09.30.04 (4:38 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Alena Davis sent me this:
HR 163 -- "To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes."
Essentially, there are two draft bills (HR 163 and S 89) pending in the House and Congress that will institute a mandatory two-year service for all young persons age 18-26, including women. This is dated to start June of next year, and is not merely a war draft, but would institute a mandatory military system akin to Israel's.
I'm sure all the patriotic Dubya supporters will be the bill's biggest supporters. Right? I mean, they shouldn't have any problem whatsoever handing their sons and daughters over to the military (involuntarily) to continue defending this country's democracy.
Who are we kidding? The rich kids will always find a way to buy or manipulate their way out of wars and military service, so who will this bill really affect?
Kerry and Dubya Debate: Like a Tyson Fight, Only Cleaner
09.29.04 (3:16 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm thinking tomorrow's debate between Kerry and Dubya will be more exciting than any Tyson match you've ever seen -- including those that involved ear biting. Watching these two candidates insult each other and dish out subtle innuendos in a diplomatic manner will be more than my little heart can stand. I'm thinking I'll finally know what it's like to yell at my TV screen and scream obscenities --like all the other lesbians around here who enjoy sporting events. I felt really left out during the Packers/Bears game a couple of weeks ago.
All kidding aside, in an entry for the Liberty Bell, a blog I write for the Wisconsin State Journal, I spoke briefly about the upcoming debates:
In order for Kerry to win any points during the tentative debates with Bush, Kerry will have to shed that wishy-washy, flip-floppin' reputation of his (good luck!) by really calling Bush on the carpet and not allowing him to just brush aside the many mistakes he's made with the Iraq war. Kerry can't allow Bush to play the national anthem, wave his flag, and rant about how strong the President has to be. Kerry will have to really push for some definitive answers. At the same time, Kerry has to be prepared to duck when Bush throws the punches about Kerry's support of the war in the beginning and his harsh criticism now.
I'm looking forward to reading the many reviews of these debates -- from both sides. As much as it pains me to say this, I don't believe Kerry stands a snowball's chance in hell of gaining much ground during these debates. I've never felt Kerry was the strongest candidate the Democrats could scrape from under the carpet. Dubya is an expert at playing to an American's sense of patriotism; common sense and rationale are usually drowned out over the sweet sound of that melodic national anthem. It's called rhetoric: the power of persuasion or attraction; that which allures or charms.
09.24.04 (6:49 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Ok, they've come for the Atheists, Muslims, Hinduists and Buddhists (there sure are lots and lots of Asian Americans and Indian Americans in this country) and every other religious minority in the United States:
WASHINGTON — The House, in an emotionally and politically charged debate six weeks before the election, voted yesterday to protect the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance from further court challenges.
The legislation, promoted by GOP conservatives, would prevent federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from hearing cases challenging the words "under God," a part of the pledge for 50 years.
A similar action, not too long ago, hopes to prevent anyone from challenging the legality of the Defense of Marriage Act. People who have rights as full equal citizens in this country were told they do not have the right to challenge the Defense of Marriage Act -- not even at the Supreme Court level. People wo have rights as full equal citizens in this country are now being told they do not have the right to challenge the words "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. Let me rephrase that: Atheists, Muslims, Hinduists and Buddhists -- and every other religious minority in this country -- have been told, that even if they are full and equal citizens in this country, they do not have the right to challenge a 50-year tradition. They should just pay their taxes, be good little Americans, and shut the fuck up.
So . . . who's next? Because somebody is definitely next. When those in power can't force people to agree with their ideology, they simply put pen to paper and make a new law that forces us to submit. Take a good, long, hard look at the faces sitting in the seats in the House and the Senate. They don't look anything like mine.
09.22.04 (2:23 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
From the heart of Richmond, Virginia:
At a time when homosexual activists are seeking special rights, such as “gay marriage,” hate crime laws, adopting children and promoting homosexuality in schools, they are also attacking the freedoms of the ex-gay community. As a counter to homosexual activists’ campaigns, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX) has put up a billboard on one of the busiest Interstate highways in the nation...
Please, go take a look at the billboard and read the article that accompanies it.
