Amen, sister. I imagine our society won't get its priorities straight until it is forced to do so by outside influences. Why fix something that ain't broke (in a sense)? Forget that the country can't survive without the influence of most of its least paid workers...
Next Topic: Older is Wiser
He said: The funny thing about growing up is realizing how little you really knew about the world when you were younger. My brothers take every opportunity to point out that in my younger years, I swore to never drink, never smoke, not even speed while driving. Nonetheless, I do all of these things. In fact, the only thing remaining that I swore never to do that I actually have never done is use drugs. I swore for the longest that I would never grow up, and dammit if I didn't do that as well. It never ceases to amaze me, the revelations that come to me as I get older about life and how it all works.
In a sad way, I think the less idealistic and the more understanding I've become, the more complete of a person I've become. Strangely enough, some of my moral and ethical failures in life have enabled me to do good in situations I would not have been able to otherwise. My problem is I kind of like who I am now, all things considered. I can not remember any other period in my life in which I've been more comfortable with who I am.
Having said that, I wonder what the future holds for me. Will I look back on this period of my life and wonder exactly what it was I was smoking? Will I ever return to some semblance of my younger self? Who knows? It should be interesting to find out, however.
Isn't this really a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of situation? When you're younger, and faced with certain events in life, you simply don't have the experience to understand how the choices you make will affect you in the future. By the time you gain that experience, the choices have typically already been made and the consequences dealt with. Is this the blessing of life as we know it, or is it a curse?
28 September 2004
She said:
I do partly define myself by what I do "for a living." And I do, to a degree, judge others by their choices. I guess the big things for me are passion and commitment. Do you like your job? Not every day, of course, but overall. Everyone hates her job sometimes. Are you committed to doing the best you can do at your job? Why would you do something you hate? You have choices. You have a responsibility to make yourself happy; start with finding something you want to do for at least 6 of the 8 hours you spend each day at work! My opinion, of course.
I do understand why some people don't like art. I don't much understand how people don't think about buildings. We spend a ton of time in them each day -- most of our 24 hours. They are extremely important in defining how we live our lives. But that's a totally different topic.
Society does look down on me, to a degree, and will never count me much of a success because I make little money -- much less than a stripper in a good club, I would guess. But I have more respectability than the stripper. But so many people are more than willing to put themselves deeply in debt to pretend they have money -- the cars and clothes to prove it -- and I don't understand it. So maybe this does dovetail nicely into your topic of lives of excess.
We do accord a sort of hero worship status to celebrities with nothing much to offer. Some actors do have a craft they share with us. Same with some musicians and sports stars. But the level of adulation that is awarded to them, along with ridiculous salaries, is out of bound with what they give us. And then, in a time of need, you are often cared for by some of the most overworked, least well-paid workers on the planet: fire fighters, police officers, and nurses.
Suffice it to say, in summary: Our priorities are WAY off.
I do partly define myself by what I do "for a living." And I do, to a degree, judge others by their choices. I guess the big things for me are passion and commitment. Do you like your job? Not every day, of course, but overall. Everyone hates her job sometimes. Are you committed to doing the best you can do at your job? Why would you do something you hate? You have choices. You have a responsibility to make yourself happy; start with finding something you want to do for at least 6 of the 8 hours you spend each day at work! My opinion, of course.
I do understand why some people don't like art. I don't much understand how people don't think about buildings. We spend a ton of time in them each day -- most of our 24 hours. They are extremely important in defining how we live our lives. But that's a totally different topic.
Society does look down on me, to a degree, and will never count me much of a success because I make little money -- much less than a stripper in a good club, I would guess. But I have more respectability than the stripper. But so many people are more than willing to put themselves deeply in debt to pretend they have money -- the cars and clothes to prove it -- and I don't understand it. So maybe this does dovetail nicely into your topic of lives of excess.
We do accord a sort of hero worship status to celebrities with nothing much to offer. Some actors do have a craft they share with us. Same with some musicians and sports stars. But the level of adulation that is awarded to them, along with ridiculous salaries, is out of bound with what they give us. And then, in a time of need, you are often cared for by some of the most overworked, least well-paid workers on the planet: fire fighters, police officers, and nurses.
Suffice it to say, in summary: Our priorities are WAY off.
27 September 2004
So I decided to post my response while at work (what better place to do so?) :)
On Work...
He said: Hmmmmm. Let's tackle society first. I don't know that it is what you do so much as how much money you make in general that makes the first great distinction between people. A very simple divide is salaried vs hourly work. Salaried implies at least a lower middle class lifestyle, hourly implies somewhere at or just above the poverty level. Being salaried carries the assumption that you likely went to a college of some sort and got a degree, and that your life is somewhat successful. Being hourly carries the assumption that you likely slept through high school, or that your college football career didn't take off. Either way, it also implies a somewhat unsuccessful life. There are plenty such divides we can make... take the case of a exotic dancer (read: stripper). They are likely to be young girls, many of whom are not college educated (although some do it "to pay for college"), who may be looked down upon for getting paid to degrade themselves, but who are sometimes paid very well to do so. Is there such a thing as a stripper with a successful life in society's view? Not really, but it seems like by the rules of income, such a thing should be possible. So I'm thinking sum total that society's view on your career can only indicate a guess as to how successful your life might be at a general level, as opposed to guessing specific aspects of your life. Actually, I take that back--there are plenty of social stigmas attached to career choice. Let's take mine first: according to society, The Comptuer Science Guy(tm) is likely to make a good salary, even capable of reaching six figures. He (let's face it, this ain't a career for women, according to society) is likely to be rather nerdish and have bad luck with girls. The Art Historian(tm) is unlikely to make a large amount, depending on the market they work in. They are likely to be intelligent, almost in a know-it-all type way. They are likely to not understand why the masses do not share their love for the arts (I'm totally guessing here). So really, money is not the end all be all factor in society's perception of you. You can make a lot of money and still have a job that society frowns upon or thinks less of you for (drug dealer, prostitute, lawyer, Computer Science Guy). In general, how important this is to you depends on how much you care about others' perception of you.
As for me, my only purpose for money is to enable me to do things (see posts way back for more). I don't really see myself defined in my career. It is what I do, but it is not who I am. Parts of it certainly describe me, the love of computers/technology, the problem solving. But I am vastly much more than that. I truly define myself in my actions, and I don't mean from how others perceive or are affected by my actions. I mean that I define myself for myself in the things that I have accomplished (of which career is only a small part). To a lesser extent, I define myself by my tendencies.
Are we lacking balance between the two? Certainly. However, by definition, stereotypes make general assumptions based on a subjective average. People are not likely to stereotype themselves. Therefore, their view of themselves and society's view are pretty much destined to differ greatly.
Let's take a prime example, shall we? Love her or hate her, one word that I have heard used recently to describe everyone's new favorite heiress Paris Hilton is successful. Are you kidding me? This is a girl who used a sex video to propel herself to stardom! She has about ZERO redeeming social qualities. You wanna talk about someone who doesn't enxergar the world beyond its proper umbigo? Now she's on TV, writing books, soon to be in movies, you name it, you'll see her. Her "choice" of career, heiress, defines her as the following, according to society: young, attractive jet-setter with a strong sense of fashion and an addiction to the limelight/popularity. An heiress is unlikely to understand a normal life, having never had to lift a finger a day in her life to earn money. Now Paris is a success because she is all of these things (attractiveness is up for debate). This is even more strange when you look at the fact that socially speaking, she should be scorned or at least laughed at for letting her sex video come out. But I guess if it worked for Pamela Anderson (and to a MUCH lesser extent, Tonya Harding)...
I guess we've come to a point in our society where we worship the decadent lifestyle. You can see it in every form of media, especially TV and music. Gangsta rap and worshipping the ghetto/thug lifestyle has given way to hip hop music that promotes money and women without so much the criminal element. TV shows like Nip/Tuck and Rescue Me (my two current favorites, oddly enough) would have us believe that plastic surgeons and firemen are up to their asses in hot women willing to have outrageous sex at the drop of a hat. You almost start to feel like you're doing something wrong if your life ISN'T like that. Man, that's a pretty big digression, even for me. I guess I should have suggested the rise (so to speak) of the decadent lifestyle as the next topic... your thoughts, please?
