opposite direction.

It’s worse than that, though. At the top of my media shit list is CNN’s Lou Dobbs. Why? Because what he does is subtle, and therefore dangerous. No one can watch “The Factor” and not realize that it’s theater. At least I hope not. Dobbs, however, hides behind a façade of impartiality. He twists his stories with something as subtle as a facial expression or a tone of voice, writing off the liberals with a condescending tone and a confident smirk that says “everyone knows they’re wrong.” It’s something that conservatives do very well—that tone of smug certainty conveys that any REASONABLE person knows this is true, and anyone fighting it has an agenda.

But these are pundits, and pundits are not journalists. They’re columnists, at best. I tend to think of them as lounge singers. They take in outside stories, shape them to their particular style, and then pander to their audience in a quest for applause and approval. What about the regular media, the field reporters and anchors and correspondents?

I don’t personally find a bias—at least, not one on the scale of a large-scale conspiracy, like many people suppose. I tend to agree with Jon Stewart’s take on things—that it’s the fault of the 24-hour News culture and the “beat-em-to-the-punch” style of reporting that stories can’t be fact-checked or investigated any more. Once upon a time, when newspapers and evening news programs were the order of the day, reporters had 24 hours or more to prepare a story. They talked to sources, filtered out bad information, investigated connections, etc. Nowadays, they barely have the press release in their hands before they’re reading it into the camera—and though they cover their ass by stating that they haven’t researched the information, this does nothing to contradict the damage they are doing to the viewer’s opinion.

Jefferson referred to the press as “censors of the government,” but today’s press has stripped themselves of that role. They censor nothing, and read everything. By delivering ‘talking points,’ and saturating the market with identical information, a political party can control the flow of information to the public. The media has put itself at the mercy of the source, whoever that may be. I personally think this has led to a dramatic conservative bias across most of the media, because the Republican party is flat-out better at controlling their message. The Democrats are improving at this, but they remain too divided to commit to, for instance, a media blast of talking points relayed by 30 or 40 spokespeople, the way the Republicans have been doing for years.

Do I think that there exists deliberate bias toward one party or another? Yes, absolutely, in pockets. Fox News is a hard-line conservative network, who tailors their information and their reporting style to fit the conservative goals, but I think at this point most people realize that. Air America is, openly, a reactionary liberal response to that, and as such takes a liberal bias to all of its stories.

So what’s the answer? Well I’d hope that the press will wake up to what’s happening and tighten its methods, but the likelihood of that happening seems nil. Instead, perhaps, the public will wisen to methods of controlling the press, and begin to take a more skeptical approach to the news they’re receiving. The popularity of O’Reilly and Fox News make me think this is also unlikely.

What’s been happening so far is an observable movement by the public toward news filters—programs like The Daily Show or The O’Reilly Factor, web news services, or even blogs, that have a declared value (or bias) that shapes the way they report. This puts the viewer/reader in the decidedly dangerous position of only getting their news from a like-minded source. It eliminates the likelihood of their opinion changing, and reinforces cultural divisions. Imagine a world where cable news networks were hosted by Klansmen, Nazis, priests and ACLU officials—it’s not that far from reality.

I suppose the very best we can hope for is that certain media outlets will maintain a strict code of journalistic ethics, reporting without bias for readers who want pure, unfiltered information. The New York Times remains devoutly ethical, but its reputation as intellectual scares a lot of people away. CNN and MSNBC can be good at this as well, depending on who is hosting, but even the most altruistic and ethical outlet remains vulnerable to accusations of bias by disingenuous opponents. Unless every American should suddenly become an expert in journalism and the ethical practices thereof, and perhaps be trained in recognizing rhetorical techniques, I doubt if the question of media bias will ever be a dead issue.

“Our Republic and its press will rise or fall together. An able, disinterested, public-spirited press, with trained intelligence to know right and courage to do it, can preserve that public virtue without which popular government is a sham and a mockery.”
-- Joseph Pulitzer

...and normally I want MORE than five inches...

2005-12-09T12:47:00.000-08:00

You know what I admire most about Americans? Americans are resolute. About the way they drive, for instance. The Americans who live in my part of suburban Philadelphia are not about to change their chosen driving method because of something as silly as five inches fo snow on the ground! No, they'll go right on running stop signs, turning without signaling, and braking for no apparent reason, regardless of how hazardous the roads might make these behaviors. That takes courage. American courage. To change the way we drive, after all, would mean that the snow had already won. It would bolster the storm system, and encourage other storm systems to think they can do the same thing, and we're just going to stand for it. That's not America. We need to show these snowstorms that we won't be afraid!