Ex-gays and the people they allow to guide and advise them all say that homosexuals can become heterosexuals if we simply choose to become heterosexuals. Perhaps I shouldn't simplify the issue, but really that's the premise of their argument. We have a choice. We can choose to become heterosexuals and live a life that society views as "acceptable."
We can argue all day about [i]choice. [/i] If homosexuals can choose to be heterosexuals, then that means homosexuals chose to be homosexuals to begin with. Yes? No? Does that mean straight men can decide at any moment to become gay men? Is it really that simple? If it is that simple, then ex-gays have minimized sexuality to nothing more than a sexual act.
It's easy for an ex-gay , who has now chosen to live his or her life as a heterosexual, to call equal rights for homosexuals "special rights." It's also a bit cowardly. Hop the fence and save yourself, then point to the people on the other side with venomous ridicule. Oh yeah, that's what I wanna be: an ex-gay. Sign me up!
09.22.04 (9:35 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Tell the elderly and disadvantaged what they wanna hear, but only just before the election:
WASHINGTON - Nearly two million poor people will soon receive Medicare drug discount cards in the mail, a new step by the Bush administration to boost enrollment in the program.
The administration has been battered by election-year criticism of the Medicare prescription drug law and the temporary discount card program that will be replaced by drug insurance under Medicare in 2006. Medicare to Mail Discount Drug Cards
09.22.04 (6:09 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
While reading an article about Dubya's new lead over Kerry with women voters, this jumped out at me:
Several said that a confluence of two events - a Republican convention that was loaded with provocative scenes of the Sept. 11 tragedy, and a terrorist attack on children in Russia - had helped recast the electoral dynamic among this critical group in a way that created a new challenge for the Kerry camp.
Children everywhere are important, including children in Iraq. I sure hope those of you who plan to vote for Dubya so he can protect you and the children in Russia, make a very strong plea for him to stop this madness in Iraq so the children there will survive.
09.21.04 (6:56 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
djinn fissure is really testing the law of supply and demand. The author has decided to allow her readers' demand to determine the tentative release date for each new chapter of her novel Sapphos Child. This serial marketing will rely heavily on word-of-mouth advertising. A new chapter is released every week or so, but only if enough new readers have signed up. In addition, new readers are asked to pay a one-time $5 fee to access the website. The first 2 chapters are available for free.
It explores the roles science, religion, and the law play in defining our humanity, the female and gay experience in today’s world, and the terrible cost of defying convention versus the need to do exactly that. Against the backdrop of western society's struggles to adjust to an overwhelmingly diverse present while powerful elements insist we seek refuge in repressive doctrines of the past, the author wrestles with two of humankind's oldest and thorniest controversies: ‘What is human life?’ and ‘Who decides?’, framing them outside the current discourse of right-to-life/right-to-di e, with a newly conceived ‘blas-phemale’ twist on right-to-beget/right-to-b e-God.
The author, djinn fissure (Virginia M. Fisher), has a degree in law and biology. She has practiced law privately and as an in-house counsel for a national franchise company. She has also worked in the non-profit sector and in the government sector -- just to toss a few credits out there.
If any of you take the time to read the first 2 chapters, head back here and provide a critique please.
Do you think the marketing strategy will work? What do you think of the first 2 chapters?
Jimmy Swaggart, a television evangelist, recently proclaimed that if a gay man looked at him as if wanted to marry him, he would "kill him and tell God he died."
The scarey part? The likes of the KKK and Jimmy Swaggart are the least of this country's troubles.
09.19.04 (11:17 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
All you Kerry-supportin' homosexuals should probably pay very close attention to this:
(Boston, Massachusetts) Hospitals run by Caritas Christi Health Care in Massachusetts have terminated their own employee health care plan to avoid having to cover the spouses of legally married same-sex couples.
Since the self administered plans fall under federal control they are subject to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, said Wendy Bauer, a spokesperson for St. Anne's Hospital, one of the facilities controlled by Caritas Christi.
"Federal law states that employers with self-funded plans are not required to extend insurance benefits to same-sex spouses or employees," Bauer told the Boston Herald.