On Work...
He said: Hmmmmm. Let's tackle society first. I don't know that it is what you do so much as how much money you make in general that makes the first great distinction between people. A very simple divide is salaried vs hourly work. Salaried implies at least a lower middle class lifestyle, hourly implies somewhere at or just above the poverty level. Being salaried carries the assumption that you likely went to a college of some sort and got a degree, and that your life is somewhat successful. Being hourly carries the assumption that you likely slept through high school, or that your college football career didn't take off. Either way, it also implies a somewhat unsuccessful life. There are plenty such divides we can make... take the case of a exotic dancer (read: stripper). They are likely to be young girls, many of whom are not college educated (although some do it "to pay for college"), who may be looked down upon for getting paid to degrade themselves, but who are sometimes paid very well to do so. Is there such a thing as a stripper with a successful life in society's view? Not really, but it seems like by the rules of income, such a thing should be possible. So I'm thinking sum total that society's view on your career can only indicate a guess as to how successful your life might be at a general level, as opposed to guessing specific aspects of your life. Actually, I take that back--there are plenty of social stigmas attached to career choice. Let's take mine first: according to society, The Comptuer Science Guy(tm) is likely to make a good salary, even capable of reaching six figures. He (let's face it, this ain't a career for women, according to society) is likely to be rather nerdish and have bad luck with girls. The Art Historian(tm) is unlikely to make a large amount, depending on the market they work in. They are likely to be intelligent, almost in a know-it-all type way. They are likely to not understand why the masses do not share their love for the arts (I'm totally guessing here). So really, money is not the end all be all factor in society's perception of you. You can make a lot of money and still have a job that society frowns upon or thinks less of you for (drug dealer, prostitute, lawyer, Computer Science Guy). In general, how important this is to you depends on how much you care about others' perception of you.
As for me, my only purpose for money is to enable me to do things (see posts way back for more). I don't really see myself defined in my career. It is what I do, but it is not who I am. Parts of it certainly describe me, the love of computers/technology, the problem solving. But I am vastly much more than that. I truly define myself in my actions, and I don't mean from how others perceive or are affected by my actions. I mean that I define myself for myself in the things that I have accomplished (of which career is only a small part). To a lesser extent, I define myself by my tendencies.
Are we lacking balance between the two? Certainly. However, by definition, stereotypes make general assumptions based on a subjective average. People are not likely to stereotype themselves. Therefore, their view of themselves and society's view are pretty much destined to differ greatly.
Let's take a prime example, shall we? Love her or hate her, one word that I have heard used recently to describe everyone's new favorite heiress Paris Hilton is successful. Are you kidding me? This is a girl who used a sex video to propel herself to stardom! She has about ZERO redeeming social qualities. You wanna talk about someone who doesn't enxergar the world beyond its proper umbigo? Now she's on TV, writing books, soon to be in movies, you name it, you'll see her. Her "choice" of career, heiress, defines her as the following, according to society: young, attractive jet-setter with a strong sense of fashion and an addiction to the limelight/popularity. An heiress is unlikely to understand a normal life, having never had to lift a finger a day in her life to earn money. Now Paris is a success because she is all of these things (attractiveness is up for debate). This is even more strange when you look at the fact that socially speaking, she should be scorned or at least laughed at for letting her sex video come out. But I guess if it worked for Pamela Anderson (and to a MUCH lesser extent, Tonya Harding)...
I guess we've come to a point in our society where we worship the decadent lifestyle. You can see it in every form of media, especially TV and music. Gangsta rap and worshipping the ghetto/thug lifestyle has given way to hip hop music that promotes money and women without so much the criminal element. TV shows like Nip/Tuck and Rescue Me (my two current favorites, oddly enough) would have us believe that plastic surgeons and firemen are up to their asses in hot women willing to have outrageous sex at the drop of a hat. You almost start to feel like you're doing something wrong if your life ISN'T like that. Man, that's a pretty big digression, even for me. I guess I should have suggested the rise (so to speak) of the decadent lifestyle as the next topic... your thoughts, please?
Ja, I never meant that it didn't happen -- I didn't mean to say that people using Love for all sorts of nefarious purposes was unknown. Just meant that it's wrong. We seem to have some very messed up ideas about love and relationships right now, as a society. But that's a whole other topic entirely. But to anyone out there manipulating someone through love (parents doing it to their kids included): STOP IT! YOU ARE BEING BAD, WRONG, AND EVIL.
So, hmmm. New topic: Work.
Some people view the purpose of their lives through what it is they get paid to do. So, by definition, you are, sum and total, a computer science guy (did I remember that right? Something like that, for sure). And I, by that definition, am an art historian. The outcome of this definition of self/life is that money ends up being the deciding factor. I define who I am by what pays me. How important are work and money in defining an individual by society's definition of self? How important are work and money in how you define yourself? Are we lacking balance in this conception?
So, hmmm. New topic: Work.
Some people view the purpose of their lives through what it is they get paid to do. So, by definition, you are, sum and total, a computer science guy (did I remember that right? Something like that, for sure). And I, by that definition, am an art historian. The outcome of this definition of self/life is that money ends up being the deciding factor. I define who I am by what pays me. How important are work and money in defining an individual by society's definition of self? How important are work and money in how you define yourself? Are we lacking balance in this conception?
24 September 2004
As usual, to each their own :)
I can certainly tell you that in my past relationships, the end of "If you loved me, you would..." was rarely if ever any of the endings you provided. I like your endings a lot better. Certainly, I care about what my girlfriend needs, but when I get that sense of them using love as a means to get what they want (AND IT HAPPENS, BELIEVE ME)... that's when things get difficult for me.
I asked about accepting one without the other because I've seen people do it all the time. Not that it seems to really work, but I've seen it done. My parents are a prime example of this. But then again, they come from a different time, a different understanding of a relationship and marriage. More so, there are some guys out there who are simply incapable for whatever reason of saying they love someone. But they will do all sorts of things that show it.
Anyhoo, next topic. Your pick.
I can certainly tell you that in my past relationships, the end of "If you loved me, you would..." was rarely if ever any of the endings you provided. I like your endings a lot better. Certainly, I care about what my girlfriend needs, but when I get that sense of them using love as a means to get what they want (AND IT HAPPENS, BELIEVE ME)... that's when things get difficult for me.
I asked about accepting one without the other because I've seen people do it all the time. Not that it seems to really work, but I've seen it done. My parents are a prime example of this. But then again, they come from a different time, a different understanding of a relationship and marriage. More so, there are some guys out there who are simply incapable for whatever reason of saying they love someone. But they will do all sorts of things that show it.
Anyhoo, next topic. Your pick.
23 September 2004
She said:
Well, you gave me questions. Let's see what I can do with/to them.
"SO, which is more important to you, and why?"
To me, showing is more important than telling. Come to think of it, that's weird for me to think, seeing as how I am full invested in the power of the word. Hmmmm. I guess it's been too obvious to me that people can say one thing and act in strict defiance of what they've just avowed. Again, in response, the only "if you love me you would..." completions that are valid:
If you love me, you will treat me with respect.
If you love me, you will consider my feelings as important as your own, or at very least, a close second.
If you love me, you will tell me the truth.
If you love me, you will treat me with respect.
If you love me, you will not dismiss my thoughts or feelings, even if you truly think they are absurd. You also won't tell me the last part.
And again, and what all these boil down to is:
IF YOU LOVE ME YOU WILL TREAT ME WITH RESPECT. Not deference, just respect.
"Can you accept one in the total absence of the other?"
There cannot be words that have meaning in the total absense of acts.
"Which do you choose in expressing yourself to your significant other?"
Acts, mostly, with words second. And rather than the standard "I love you" ad nausea, I prefer other choices. I love being with you. I love the way you think. I love your body (and other less printable versions). But I would rather act in a caring manner most of the time.