OK, all sarcasm aside (and wow, that went way too far! Way to go me!) the citizens of the Philadelphia area get at least one major snowstorm every year, and every year it seems like the first time they've seen one! On roads that have barely been plowed, I've got moms with kids in the back of the minivan cutting me off, braking suddenly and for no readily apparent reason, and turning without the least warning or use of a turn signal. I've got SUVs riding my butt because I guess they think their four-wheel drive somehow makes my Hyundai accent more adaptable to slick road conditions. My favorite, I've got people sliding right through stop signs, perhaps not realizing that with the packed powder lining these residential streets, stopping or swerving to avoid their careless ass is, at the very best, a happy fantasy that will pass through my mind before both our cars are totalled.

I guess I should have stayed home today. I have no right to be out on the road in the first place--I don't have a single ribbon on my car, so clearly I don't support anything. Except the radical agenda of the godless sodomite, I guess, symbolized by the faded HRC equal sign on my bumper.

(and what an appropriate metaphor THAT is!)

I've got more relevent thoughts, but I'm formulating an argument. I'm kind of ashamed of my rambling ACLU post from two days ago, and I've gone back to sixth grade to learn how to write a coherent essay. More later.

Oh, and BTW, a shout-out to the people leaving comments. There's no way I'm going to open up a rational dialogue if no one's reading or responding to my shit, so way to go you guys! I'm slowly reading all your blogs, and I'll be linking to those that strike me. Thanks, and keep reading!

A gripe about bloggers....

2005-12-08T16:35:00.000-08:00

So as I tour the 'blogosphere' as they call it, the blogs I take the greatest interest in are the conservative rants, because they get my blood up. When I read one that REALLY aggravates me, I leave a comment. I don't flame, I don't hurl insults or rhetoric. Instead, what I try to do is ask questions and try to undermine the stated argument. I did just that today, in response to a post that basically said "we can't leave Iraq because it would make the U.S. look like pussies." I was mature, I asked questions that I thought would generate an open debate or discussion, and I returned later to find...

...my comment deleted. Apparently it's easier to make your critics disappear than it is to respond to them. *Sigh*

Just for the record, I won't delete comments from this blog. If you have problems with what I say, please try to engage me in a discussion, and I will respond to your statements. I happen to believe that this country (world?) will be best off if we all talk to each other like humans and try to come to a consensus, rather than just trying to outshout those who disagree with you--or, alternately, silence them.

Pennsylvania: Keeping it "Friendly."

2005-12-08T09:05:00.000-08:00

Got an e-mail from the HRC last night to let me know that my own home state of Pennsylvania may be the next to propose a constitutional "Marriage Protection Amendment." I'm a little surprised, though I suppose I shouldn't be. In case you're unfamiliar with Pennsylvania, many residents know the keystone state as "Pennsytucky." One popular (and fairly accurate) description is "Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, with Alabama in between." Apologies to Kentucky and Alabama, for though I am sure there are open-minded and intellectual residents in each of those fair states, I am also sure they are somewhere in hiding, lest they should be raped and eaten by shotgun-toting hillbilly yokels.

Now that I've undermined my credibility by slandering a twenty-fifth of our nation, I'll go on.

I won't waste much time railing against "Marriage Protection Amendments." They're silly, extremist measures whose supporting arguments are taken pretty much verbatim from the KKK Manual of Rhetoric: "Allowing [gays/blacks] to [marry/live equally] will cheapen the instutition of [marriage/whiteness] and desecrate our proud culture and heritage!" My brother and I think it would be hilarious to hijack the public address system at a meeting of the "Family Values Gestapo" or whatever they call themselves, and play a recording of the Klan leader's speech from "O Brother Where Art Thou.

"That's not MY culture and heritage! Is that YOUR culture and heritage?!" lol.