Ok, so: Kerry says marriage should be defined as a union between one man and one woman, and that homosexuals should opt for civil unions instead -- as long as we are provided the same legal rights as married heterosexuals (yeah, right!).
Now, the Defense of Marriage Act states: no state is obligated to honor same-sex marriages (or civil unions) performed in another state. Your other favorite Democrat, Clinton, hooked us with that nice little law:
"No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship."
Employers are not obligated to provide health insurance. With a little more thought, how many more organizations can find ways to use the Defense of Marriage Act to refuse rights or benefits to homosexual couples who have married (or have a registered civil union) in one state or another?
Basically, Kerry did some pretty fancy footwork to sideswipe a whole lot of ya. The Defense of Marriage Act will be pretty damn hard to undo (thanks to the Marriage Protection Act that's well under way). And a whole lot of ya did some pretty fancy footwork to sideswipe each other because you already knew that!
Civil unions don't mean squat. Well, to anybody but the two people joined at the hip. They certainly don't mean jack to the federal government -- especially come tax time. When you can check the civil union block on the 1040 form, let me know. John Kerry threw the homosexuals a bone.
WASHINGTON: US President George W Bush received a potential boost today in his bid for re-election when a court ruled that independent candidate Ralph Nader, who experts believe helped Bush win four years ago, be placed on Florida's presidential ballot.
I prefer to speak less about what that means for Dubya and more about what that says about Kerry. Actually, I could (but I won't) go even further and spew a few theories about what that means about the Democratic party and their choice of a candidate this election year -- not to mention who the party was left with in 2000. If the Democratic party had a stronger candidate to present to the country, no one would convince me that Kerry would have to worry about a third party candidate.
Ross Perot ran as an Independent in 1992 and barely caused the fuss Nader is causing. What was the difference between Nader and Perot? Why did Americans take Nader seriously -- so seriously that "experts" are claiming Nader tilted the election results in Dubya's favor.
The simple issue so many anti-Dubya (or pro-Kerry) folks -- one not necessarily being the opposite of the other -- keep forgetting (or conveniently ignoring) is that Nader voters wouldn't have turned to Nader if they could find what they needed in one of the other parties. Nader votes didn't belong to Gore. They belonged to Nader because that's who the voters chose. It's as simple as that. A Nader vote isn't a wasted vote just because there's no chance in hell he'll win. If his votes keep tilting the election in a direction you don't want it to go, perhaps that's the only way we'll see some serious change in the political system -- particularly within the Democratic party.
So, even though I don't plan to vote for Nader, Dubya, or Kerry (I'm writing Kucinich in), I say do whatcha gotta do. Let the chips fall where they may.
09.17.04 (9:42 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
The liberal press, as the Conservatives call them, painted a very convincing picture that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Most major newspapers jumped all over every item of news that stated Saddam possessed WMD and was a threat to the United States. It was the liberal press that built a great case for Bush's war and helped the Bush Administration convince America that a war was the right thing to do -- based largely on Iraq's possession of WMD.
The latest report regarding the infamous WMD states "Saddam Hussein did not have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, but left signs that he had idle programs he someday hoped to revive. Of course Dubya supporters will respond with a resounding "ah ha! He was planning to make weapons. What more do you need?" The war wasn't based on Saddam's desire to build WMD after international suspicions waned; it was based on his possession of weapons. The war rhetoric wasn't desire; it was existence. The Bush Administration, along with the liberal press, used that assumed existence to promote fear. With memories of 9-11 still fresh in everyone's mind, it worked like a charm. But, perhaps the Bush Administration and the liberal press could have worked with the rhetoric of desire to build WMD and accomplished their task of convincing the country that a war was the right thing; the 9-11 fear atmosphere in the country at the time would have made this almost easy to do.
Somebody had to do something. That, I don't deny. But folks, Saddam had been in power (and using chemical weapons) since 1981. I do believe your beloved Reagan was Commander-in-Chief at the time. In 1987, the USS Stark was attacked -- hit by an Exocet missile fired from an Iraqi jet, just 2 years after Reagen fully restored all diplomatic relations with Iraq (Ann Coulter once had a very colorful explanation for her favorite Republican's actions in 1985. The Democrats made him do it).