It's not about toeing the line. I think maybe the issue is that each person needs something different, both in expressions of love and in acts of love. Just like you need to learn the preferences of each new lover physically (last GF loved having her ear nibbled, new GF hates it), your expressions of love must be tailored to suit the person to whom you are expressing it. If you care about someone, you are going to care about what she needs from you, right?
Well, you gave me questions. Let's see what I can do with/to them.
"SO, which is more important to you, and why?"
To me, showing is more important than telling. Come to think of it, that's weird for me to think, seeing as how I am full invested in the power of the word. Hmmmm. I guess it's been too obvious to me that people can say one thing and act in strict defiance of what they've just avowed. Again, in response, the only "if you love me you would..." completions that are valid:
If you love me, you will treat me with respect.
If you love me, you will consider my feelings as important as your own, or at very least, a close second.
If you love me, you will tell me the truth.
If you love me, you will treat me with respect.
If you love me, you will not dismiss my thoughts or feelings, even if you truly think they are absurd. You also won't tell me the last part.
And again, and what all these boil down to is:
IF YOU LOVE ME YOU WILL TREAT ME WITH RESPECT. Not deference, just respect.
"Can you accept one in the total absence of the other?"
There cannot be words that have meaning in the total absense of acts.
"Which do you choose in expressing yourself to your significant other?"
Acts, mostly, with words second. And rather than the standard "I love you" ad nausea, I prefer other choices. I love being with you. I love the way you think. I love your body (and other less printable versions). But I would rather act in a caring manner most of the time.
It's not about toeing the line. I think maybe the issue is that each person needs something different, both in expressions of love and in acts of love. Just like you need to learn the preferences of each new lover physically (last GF loved having her ear nibbled, new GF hates it), your expressions of love must be tailored to suit the person to whom you are expressing it. If you care about someone, you are going to care about what she needs from you, right?
Ah, Babelfish... good work, that's pretty much what I had in mind. One day I hope we enxergar the world beyond its proper umbigo. I'm going to have fun with that sentence. Don't be surprised to see it left in random places I happen to visit.
I'm all for leaving the past the past. Even if we determine that Kerry didn't do squat in the heat of battle and Bush really did desert his post, that still doesn't mean either one of them would not make a good leader NOW.
BTW, don't give FOX any more ideas for reality TV. They just might try something like that, and neither one of us would get paid for having created the idea in the first place.
I've been having some sidebar discussions on the casual sex topic from before with Jenn and some others, so I'm kinda wanting to go back to that thread--so, as threatened previously, revoked, and now re-threatened--
Next topic: Say You Love Me vs Show Me You Love Me
He said: This is a touchy subject for me, having been a huge issue in two of my three relationships. In my college relationship, I believe I failed to say that I loved her. In my more recent relationship, I failed to show her that I loved her, despite saying it (each of these from the girlfriend's point of view, mind you). Which is really more important to women? It seems like if you do one, they want the other. This is a hard concept for me, because I don't feel the same need for a girl to show me that she loves me, I prefer to take her at her word if she says it. Unfortunately, my girlfriends often did things for me that I failed to recognize as expressions of their love... not that I felt like they didn't love me, but I never gave them credit for some of the things they did, which always bit me in the ass later on.
One problem for guys is that showing your girl that you love her oftentimes sets you as "pussy-whipped" by your friends--you may not like me saying it, but you'd better believe it's a factor. Where do you draw the line between "if you loved me, you would" and simply being good and loving and caring towards your girlfriend? Some people will take advantage of you like that, and that's what causes a lot of problems.
On the other side, I've never had a problem telling my girlfriends that I love them. Fortunately, that's one bad habit I did not inherit from my father. The problem with feelings is that they don't do anyone any good if you don't share them with others. I believe that if someone has a problem telling you that they love you, there's probably a good reason why.
SO, which is more important to you, and why? Can you accept one in the total absence of the other? Which do you choose in expressing yourself to your significant other?
I'm all for leaving the past the past. Even if we determine that Kerry didn't do squat in the heat of battle and Bush really did desert his post, that still doesn't mean either one of them would not make a good leader NOW.
BTW, don't give FOX any more ideas for reality TV. They just might try something like that, and neither one of us would get paid for having created the idea in the first place.
I've been having some sidebar discussions on the casual sex topic from before with Jenn and some others, so I'm kinda wanting to go back to that thread--so, as threatened previously, revoked, and now re-threatened--
Next topic: Say You Love Me vs Show Me You Love Me
He said: This is a touchy subject for me, having been a huge issue in two of my three relationships. In my college relationship, I believe I failed to say that I loved her. In my more recent relationship, I failed to show her that I loved her, despite saying it (each of these from the girlfriend's point of view, mind you). Which is really more important to women? It seems like if you do one, they want the other. This is a hard concept for me, because I don't feel the same need for a girl to show me that she loves me, I prefer to take her at her word if she says it. Unfortunately, my girlfriends often did things for me that I failed to recognize as expressions of their love... not that I felt like they didn't love me, but I never gave them credit for some of the things they did, which always bit me in the ass later on.
One problem for guys is that showing your girl that you love her oftentimes sets you as "pussy-whipped" by your friends--you may not like me saying it, but you'd better believe it's a factor. Where do you draw the line between "if you loved me, you would
On the other side, I've never had a problem telling my girlfriends that I love them. Fortunately, that's one bad habit I did not inherit from my father. The problem with feelings is that they don't do anyone any good if you don't share them with others. I believe that if someone has a problem telling you that they love you, there's probably a good reason why.
SO, which is more important to you, and why? Can you accept one in the total absence of the other? Which do you choose in expressing yourself to your significant other?
22 September 2004
Translation from babelfish.altavista.com (Portuguese to English):
Face I say a thing to you, of the skill that the things go going, as much makes to be Kerry or Bush. Vcs as people is that they need to enxergar the world beyond its proper umbigo. U.S.A. is not the rescuers of the world, vcs knows the truth, but they are not owners of it. They are not turned aside for the evil, do not forget it Sir.
Rough, I know, but not enough time to fix it for the moment.
Face I say a thing to you, of the skill that the things go going, as much makes to be Kerry or Bush. Vcs as people is that they need to enxergar the world beyond its proper umbigo. U.S.A. is not the rescuers of the world, vcs knows the truth, but they are not owners of it. They are not turned aside for the evil, do not forget it Sir.
Rough, I know, but not enough time to fix it for the moment.
19 September 2004
You know I hate talking about politics... but I love where this is going, so it's worth it to delve into my least favorite topic of conversation.
HOWEVER, I'm going to call time out, as I'm still my on Great Road Trip, and won't be returning home until Monday evening. So no new topic for now, unfortunately, but if you want to suggest something else and start it off, Kate, I'll pick it up when I get back home.
Uh... anyone know Spanish or Portugese or the like? I think we need a translation of the comment that was left after my previous post...
HOWEVER, I'm going to call time out, as I'm still my on Great Road Trip, and won't be returning home until Monday evening. So no new topic for now, unfortunately, but if you want to suggest something else and start it off, Kate, I'll pick it up when I get back home.
Uh... anyone know Spanish or Portugese or the like? I think we need a translation of the comment that was left after my previous post...
16 September 2004
She said:
Why the hell not politics? It is a timely topic, is it not?
I love the Last Politician Left Standing idea. It would change the system entirely. I can get behind it -- I turned 18 during Newt Gingrich's term in Congress. I despised everything the man stood for, which may have somewhat determined my political leanings (that and Zell Miller's governorship, which was fantastic -- even though I do not like where he is now politically). I registered to vote 3 days after my 18th birthday, mainly to vote AGAINST Newt. He did win again, but I was happy to express my opinion on him.
I agree with you that the right of the voter is to have access to information that is as objective as possible. This is difficult to find currently. So, conversely, it is the responsibility of the voter to be aware that most of the information out there is severely biased (and all of it is somewhat biased). I think there is an incredible lack of media literacy in our country. People are apparently misled by Fox News' "Fair and Unbiased" (or whatever it is) slogan. Good Grief! NO NEWS IS FAIR AND UNBIASED. All writers have political leanings and opinions on things. All reporters have political leanings and opinions. Whether they mean for these biases to come out or now, they do. People need to learn to think for themselves, to recognize that they are biased in certain directions, the suppliers of their information are biased, and that objective truth is rarely, if ever, presented.