What I will say is that my surprise at this measure comes from my belief that Pennsylvania (at least, the populated/metropolitan areas; the areas that *ahem* live in the 21st century and *ahem* matter) were pretty progressive. Philadelphia has certainly embraced its gay population, and benefitted greatly as a result. There's a sizeable "gayborhood" in Center City that's strengthening the economy, there are four major gay-related events annually (Outfest on Nat'l Coming Out Day, the Gay & Lesbian Film Festival, the Pride Parade, and Equality Forum, a prestigious national symposium on gay rights and issues) that draw visitors to the city, as well as regularly scheduled events like Gay Bingo that attract locals from the suburbs, and add to the city's 'hip factor' that attracts youth and innovation and helps the economy. Last year, Philadelphia became the first city in the country to advertise for gay tourists--not New York, not San Fran, Philly. There's a special police liason to the gay community, and the city regularly pulls from the city's pool of gay event organizers to help organize civic events like parades and festivals.

I've always thought that speaks to Philadelphia's history as a city of liberty and freedom. Granted, when William Penn founded Philadelphia on the premise of free expression for all residents, he was thinking along religious lines. I do believe, however, that were today's issues alive in Penn's era, that he would have supported gay rights, and--dare I say it--gay marriage. I realize that's very speculative on my behalf, but the guy was a strident defender of religious freedom in an era when religious freedom was a radical idea.

Pittsburgh, where I recently lived for two months, is not quite as far along, but it's improving fast. The gay community there is still rather underground--gay bars, for instance, tend to be nondescript doors or unmarked buildings in secluded parts of the city, unlike the high-profile bars in Philly with their pride flags waving. Pittsburgh has an annual pride parade, however, and a gay film festival, and (thanks, at least in part, to the false image of the city created by HBO's Queer as Folk) the gay population is growing fast, and seems to be gaining a voice in the general civic landscape. Many of the cultural events in Pittsburgh are organized by gays, just like they are in Philly. The difference is, in Pittsburgh they don't realize it yet. heh.

That's why it's so disappointing to see a movement like this gaining ground in my state. I realize Pennsylvania remains too conservative to do something like approve gay marriage, as happened in Massachusetts, but I have always believed (and still do) that we are too progressive to pass something as ludicrous and anti-American as a constitutional amendment. I'm a realist; I don't expect the straight community to suddenly be fine with gays getting married, but I would hope that in the state where liberty was born (and sorry, Massachusetts, that's us, hate to break it to you) we would be above writing discrimination into our constitution. It would break my heart to walk through Philadelphia, past Independence Hall, the Liberty Bell, the Constitution Center, and other monuments to liberty, freedom, and the American spirit, and know that we have added an asterisk to that freedom for some Americans. To tour a city where men like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and George Washington--great thinkers, and brave men who were not afraid to rebel against tradition, culture, and heritage to stand up for something they believed in--and know that small, petty men with closed minds are systematically dismantling the nation that they risked their lives to build.

I don't know how realistic the chances of getting this thing passed might be, but if you live in PA, it couldn't hurt to call your representative and tell them to kill this thing before it becomes an embarassment. Heck, even if you don't live here, it wouldn't be a bad idea.

Air Marshals Shoot to Kill!

2005-12-07T22:14:00.000-08:00

So how do we, the cynical leftists, bill this? The first civilian casualty of the war on terror? No, I suppose there were thousands of those in September of 2001... The first friendly fire casualty?

In all seriousness.... Like, I expect, most people, my instinctive response to seeing an innocent (should that maybe be in quotes, due to circumstances? Perhaps, to be fair) civilian shot and killed for being a terror suspect is to say "how horrible! there must be some alternative," but I think that's kneejerk. I talked to a few people (ok, ok, I brought it up as my hockey team was getting dressed before a game) and none of us could come up with some other solution that would be both humane and efficient. Either you give the man the benefit of the doubt, hold your fire, and risk that he detonates an explosive, or you err on the side of protecting more lives, and shoot him. I suggested perhaps the marshal could have shot to wound, or incapacitate, but the fact is that if he did that, and the guy DID in fact have a bomb, he could easily have set it off. Shooting to kill was really the only option.

Maybe if the circumstances were different... But in spite of the pleading wife, this guy was saying he had a bomb, and acting as if he had a bomb, and he ignored directives to surrender... It's a shame, but he had to go. I feel a little bad for the air marshal, and I do hope that this doesn't lead to some political or media controversy. I haven't had the news networks on today, or really watched the opinion columns. I'll be interested to see where this leads.

Churches Closing on Christmas?