So Conservatives and Dubya supporters will continue to argue that Dubya had what it took to take care of . . . the thing Reagan did not? Never mind the fact that the war was based on, not the existence of but, the desire to produce weapons of mass destruction. Hail to the top cowboy for protecting the USA from possible future atrocities; at an estimated cost of $150 billion, 1,002 dead Americans, 1,129 dead coalition troops, and at least 14,791 dead Iraqi civilians. And it ain't over yet.
Change the Constitution: Let Immigrants Be President
09.16.04 (8:59 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
According to this article, Arnold wants to be President:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Arnold Schwarzenegger, making his Sunday talk show debut as governor, said that he and other foreign-born citizens should be eligible to run for the White House and that President Bush can carry California in November if he does more to help the state. Let Foreign Born Seek White House
In addition, a friend of Arnold's has introduced this bill:
WASHINGTON — Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, an Orange County, Calif., Republican and longtime friend of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, introduced a constitutional amendment yesterday to allow foreign-born Americans who have been citizens for 20 years to run for president.
I'm not sure how I missed that! I first found mention of it on Time for Drinking.
Perhaps now, Arnold will get to feel the sting of discrimination. Arnold Schwarzenegger will get to be President of the United States the day a lesbian couple gets to be Madame President and the First Significant Other. Aaaah, there's hope, right?
Republicans just love tossin' constitutional amendments out there, don't they? I can use a lot of same old arguments against this change that the Republicans used to keep us homos from getting married. My favorite one is: tradition. Immigrants have never been allowed to hold the office of Commander-in-Chief in this country. Ever. That was certainly one of the arguments Marilyn Musgrave (the Republican who introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment) used to deny homosexuals the right to marry: maintaining an important tradition.
09.15.04 (8:45 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
After Kerry screwed up and referred to the infamous Packer Lambeau Field as [i]Lambert[/i] field, Dubya and Cheney had this to say:
"I got some advice for him," Bush told Wisconsinites a few days after the Lambert gaffe. "If someone offers you a cheesehead, don't say you want some wine, just put it on your head and take a seat at Lambeau Field." Vice President Cheney made the obligatory pilgrimage to Green Bay last week to pile on. "I thought after John Kerry's visit here I'd visit Lambert Field," Cheney told a crowd at a Republican fundraising dinner Thursday night. Then he went in for the kill. "The next thing is he'll be convinced Vince Lombardi is a foreign leader."
Now, I know Dubya didn't fix his mouth to criticize Kerry for a slip of the tongue. Oh no he didn't. [b]This[/b] coming from the man who was heard at one point saying the following:
"Families is where our nation finds home, where wings take dream."
"States should have a right to enact reasonable laws and restrictions, particularly to end the inhumane practice of ending a life that otherwise could live."
"Theories range from dyslexia to stupidity to lack of education to lack of sophistication."
"I will have a foreign-handed foreign policy, on the other hand, is unlikely to reassure either US foes or allies."
"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it."
"There's not going to be enough people in the system to take advantage of people like me."
Now, I certainly hope Dubya remembered all these well documented blunders (or should we say [i]"documented evidence of a wasted Harvard education?"[/i]) before he opened his mouth to criticize Kerry's simple slip of the tongue -- something Kerry has never once done to him.
But hey, when you're desperate, ya gotta take a jab when ya can. I just find it ridiculous that the Commander-in-Chief has stooped to these simpleton tactics.
09.14.04 (8:32 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
You pervs, I knew that would get your attention. I have a much catchier title for my sidebar over there: "Clickin' for boobies!"
Next month is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Whether or not you've ever had anyone in your life who's been affected by breast cancer, please visit The Breast Cancer Site: Fund Mammograms for Free and click the link. Place a link on your blog to the site and encourage others to visit the site and click the link. It's such a worthy cause. The site's sponsors use the number of daily visits to the site to donate mammograms in exchange for advertising. You're helping women who can't otherwise afford to pay for the mammograms on their own.