Hence my problem with political ads. They infuriate the other side. They are preaching to the choir, more or less. Are there Republicans out there who will be convinced to vote for Kerry because of an advertisement? Are there Democrats out there who will be convinced to vote for Bush based on an advertisement? Gods I hope not. This is not responsible votership. Political ads are worthless. As you said, they may convince you to vote against someone, but rarely for. If people want to know about the candidates, I say, watch the debates. I know they are scripted, but it's the closest thing to real as we get in an election year.
Back to your Last Politician Standing idea, what if the presidential election were billed as a reality show? It wouldn't minimize its importance anymore than the rest of the hoopla and BS that's going on right now. Make Kerry and Bush live in one of those ultra-hip MTV pads (maybe an old firehouse with a pole?) Give them challenges to do, things to debate, and do not, under any circumstances, allow them access to publicists, speech writers, or even their own wives and families. Man on man. Now this would be worth watching.
Last comment:
Can we please stop talking about Vietnam?!?
Okay, I realize it was an important part of our nation's history. Maybe Kerry's a hero, maybe he betrayed his comrades. Maybe Bush showed up, maybe he didn't. Want to know what I think?(okay, that was rhetorical: I don't care if you want to know; this is MY blog rant!)
I think that Vietnam ended 30 some years ago. Vietnam was over before I was born. While maybe this seems to be important in establishing the character of our competitors, people change over the course of 30 years! This is a diversion tactic. If we continue to debate Vietnam service records, we don't have to discuss:
Iraq
Afghanistan (yeah, where did this topic go?)
healthcare
taxes
education
And the list could go on.
As a young voter, this topic will continue to alienate me and my already-disenchanted/disenfranchised peers. We don't really care about Vietnam because, for most of us, there was no direct effect on our lives. What happened then does not and will not and should not impact what happens in the future. We need to move on.
Why the hell not politics? It is a timely topic, is it not?
I love the Last Politician Left Standing idea. It would change the system entirely. I can get behind it -- I turned 18 during Newt Gingrich's term in Congress. I despised everything the man stood for, which may have somewhat determined my political leanings (that and Zell Miller's governorship, which was fantastic -- even though I do not like where he is now politically). I registered to vote 3 days after my 18th birthday, mainly to vote AGAINST Newt. He did win again, but I was happy to express my opinion on him.
I agree with you that the right of the voter is to have access to information that is as objective as possible. This is difficult to find currently. So, conversely, it is the responsibility of the voter to be aware that most of the information out there is severely biased (and all of it is somewhat biased). I think there is an incredible lack of media literacy in our country. People are apparently misled by Fox News' "Fair and Unbiased" (or whatever it is) slogan. Good Grief! NO NEWS IS FAIR AND UNBIASED. All writers have political leanings and opinions on things. All reporters have political leanings and opinions. Whether they mean for these biases to come out or now, they do. People need to learn to think for themselves, to recognize that they are biased in certain directions, the suppliers of their information are biased, and that objective truth is rarely, if ever, presented.
Hence my problem with political ads. They infuriate the other side. They are preaching to the choir, more or less. Are there Republicans out there who will be convinced to vote for Kerry because of an advertisement? Are there Democrats out there who will be convinced to vote for Bush based on an advertisement? Gods I hope not. This is not responsible votership. Political ads are worthless. As you said, they may convince you to vote against someone, but rarely for. If people want to know about the candidates, I say, watch the debates. I know they are scripted, but it's the closest thing to real as we get in an election year.
Back to your Last Politician Standing idea, what if the presidential election were billed as a reality show? It wouldn't minimize its importance anymore than the rest of the hoopla and BS that's going on right now. Make Kerry and Bush live in one of those ultra-hip MTV pads (maybe an old firehouse with a pole?) Give them challenges to do, things to debate, and do not, under any circumstances, allow them access to publicists, speech writers, or even their own wives and families. Man on man. Now this would be worth watching.
Last comment:
Can we please stop talking about Vietnam?!?
Okay, I realize it was an important part of our nation's history. Maybe Kerry's a hero, maybe he betrayed his comrades. Maybe Bush showed up, maybe he didn't. Want to know what I think?(okay, that was rhetorical: I don't care if you want to know; this is MY blog rant!)
I think that Vietnam ended 30 some years ago. Vietnam was over before I was born. While maybe this seems to be important in establishing the character of our competitors, people change over the course of 30 years! This is a diversion tactic. If we continue to debate Vietnam service records, we don't have to discuss:
Iraq
Afghanistan (yeah, where did this topic go?)
healthcare
taxes
education
And the list could go on.
As a young voter, this topic will continue to alienate me and my already-disenchanted/disenfranchised peers. We don't really care about Vietnam because, for most of us, there was no direct effect on our lives. What happened then does not and will not and should not impact what happens in the future. We need to move on.
Man, you would pick politics, wouldn't you? Let's give it the old college try...
Topic: Political Power
He said:
In a perfect world, it is the right of the voter to vote for whoever the hell he/she wants. It is the right of the voter to have access to information regarding how a candidate has performed in political and related situations. It is the right of the voter to hold candidates responsible for promises made during a campaign, if they are elected. It is the responsibility of the voter to be informed about the candidates running in an election, all of them. It is the responsiblity of the voter to vote, of course.
In our world, we do not respect many of these rights and responsibilities. For example, what purpose is served by negative campaign ads? These ads present information that may or may not be true about a candidate, and are typically difficult or even impossible to collaborate. Further, apathy is rampant among voters who believe that real power in our country is wielded by a select few who either have the money or the clout or both to influence candidiates into serving their interests and their interests only. You gotta love Capitalism. All the ad campaigns in the world to encourage voting, such as Rock the Vote and others, will never be more effective than people interacting with others in their daily lives that perpetuate the view that voting simply does not matter. Again, I lament the death (or at least hibernation) of the power of the Individual.
Should we encourage folks to vote? Of course. We should encourage them just as we encourage them to plan for retirement, not drink and drive, and use condoms. How? I am not really sure. But the general idea would be to convince people that they indeed can make a difference, convince them that the person they elect will respect their votes enough to follow through with what they were voted in on, at least to the best of their ability. Hell, maybe we should just give out a free Xbox every time you vote.
As far as advertisements and their place, you can already tell my stand on some of them. Currently, they serve to confuse and dissuade people. Candidates should really focus only on what they will do, not what someone else has done or might do. Is Bush a deserter? Could be. Does Kerry really change his mind every five seconds? Possibly. Does any of that information really help me, the voter, vote FOR someone. Not a chance. All that does is help me vote AGAINST someone. Last I heard, you pick who you want to vote FOR, not AGAINST. Perhaps they should change to voting system to a "last man standing" format, in which you vote for who you DO NOT want in office. Then negative campaign ads would make more sense.
Topic: Political Power
He said:
In a perfect world, it is the right of the voter to vote for whoever the hell he/she wants. It is the right of the voter to have access to information regarding how a candidate has performed in political and related situations. It is the right of the voter to hold candidates responsible for promises made during a campaign, if they are elected. It is the responsibility of the voter to be informed about the candidates running in an election, all of them. It is the responsiblity of the voter to vote, of course.
In our world, we do not respect many of these rights and responsibilities. For example, what purpose is served by negative campaign ads? These ads present information that may or may not be true about a candidate, and are typically difficult or even impossible to collaborate. Further, apathy is rampant among voters who believe that real power in our country is wielded by a select few who either have the money or the clout or both to influence candidiates into serving their interests and their interests only. You gotta love Capitalism. All the ad campaigns in the world to encourage voting, such as Rock the Vote and others, will never be more effective than people interacting with others in their daily lives that perpetuate the view that voting simply does not matter. Again, I lament the death (or at least hibernation) of the power of the Individual.
Should we encourage folks to vote? Of course. We should encourage them just as we encourage them to plan for retirement, not drink and drive, and use condoms. How? I am not really sure. But the general idea would be to convince people that they indeed can make a difference, convince them that the person they elect will respect their votes enough to follow through with what they were voted in on, at least to the best of their ability. Hell, maybe we should just give out a free Xbox every time you vote.