2005-12-07T10:24:00.000-08:00

Apparently a number of churches will be closing on Christmas, even though it's a Sunday, because they expect low turnout. Ok, now that's just sad. I am certainly not one of those "Christmas is all about Christ" people, but it is after all the reason the holiday exists to begin with, at least for Christians.

Could it be a tactic? A strategy to call attention to the "demise of Christian values?" Part of me has to wonder; since when do churches close because they expect poor attendance?

Thoughts on the ACLU

2005-12-07T08:59:00.000-08:00

Prompted by various news articles and opinion pieces that mention the ACLU as some anti-Christmas nest of villainy, my thoughts at the moment:

First off, how is it that this organization never seems to clarify its role in the eyes of the public?! I think the ACLU is in need of a good branding campaign. What people don't seem to understand (much to the pleasure of conservative pundits) is that the ACLU exists solely to defend the Bill of Rights. That's the U.S. Constitution, in case you failed (or, like me, were never offered) civics class. It's hard to argue with people who want to see the law upheld.

The ACLU gets a bad name becuase they will side with liberty in every case, and that frequently puts them in the position of supporting an unpopular idea. The rights of hate groups to march and gather, for instance, or the rights of [religious/ethnic/sexual] minorities to have their beliefs respected. The ACLU would never suggest that no one should send Christmas cards--after all, sending a Christmas card is a way for one to express his religious freedom. What the ACLU WOULD stand for is the right of, say, a Jew for instance, to take his or her children to the shopping mall during the Christmas season, and not have them inundated with Christ the King, Christ the Lord, Christ the savior.

I think the problem here is that people confuse issues, often with the help of self-serving politicians or pundits, who deliberately create confusion. Stores elect to say "Happy Holidays" because they wish to be polite and respectful to their customers, not because it's a legal mandate. People say "Happy Holidays" because they understand that there are a multitude of beliefs out there, and they don't want to make assumptions. Again, it's an issue of politeness. The only place that the ACLU gets involved (and where the governmnent is obliged to intercede) is where the separation of church and state is being violated--in cases where a government office is displaying a nativity scene, for instance. Christmas trees and Santa Claus are a whole different issue--some communities deem those images offensive, and some consider them secular. As far as I'm aware, the ACLU doesn't have much of a hand in those cases. It's not Santa that's the problem.

I'm reminded of a news story that ran here in the Lehigh Valley in mid-November. Apparently in one of the voting districts here, where it's common to use places of worship as polling places on election day, a polling place was set up in a mosque. The local Christian citizens (or at least, a large enough body of them to generate media attention and response from elected officials) were outraged. To them, merely having to set foot in an Islamic house of worship--even for so secular a purpose as voting--was offensive. Naturally representatives of the Islamic community responded with a passive statement of mild umbrage, and everyone else shrugged it off.

Now, with that instance as an illustration of the shoe being on the other foot, I ask Christians to put themselves in the place of the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Agnostics, Atheists (yes, even atheists, though I realize they're a group nearly as--if not more--maligned among conservatives as gays and liberals), and other people of contrasting belief. If it's so horrible for a Christian to have to set foot in a mosque, how must it feel for these people to see all of America transformed into an enormous Church service?

I'll say here that I'm proud to be a card-carrying member of the ACLU, and I think Santa and Jesus and Christmas trees are great, if that's what you value. Buy all the Christmas cards you want. Inscribe them with John 3:16. Send them to everyone. Express yourself! You have that right! But would it be so bad, in the interest of being respectful and polite to those around you, to say the words "Happy Holidays," as a way of showing that--while you love your Jesus, and you celebrate his birthday with all the vigor that you can muster--your "good will toward men" extends far enough to respect those who don't worship the way you do?

And while you're at it, stop picking on the ACLU. They're not hurting anyone. They're trying to help.

An Oldy but Goody...

2005-12-07T07:31:00.000-08:00

I know this is not exactly topical, but I wouldn't feel right not having it in my blog.

Good old President Alfalfa.... lol. You can write your own "exit strategy" joke.

Hermann Goering: Rumsfeld's Mentor?

2005-12-06T19:03:00.001-08:00

Just found this online. I think it says a lot.

"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."