As far as advertisements and their place, you can already tell my stand on some of them. Currently, they serve to confuse and dissuade people. Candidates should really focus only on what they will do, not what someone else has done or might do. Is Bush a deserter? Could be. Does Kerry really change his mind every five seconds? Possibly. Does any of that information really help me, the voter, vote FOR someone. Not a chance. All that does is help me vote AGAINST someone. Last I heard, you pick who you want to vote FOR, not AGAINST. Perhaps they should change to voting system to a "last man standing" format, in which you vote for who you DO NOT want in office. Then negative campaign ads would make more sense.
15 September 2004
Gee, so I just suggest a topic and then let you have your say first? That could be interesting. I love the power!
Okay: Political Power. What are the rights and responsibilities of an individual voter within the democratic system? Do we or do we not respect these rights and responsibilities? Should we encourage increased voter turnout, voter education, and participation in democracy? If so, how? If not, why not?
And lastly, as a kicker: what purpose do political advertisements serve within our political system?
Okay: Political Power. What are the rights and responsibilities of an individual voter within the democratic system? Do we or do we not respect these rights and responsibilities? Should we encourage increased voter turnout, voter education, and participation in democracy? If so, how? If not, why not?
And lastly, as a kicker: what purpose do political advertisements serve within our political system?
Good stuff. Only comment I have is that you could certainly attempt to explain the meal/caring deal to a guy with a "no appetizers, cut to the chase" type mentality, and he probably does understand it--he just has no intention of actually doing it :) I've already said before that guys in that category should have their sexual license revoked, or at least suspended for a year or two.
See? You're a natural. I'm almost tempted to suggest Say You Love Me vs Show Me You Love Me as the next topic, but I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head in basically saying diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
So it's your pick now...
See? You're a natural. I'm almost tempted to suggest Say You Love Me vs Show Me You Love Me as the next topic, but I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head in basically saying diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
So it's your pick now...
14 September 2004
On looking at life, ITA. Moving on for the moment.
Coutnerpoint: MEN, Cooking or cooking, and sex
Men who would want to skip hours of foreplay aren't worth having around. Granted, I do not personally have the patience for hours of anything, really, but there needs to be a fair introduction. If you start off on the same page as your partner, you're usually in for a good ride, whether that be at 90 mph or 10 mph. It's the engagement with the other that makes the difference. Besides, shouldn't the journey be enjoyable? Shouldn't the appetizers be good, too? Trying to explain the meal/caring thing to a guy with a "no appetizers, all meal" attitude isn't worth it -- he won't get it.
Which brings me to casual sex: you may be right. The unexpected can often be good. I've no experience with casual sex, so I cannot comment and let your thoughts stand as is.
So yes, one needs to be careful who you say things to. I've told the SO what I think about this conversation (a piece of the conversation I had with him prompted the blog moment). We're on the same page about this. I am with a man who believes that treating me with love trumps saying it -- and that's what is important to me. The same menu does not please all palates. Some people love appetizers. Some love a good, heavy, meat and potatoes meal; others like gourmet feasts and variety. Some people love dessert. I think you just have to figure out what kind of person you are, and find someone that you want to share a meal with.
(I LOVE extended metaphor!)
Coutnerpoint: MEN, Cooking or cooking, and sex
Men who would want to skip hours of foreplay aren't worth having around. Granted, I do not personally have the patience for hours of anything, really, but there needs to be a fair introduction. If you start off on the same page as your partner, you're usually in for a good ride, whether that be at 90 mph or 10 mph. It's the engagement with the other that makes the difference. Besides, shouldn't the journey be enjoyable? Shouldn't the appetizers be good, too? Trying to explain the meal/caring thing to a guy with a "no appetizers, all meal" attitude isn't worth it -- he won't get it.
Which brings me to casual sex: you may be right. The unexpected can often be good. I've no experience with casual sex, so I cannot comment and let your thoughts stand as is.
So yes, one needs to be careful who you say things to. I've told the SO what I think about this conversation (a piece of the conversation I had with him prompted the blog moment). We're on the same page about this. I am with a man who believes that treating me with love trumps saying it -- and that's what is important to me. The same menu does not please all palates. Some people love appetizers. Some love a good, heavy, meat and potatoes meal; others like gourmet feasts and variety. Some people love dessert. I think you just have to figure out what kind of person you are, and find someone that you want to share a meal with.
(I LOVE extended metaphor!)
The PTI thing is really easy. A topic is suggested. You give your take, I give mine. That's how it works. Just like we were doing a little bit with living in Florida.
Let's take a test drive:
Topic: Men, cooking, and sex
He said: I can cook anything, so long as it involves a microwave or isn't more complex than cold cereal. I'd like to think that eventually I'll be able to prepare the traditional candlelight dinner for a female near and dear to my heart. Now here's my thing... what if you go to all that trouble, and it comes out terrible? Do you get points for trying? Do you ever have to try again? On the sex thing and how it relates... I disagree with you in that I think it does work for casual sex. The premise of casual sex is the unlikelyhood of it becoming a serious relationship. So basically you're cramming a relationships' worth of emotions into a short time period. In fact, I would venture to say such a thing would actually work BETTER in a casual relationship... mostly because it is unexpected. BTW, if making you a candlelight dinner is better than hours of foreplay, what's the point of hours of foreplay? Most men would welcome a free pass to the main event (I am not one of those, however)... you might want to be careful which men you say such a thing to :)
So even though you've already said your piece, I would suggest a rebuttal just to get things warmed up :) I wouldn't worry about the censors--I don't know that anyone is still reading what we're writing besides us.
I think everyone should stop every few years and reflect on where they are and where they have been. I've been doing that on the personal blog as part of a celebration of reaching 30 years of life next January. It is a lot easier to remember what happened if you write things down. My high school diary is the equivalent of a time machine. Other than that period of one and a half years, I struggle to remember the details of even major events in my life. There are also the shoeboxes o' memorabilia, which help a lot, because they cover the last 10 years of my life. It has been easy to divide the major phases of my life over the past 15 years, as I can look at myself in high school, in college, and in the workplace. Each phase has lasted about five years (except high school, of course). My core being stayed the same for the most part, but each incarnation is different. Different friends, different activities, different abilities. As usual, I digress, the signature of being engaged in a topic I find interesting.
The beauty of life is the inevitability of the unknown. On some level, however, you will always be who you are. Like I always like to say, you can't run from who you are.
Let's take a test drive:
Topic: Men, cooking, and sex
He said: I can cook anything, so long as it involves a microwave or isn't more complex than cold cereal. I'd like to think that eventually I'll be able to prepare the traditional candlelight dinner for a female near and dear to my heart. Now here's my thing... what if you go to all that trouble, and it comes out terrible? Do you get points for trying? Do you ever have to try again? On the sex thing and how it relates... I disagree with you in that I think it does work for casual sex. The premise of casual sex is the unlikelyhood of it becoming a serious relationship. So basically you're cramming a relationships' worth of emotions into a short time period. In fact, I would venture to say such a thing would actually work BETTER in a casual relationship... mostly because it is unexpected. BTW, if making you a candlelight dinner is better than hours of foreplay, what's the point of hours of foreplay? Most men would welcome a free pass to the main event (I am not one of those, however)... you might want to be careful which men you say such a thing to :)
So even though you've already said your piece, I would suggest a rebuttal just to get things warmed up :) I wouldn't worry about the censors--I don't know that anyone is still reading what we're writing besides us.
I think everyone should stop every few years and reflect on where they are and where they have been. I've been doing that on the personal blog as part of a celebration of reaching 30 years of life next January. It is a lot easier to remember what happened if you write things down. My high school diary is the equivalent of a time machine. Other than that period of one and a half years, I struggle to remember the details of even major events in my life. There are also the shoeboxes o' memorabilia, which help a lot, because they cover the last 10 years of my life. It has been easy to divide the major phases of my life over the past 15 years, as I can look at myself in high school, in college, and in the workplace. Each phase has lasted about five years (except high school, of course). My core being stayed the same for the most part, but each incarnation is different. Different friends, different activities, different abilities. As usual, I digress, the signature of being engaged in a topic I find interesting.
The beauty of life is the inevitability of the unknown. On some level, however, you will always be who you are. Like I always like to say, you can't run from who you are.
13 September 2004
Well, are you up for teaching me the subtle nuances of PTI? I can handle it. With the online class, I have to be online regularly (except weekends) and I've upped my time online (although I don't think it kicks in until Thursday).
I know. I just like harassing beach folks. My mom loves the beach so much that I'm sick of it. I've had enough for a lifetime. Oh, and it was all in Florida for about 10 years. I don't love your state.
Yeah, the SO's got a clue. That's why I love him. The man actually cooked me dinner Saturday night. He's done that before, but this was a big, involved recipe, and he did it all by himself. Any guy who doesn't know this already -- acts like this are better than hours of foreplay. I'm not saying it means you can skip the intro to sex! I'm just saying that you set the stage this way. Okay, so it probably doesn't work when you're talking casual sex. But in a Relationship of any lasting quality, the general feeling of well-being (which comes from knowing that your partner cares about YOUR well-being) inside the relationship allows the fires of passion to burn brightly. Maybe it was the cinnamon in the chicken.... nah, nevermind. Can't get too graphic on the blog, right?
It's fall again. My mind rolls through the many goings-on in the present and also the joys and trials of the past and the possibilities of the future. They intermingle in this season in a way that I can't describe or reproduce at will. It's crazy and makes me a little goofier than normal, but there's something about it that I love. It's as though the cool crisp air clears your head and things can roll more freely -- the hamsters run faster or something.
The "diet": I've cooked dinner for myself a bunch of days in a row. I've been mindful of what I'm eating. I like the new recipes I've gotten, too. This is working right now. I had pork chops, baked in herbs and oil, a corn salad (cold, with green onions, green peppers, corn, cucumbers all marinated in seasoned rice vinegar) and spinach. Whee! I can cook again.
I've been following the "path of my life" in my mind. I love a lot of where I am right now. But I miss things, too. I was listening to music on my way out west Saturday: Sarah's Afterglow, the album of the moment and late winter last year, and then Morrissey's Your Arsenal, the album most key sophomore year of college, epitomizing the youthful dissatsifaction with life's current offerings and disengagement, and yet, for me, full of hope, too. The blending of eras. Because, really, there's part of me that still is the college woman you met junior year (for me). And then there are the layers of things, experiences, thoughts, achievements and shortcomings that have been my life since them (7 years? Really?) I can't get past this -- trying to figure out how I got to this point in my life and why. It isn't that I want to change it. I think I want some sort of indicator of what's to come. I know I make those choices. But what next? I'll buy a house. Will I eventually move out of Bismarck? Become a famous writer? Get married? Begin raising cats? Someday earn enough money to go travel to exotic locations with you?
I both love and hate the inevitability of the unknown.
I know. I just like harassing beach folks. My mom loves the beach so much that I'm sick of it. I've had enough for a lifetime. Oh, and it was all in Florida for about 10 years. I don't love your state.
Yeah, the SO's got a clue. That's why I love him. The man actually cooked me dinner Saturday night. He's done that before, but this was a big, involved recipe, and he did it all by himself. Any guy who doesn't know this already -- acts like this are better than hours of foreplay. I'm not saying it means you can skip the intro to sex! I'm just saying that you set the stage this way. Okay, so it probably doesn't work when you're talking casual sex. But in a Relationship of any lasting quality, the general feeling of well-being (which comes from knowing that your partner cares about YOUR well-being) inside the relationship allows the fires of passion to burn brightly. Maybe it was the cinnamon in the chicken.... nah, nevermind. Can't get too graphic on the blog, right?
It's fall again. My mind rolls through the many goings-on in the present and also the joys and trials of the past and the possibilities of the future. They intermingle in this season in a way that I can't describe or reproduce at will. It's crazy and makes me a little goofier than normal, but there's something about it that I love. It's as though the cool crisp air clears your head and things can roll more freely -- the hamsters run faster or something.
The "diet": I've cooked dinner for myself a bunch of days in a row. I've been mindful of what I'm eating. I like the new recipes I've gotten, too. This is working right now. I had pork chops, baked in herbs and oil, a corn salad (cold, with green onions, green peppers, corn, cucumbers all marinated in seasoned rice vinegar) and spinach. Whee! I can cook again.
I've been following the "path of my life" in my mind. I love a lot of where I am right now. But I miss things, too. I was listening to music on my way out west Saturday: Sarah's Afterglow, the album of the moment and late winter last year, and then Morrissey's Your Arsenal, the album most key sophomore year of college, epitomizing the youthful dissatsifaction with life's current offerings and disengagement, and yet, for me, full of hope, too. The blending of eras. Because, really, there's part of me that still is the college woman you met junior year (for me). And then there are the layers of things, experiences, thoughts, achievements and shortcomings that have been my life since them (7 years? Really?) I can't get past this -- trying to figure out how I got to this point in my life and why. It isn't that I want to change it. I think I want some sort of indicator of what's to come. I know I make those choices. But what next? I'll buy a house. Will I eventually move out of Bismarck? Become a famous writer? Get married? Begin raising cats? Someday earn enough money to go travel to exotic locations with you?
I both love and hate the inevitability of the unknown.
Well... perhaps you are all outgrowing the blog... I think for the most part, it's a tool to help you deal with things that have been on your mind, but haven't necessarily vocalized to anyone else. I think I'm just now coming to a point where I once again needed to put my thoughts down for myself (and a few select others) to see. But I digress, and that's a better subject for the other blog anyway.
Just because I can't swim, doesn't mean I can't enjoy the beach. That's like saying people who don't gamble shouldn't go to Las Vegas. I find the beach relaxing, and who can argue with women in bikinis? Florida is a great place to live, except those pesky hurricanes that destroy everyone and everything every so often. However, finding myself once again back in Atlanta (evacuation plan A) for a few days, I continue to wonder why I ever left here.
I'll go out on a limb here and say the concert was a good idea by the SO. I think you might have actually enjoyed it. I think it may have made your month :) Good to see you happy, don't let it happen again...
...just kidding ;)
Best of luck with the diet and the house. Anyway, consider my offer... it's not like anyone else is posting anything... it could be like our version of PTI... that's Pardon The Interruption for you non-ESPN viewers out there...
Just because I can't swim, doesn't mean I can't enjoy the beach. That's like saying people who don't gamble shouldn't go to Las Vegas. I find the beach relaxing, and who can argue with women in bikinis? Florida is a great place to live, except those pesky hurricanes that destroy everyone and everything every so often. However, finding myself once again back in Atlanta (evacuation plan A) for a few days, I continue to wonder why I ever left here.
I'll go out on a limb here and say the concert was a good idea by the SO. I think you might have actually enjoyed it. I think it may have made your month :) Good to see you happy, don't let it happen again...
...just kidding ;)
Best of luck with the diet and the house. Anyway, consider my offer... it's not like anyone else is posting anything... it could be like our version of PTI... that's Pardon The Interruption for you non-ESPN viewers out there...
10 September 2004
Hey, guess what? It's Friday again. I think I've become a once-a-week blogger, now, kinda like a Christmas/Easter Catholic or something. Actually, though it seems long ago, last Friday was basically me goofing off at work waiting to LEAVE TOWN. Which, for the record, ROCKED.
Sarah is the coolest most awesome person ever. She writes, sings, plays, and just generally rocks. I love her. Well, I love her music, so more or less the same. This is, without a doubt, the BEST CONCERT EVER. We saw Sarah at the Xcel Center in St. Paul. Decent venue, I guess. At least it's not a football stadium (a la the Fargodome). Regardless, after a kick-ass opening act (more on that in a minute), Sarah rocked the house for a good 2 hours, playing EVERY song on "afterglow," most of the tracks from "fumbling towards ecstacy" and over half of "surfacing. Beautiful. You left with a glow -- in fact the SO and I were commenting that the peace officers directing the foot traffic seemed pretty laid-back. I assume that they were overjoyed that it was Sarah and not, say, Limp Bizkit. We were as mellow as conceivable.