--Hermann Goering, Hitler's Reich-Marshall, at the Nuremberg Trials

I wish more Americans realized the similarities between the Nazi rise to power in Germany, and the activities of the Bush administration since (and probably, dare I say it, before) 9/11. If you don't know what I mean, or you find that offensive, you need to learn more about the rise of the Third Reich. Try Wikipedia's summary of the Third Reich, which is excellent, and pay particular attention to the Reichstag Fire Decree, the Enabling Act, and the Night of the Long Knives. If Americas realized where blind "patriotic" devotion to your leadership can lead you--ESPECIALLY in time of War--we might not hear so much about 'supporting the troops' and 'emboldening the enemy' in response to those who actually question poor policy decisions.

That quote by Goering is just chilling. I bet if they sold ribbon magnets in Nazi Germany, all the loyal citizens would have proudly displayed one or two or nine on their Volkswagons.

American Museum of Natural History, 12/3/05

2005-12-06T18:32:00.000-08:00

My brother and I had some time to kill on the Upper West Side on Saturday (and I felt like throwing away $40 to park my car for a couple of hours) so we took in the American Museum of Natural History. Perhaps my fifth or sixth visit in my lifetime, and I think the first time I didn't see the dinosaur bones. I do love that museum, though; it's a classic example of the Victorian-era museum, with few changes toward a more modern philosophy. This leads in some places to exhibits that might be perceived as socially or racially insensitive (I have to assume there were others that were more offensive, that have since been removed or updated) and to captions that, while not denotatively sexist, are fairly amusing in their language.

Of particular interest was the exhibit on ritual and magic among African tribes. They had a display of ceremonial costumes that was particularly fascinating in its unusual mythology. I would love to see a fantasy world developed around African tradition, the way much of fantasy has been developed around European and Christian mythology. I get the impression Octavia Butler writes things in this vein, but I'm not familiar enough with her work to assume so. I know I greatly enjoy Orson Scott Card's "Tales of Alvin Maker" series, which plays with North American mythology and beliefs, like knacks, voodoo, and hexes.

I also have to say, a museum like that is great fun when you have a ridiculous sense of humor and an appreciation for the ironic and subtly off-balance the way my brother and I do.

A few photos from our museum experience:

Apparently these are the "first New Yorkers," according to the caption. The guy on the right is asking someone for a quarter. The guy on the left secretly thinks that Jeter is a fag. I mostly took the picture because of the peg leg.

This is from the "Hall of Awesomeness," (our name, not theirs) an exhibit that was just lots and lots of preserved animals hung on the walls... Just about thrown in a heap on the floor, actually. I think the point was to show "biodiversity" and motivate people to save endangered species, but that might be a strech. Take, for instance:

Some kind of crab monster that was attacking us. I like to call this part the "Hall of Molluscs"

A squid fighting a flamingo. I just found this one confusing.

Thoughts of the Day:

2005-12-06T13:40:00.000-08:00

1. Sadaam Hussein in court rules. He reminds me of Strong Bad, or a rock singer. He's just up there ranting about how badass he is. I rather like today's "defense." He's boycotting the court. I didn't know you could do that! The next time I'm given a speeding ticket, I'm informing the officer that I'm boycotting. It's unjust. I don't know if it will work--frankly, picking up legal defense tactics from deposed dictators is probably not the best way to go. Maybe I can just get a nice place in Argentina.

For the record, I'm really disturbed by this 'trial' in Iraq. I wish more people I knew had opinions on the issue. Most people I know seem to be staying away from it. If they have an opinion, it's either "I don't understand this," or "he's obviously guilty, what does the trial matter?" People like Bill O'Reilly criticize their opponents for being anti-American, but what's more American than the right to a fair trial, and innocence until guilt is proven? (note: that's [in a court of law], not [in the eyes of the media]) I think I'm going to start marketing a "Support a fair trial for genocidal dictators" ribbon.

<---2. George W. Bush. More and more I'm convinced he's not really sure what's going on. I mean, look at the guy! I swear it's like Cheney dressed up a kid for church, and Bush is just doing everything he can not to laugh. That bulge in his jacket at the debates was his game-boy. 3. The Daily Show / The Colbert Report. As much as I think TDS is by far the best program on television (and possibly the only reason I can be both interested in politics and still sane and socially functional) and as much as I love Colbert and wish him the best, I just think the show is missing it. Don't get me wrong, the show is funny, but I (a) wonder how long it can possibly last, being that it's essentially a one-joke show and (b) I think that it's missing out on REALLY slamming the pundits for what they are and what they do. More on that later. For now I'm going to get some chicken soup.