Opening act Butterfly Boucher (she tells us it's really her parent-given name) is an Aussie with a great voice, Incredible stage presence, and a bass guitar. Rock on, chica. I just ordered two copies of her CD -- one for me, and one for SO. He did buy the tix afterall. I would have bought one at the concert, but according to the paper, the line that just looked too long to me was over 500 people. Oh, yeah. She has a cool website, too: www.butterflyboucher.com
Other great moments of St. Paul:
The Minnesota Historical Society's Mill Museum is pretty cool. Thai food. YUM. Used CD stores. Gotta love The Cities.
The kitties hate me though. We got back Monday night and I left again Tuesday morning for Pierre, the lovely capitol of South Dakota. But guess what?? Pierre has a ZESTO. Did you know that Zesto has great corndogs? And an avalanche shake: chocolate ice cream, marshmallow cream, and oreos. I can so dig it.
So let's see. What else?
Well, Mark, I think you and I make a great long-distance, internet Lucy and Ricky type team, without the defined gender roles. Actually, we don't even remotely resemble them. We are two people who think randomly far too often and who have apparently driven away the good Daniel and Susan folk who used to frequent these pages. I am so blowing my extra online time tonight! What a Friday for me: blogging at 11 pm. WHATEVER. (I am on limited access until the 16th, when I finally revert to unlimited).
Anyway, to address Mr. P's concerns and issues:
You don't swim.
Apathy does suck. I cannot work a voter registration drive here, which I think would be among the most useful election time tasks, because we are not required to vote in this state. Crazy, huh? Anyway, I think I may volunteer to staff the polls. I want to do something nonpartisan to help get people out to vote, whichever way they want to go. I'm all for infomed votership, but I want people to understand that they have rights and responsibilities! Some editorialist likened it to a sports season: you don't go into football season without knowing where your team stands, right?
The online lab is basically a self-paced thing. I'm a facilitator more than an instructor. I grade and comment on quizzes, and I'm available to answer questions. The English department uses the entry test scores to determine that some students would benefit from additional help in basic grammar and sentence construction concurrently with taking the composition class. My students are the middle group: not proficient, but not in need of a face-to-face class either. So far, the biggest hassle has been dealing with the IT folks -- new system, statewide, and NO ONE is sure who is responsible for what. Sucks.
As for houses, I've now looked at every house in my price range in the city. I don't want any of them. I am really picky about buying anything that's going to cost me more than about $20, so I won't be rushing into a mortgage. I've talked to my credit union, and I'm good with where I stand there. I like the agent I'm working with (3 good recommendations from coworkers). We'll see how long it takes.
As for life in general, when I can be okay with the fact that I will never have IT figured out, life is good. I'm busy. Stuff happens. I have two jobs, two cats, friends to go out with occasionally, little but enough money, and some goals, dreams, and general stuff to look forward to. I'm feeling pretty good right now. But on a confessional note, I caved today and logged in to ediets.com. It's not that I need to lose weight, it's that I need to eat a healthier diet. I've been eating like crap for months and not really being out and about as much as is normal for me. And I feel crappy. So I logged in and found a diet plan that creates meal plans. I'm using "diet" here in the sense of "course of things to eat" more than "I want to lose weight." Regardless, so far, it's done what I wanted it to do: make me think about what I'm eating, and get me excited about cooking food to eat. I've got about 4 meals in the freezer -- I make extras and pack them up. That way I don't actually have to eat packaged frozen food. But so now I have an online guide of food for the next month. What I'm hoping is that this will get me back on track with food. I used to like to cook and eat. I don't like doing it for myself, and I've been incredibly lazy and not done much. I need guidance/direction. Whatever. I feel like a dork for doing it, but I'm guessing it boils down to: Will it work?
Wherever you go, there you are.
Sarah is the coolest most awesome person ever. She writes, sings, plays, and just generally rocks. I love her. Well, I love her music, so more or less the same. This is, without a doubt, the BEST CONCERT EVER. We saw Sarah at the Xcel Center in St. Paul. Decent venue, I guess. At least it's not a football stadium (a la the Fargodome). Regardless, after a kick-ass opening act (more on that in a minute), Sarah rocked the house for a good 2 hours, playing EVERY song on "afterglow," most of the tracks from "fumbling towards ecstacy" and over half of "surfacing. Beautiful. You left with a glow -- in fact the SO and I were commenting that the peace officers directing the foot traffic seemed pretty laid-back. I assume that they were overjoyed that it was Sarah and not, say, Limp Bizkit. We were as mellow as conceivable.
Opening act Butterfly Boucher (she tells us it's really her parent-given name) is an Aussie with a great voice, Incredible stage presence, and a bass guitar. Rock on, chica. I just ordered two copies of her CD -- one for me, and one for SO. He did buy the tix afterall. I would have bought one at the concert, but according to the paper, the line that just looked too long to me was over 500 people. Oh, yeah. She has a cool website, too: www.butterflyboucher.com
Other great moments of St. Paul:
The Minnesota Historical Society's Mill Museum is pretty cool. Thai food. YUM. Used CD stores. Gotta love The Cities.
The kitties hate me though. We got back Monday night and I left again Tuesday morning for Pierre, the lovely capitol of South Dakota. But guess what?? Pierre has a ZESTO. Did you know that Zesto has great corndogs? And an avalanche shake: chocolate ice cream, marshmallow cream, and oreos. I can so dig it.
So let's see. What else?
Well, Mark, I think you and I make a great long-distance, internet Lucy and Ricky type team, without the defined gender roles. Actually, we don't even remotely resemble them. We are two people who think randomly far too often and who have apparently driven away the good Daniel and Susan folk who used to frequent these pages. I am so blowing my extra online time tonight! What a Friday for me: blogging at 11 pm. WHATEVER. (I am on limited access until the 16th, when I finally revert to unlimited).
Anyway, to address Mr. P's concerns and issues:
You don't swim.
Apathy does suck. I cannot work a voter registration drive here, which I think would be among the most useful election time tasks, because we are not required to vote in this state. Crazy, huh? Anyway, I think I may volunteer to staff the polls. I want to do something nonpartisan to help get people out to vote, whichever way they want to go. I'm all for infomed votership, but I want people to understand that they have rights and responsibilities! Some editorialist likened it to a sports season: you don't go into football season without knowing where your team stands, right?
The online lab is basically a self-paced thing. I'm a facilitator more than an instructor. I grade and comment on quizzes, and I'm available to answer questions. The English department uses the entry test scores to determine that some students would benefit from additional help in basic grammar and sentence construction concurrently with taking the composition class. My students are the middle group: not proficient, but not in need of a face-to-face class either. So far, the biggest hassle has been dealing with the IT folks -- new system, statewide, and NO ONE is sure who is responsible for what. Sucks.
As for houses, I've now looked at every house in my price range in the city. I don't want any of them. I am really picky about buying anything that's going to cost me more than about $20, so I won't be rushing into a mortgage. I've talked to my credit union, and I'm good with where I stand there. I like the agent I'm working with (3 good recommendations from coworkers). We'll see how long it takes.
As for life in general, when I can be okay with the fact that I will never have IT figured out, life is good. I'm busy. Stuff happens. I have two jobs, two cats, friends to go out with occasionally, little but enough money, and some goals, dreams, and general stuff to look forward to. I'm feeling pretty good right now. But on a confessional note, I caved today and logged in to ediets.com. It's not that I need to lose weight, it's that I need to eat a healthier diet. I've been eating like crap for months and not really being out and about as much as is normal for me. And I feel crappy. So I logged in and found a diet plan that creates meal plans. I'm using "diet" here in the sense of "course of things to eat" more than "I want to lose weight." Regardless, so far, it's done what I wanted it to do: make me think about what I'm eating, and get me excited about cooking food to eat. I've got about 4 meals in the freezer -- I make extras and pack them up. That way I don't actually have to eat packaged frozen food. But so now I have an online guide of food for the next month. What I'm hoping is that this will get me back on track with food. I used to like to cook and eat. I don't like doing it for myself, and I've been incredibly lazy and not done much. I need guidance/direction. Whatever. I feel like a dork for doing it, but I'm guessing it boils down to: Will it work?
Wherever you go, there you are.
05 September 2004
You're online? When did that happen? Leave the blog for a bit, and see what happens. Last I remember, the only way I could catch you was ICQ, and that was a LONG time ago. I'm on pretty much everything else.
Hurricane #2 down, bring on Ivan. Much more interesting than Charley for those of us in the Tampa Bay area. I'm one of the few of my friends that kept power the entire time, so (I hate to say it) it has been a rather pleasant hurricane experience for me. I watched TV, filmed the wind blowing the trees, had myself a lovely old time. I can only hope every hurricane experience is as easy as this one was. Don't get me wrong, they say power is out all over, traffic lights aren't working, curfew in effect, and best of all acidic sludge is seeping into the Bay. So it hasn't been all roses.
So, to business:
People live in Florida because they:
A) prefer hot weather to cold
B) like the beach or easy access to the beach
C) like rain and hurricanes
D) are old and want to retire
E) are insane
F) all of the above
For me, personally, everytime I drive out to the beach over the Causeway on a weekend morning, with the water and the sunshine, it validates my reason for living here. I mean come on--what are the odds we'd actually get hit by more than one major hurricane in a season? Doesn't happen very often. Tampa hadn't been hit hard for like 50 years or something. Looks like Al-Qaida finally finished their weather machine, and we're the test run.
Apathy is the worst, isn't it? I've been hit with my own version. Sometimes I get frustrated that there's so much I can be doing, so I respond by not doing anything at all. It's a lot harder to type when you have TWO blogs, sometimes I feel like I have to copy stuff from one to the other. Excuses, excuses.
WTF is an online lab grammar class? Do they play Wheel of Fortune on the PCs while you walk around?
All I can tell you about buying houses is TAKE YOUR DAMN TIME. I've heard far too many horror stories about the realtor, the builder, the seller, everybody. Everybody's looking for a chance to screw you.
That was a cool b-day gift, tix to Sarah. Not to mention a chance to return to civilization :)
If you've been keeping score at home, lately I feel like I've lost my mojo. Mostly has to do with watching too much TV and everyone else seeming to find a little luck in the relationship department. There's other stuff, too, but if you want to know about that, you'll have to tune into my other blog.
So seriously, KT... is it down to just you and me now? Maybe we could change the format into a "He Said/She Said" style... I think it'd make for a decent show... what do you think?
Hurricane #2 down, bring on Ivan. Much more interesting than Charley for those of us in the Tampa Bay area. I'm one of the few of my friends that kept power the entire time, so (I hate to say it) it has been a rather pleasant hurricane experience for me. I watched TV, filmed the wind blowing the trees, had myself a lovely old time. I can only hope every hurricane experience is as easy as this one was. Don't get me wrong, they say power is out all over, traffic lights aren't working, curfew in effect, and best of all acidic sludge is seeping into the Bay. So it hasn't been all roses.
So, to business:
People live in Florida because they:
A) prefer hot weather to cold
B) like the beach or easy access to the beach
C) like rain and hurricanes
D) are old and want to retire
E) are insane
F) all of the above
For me, personally, everytime I drive out to the beach over the Causeway on a weekend morning, with the water and the sunshine, it validates my reason for living here. I mean come on--what are the odds we'd actually get hit by more than one major hurricane in a season? Doesn't happen very often. Tampa hadn't been hit hard for like 50 years or something. Looks like Al-Qaida finally finished their weather machine, and we're the test run.
Apathy is the worst, isn't it? I've been hit with my own version. Sometimes I get frustrated that there's so much I can be doing, so I respond by not doing anything at all. It's a lot harder to type when you have TWO blogs, sometimes I feel like I have to copy stuff from one to the other. Excuses, excuses.
WTF is an online lab grammar class? Do they play Wheel of Fortune on the PCs while you walk around?
All I can tell you about buying houses is TAKE YOUR DAMN TIME. I've heard far too many horror stories about the realtor, the builder, the seller, everybody. Everybody's looking for a chance to screw you.
That was a cool b-day gift, tix to Sarah. Not to mention a chance to return to civilization :)
If you've been keeping score at home, lately I feel like I've lost my mojo. Mostly has to do with watching too much TV and everyone else seeming to find a little luck in the relationship department. There's other stuff, too, but if you want to know about that, you'll have to tune into my other blog.
So seriously, KT... is it down to just you and me now? Maybe we could change the format into a "He Said/She Said" style... I think it'd make for a decent show... what do you think?
03 September 2004
It's Friday. Tonight begins a three-day weekend (for those of us in the "normal" working world, at least). It's gloomy and threatening to rain outside. I'm hungry and lunch is 2 hours away AND I have no food here. For some reason, I'm having a horrible time focusing on work right now, despite the fact that I am writing about one of the most incredible Prairie style houses I've seen out here. The chimney detail on this building is great -- sort of an Art Deco poured concrete, with indented channels to create some shadow and depth, and brick caps on the stepped form. I know you don't know what I'm talking about (or care) but it's really, really cool.
So on for focusing.
MP, why do folks live in FL? I was reading today that 2.5 million people have been asked to evacuate? WTF? We don't have that many people in the whole state, for one thing. I'll take 40 degrees below zero anyday. That's just me, of course.
So my excuses for not blogging lately:
1. Apathy
2. My new job started: I'm now instructing (sort of) an online grammar lab class that students take in conjunction with their Comp 110 class. The lab is self-directed/self-paced, which means I'm more of a facilitator than anything. It's new, it's interesting, and it's something to do. But it does mean I'm busy when online at nights.
3. I've started searching for a house. To buy. For me. I'm still wrapping my head around spending that much money for anything, but I'm tired of living in a basement and having to ask permission to paint the walls and living with crappy faucets that don't really work quite right but not wanting to put the time, effort, and/or money into fixing something that's not mine. Oh, and I hate the old, '70s, bi-level topographic carpet. Ick. Who invented that? Is he/she dead? Can I put this carpet on someone's grave? Ugh. I like looking at houses, but for the time being, buying one is still a little out of my ability to comprehend. I want one, though.
In other news, I am actually leaving my state this weekend! Woo-hoo! The SO gave me tickets to see Sarah McLachlan play this Saturday night in St. Paul for my birthday. How awesome is that? Sarah, live, again. She's totally on my couch -- short hair, long hair, no hair. Sarah ROCKS! AND, St. Paul is a really place so they have real food, like Thai food. Yum! I get to go to the Ci-ty!
Don't get blown away, Mark.
So on for focusing.
MP, why do folks live in FL? I was reading today that 2.5 million people have been asked to evacuate? WTF? We don't have that many people in the whole state, for one thing. I'll take 40 degrees below zero anyday. That's just me, of course.
So my excuses for not blogging lately:
1. Apathy
2. My new job started: I'm now instructing (sort of) an online grammar lab class that students take in conjunction with their Comp 110 class. The lab is self-directed/self-paced, which means I'm more of a facilitator than anything. It's new, it's interesting, and it's something to do. But it does mean I'm busy when online at nights.
3. I've started searching for a house. To buy. For me. I'm still wrapping my head around spending that much money for anything, but I'm tired of living in a basement and having to ask permission to paint the walls and living with crappy faucets that don't really work quite right but not wanting to put the time, effort, and/or money into fixing something that's not mine. Oh, and I hate the old, '70s, bi-level topographic carpet. Ick. Who invented that? Is he/she dead? Can I put this carpet on someone's grave? Ugh. I like looking at houses, but for the time being, buying one is still a little out of my ability to comprehend. I want one, though.
In other news, I am actually leaving my state this weekend! Woo-hoo! The SO gave me tickets to see Sarah McLachlan play this Saturday night in St. Paul for my birthday. How awesome is that? Sarah, live, again. She's totally on my couch -- short hair, long hair, no hair. Sarah ROCKS! AND, St. Paul is a really place so they have real food, like Thai food. Yum!
Don't get blown away, Mark.