Guys, you can place the link on your blog, too! Please, pretty please. Feel free to copy my text code in the left sidebar if you like.
09.13.04 (9:45 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
See, while Dubya and Marilyn Musgrave (and the rest of the Republicans who were attempting to protect marriage) were fighting to write discrimination into the constitution with the Federal Marriage Amendment, they forgot something very important:
Using that quote is certainly not a Kerry endorsement. It was the first one I could find.
So, I found it quite odd that:
on Sunday, the Justice Department said the nation's crime rate last year held steady at the lowest levels since the government began surveying crime victims in 1973, the latest in a decade-long trend showing violent crime falling.
Yeah, the release of that particular statistic on Sunday, right before we find out the federal ban on assault weapons had expired, is quite odd indeed. Just who the hell do they think they're foolin'?
09.13.04 (8:53 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
From what I've seen so far, Kerry's supporters have spent most of their time threatening us with "you don't want to be stuck with Bush do ya?" to get us to vote for Kerry. Kerry's lead in the polls has been mostly slim. Has that lead been based on fear? Fear of living with another 4 years of Dubya? Or has Kerry's lead been riding on his own merit?
Kerry supporters and Democrats have done just what the Republicans did at their Convention -- stooped to scare tactics. They've been doing it for months. The first thing Democrats did when Nader threw his hat in the ring this election year was complain that Nader would tip the scale in Dubya's direction. I recall Howard Dean being the first to issue a bold statement about Nader's presence in the race and advise us not to support Nader because it would steal votes from the Democratic nominee (Kerry was not named at the time). If that's not a scare tactic I don't know what it is.
It's plain "un-American" (using the words of a moderate Republican who supports John Kerry and was outraged by Cheney's speech at the Republican convention) to tell voters not to vote for Nader because it will steal votes from Kerry. That's a bold statement that assumes the votes [b]belong[/b] to Kerry to begin with.
So, Democrats are seeing tit-for-tat and don't like it. If Nader tips the scale in Dubya's direction and he actually wins another four years, it sends a loud and clear message to the Democrats: get your ass in gear and make some changes. Choose a better candidate the next time -- one who can win an election on his own merit and doesn't need to keep his mouth shut just to look good.
09.12.04 (10:15 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Passing along a couple of finds . . .
The Republicans for Kerry issued a few comments about Cheney's speech at the Republican convention:
Jason Jones, a Republican and Native American, called Dick Cheney's speech to the Republican National Convention a "One Trick Pony". The speech, Jones noted, contained little beyond criticism of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. "[Cheney] could have spent more time than a minute on the future of education in our country. However, he would have to explain why this Republican administration backed the largest un-funded mandate in the history of the Republic," Jones said. "He could have spent more time talking about how the tax cuts have resulted in job growth. Of course, this might raise sticky questions about how those jobs are often at significantly lower wages than those previously held. He could have expanded on America having the greatest health care system in the world, but one of those forty-plus million without access might disagree."
In addition, Harry Wettig, a lifelong Republican and retired public servant of 34 years who served in the Army Air Corps as a twin engine pilot in WW II, outraged by Vice President Cheney's remarks in Iowa asked:
"Mr. Vice President, how much more terror can you hope to inspire? Your remark is trying to undermine the democratic system of this country. It is clearly un-American." Wettig operates the web site "RepublicansAgainstBush.info" that has been tracking Bush administration actions and policies on issues important to moderate Republicans, including security. He believes that there is nothing in the Department of Homeland Security's current plans, or in the words of Bush or Cheney to make the American people feel any safer. “All we hear from them is that the level of terror for today is ‘orange’. That is not protection”
I haven't made any jabs at Ann Coulter lately. I'm sure these Republicans are right up there on Ann's list next to the French and the Spanish -- cowards.
By the way, don't forget to check Ann out. In her opinion, "liberals are racists", the French are "a bunch of faggots", only property owners should be allowed to vote, and anyone who disagrees with her is a "fatuous idiot" or "evil". See why I just [b]love[/b] Ann!
09.10.04 (2:21 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Well, I don't find this funny at all, especially because it's a joke related to the nation's military and those homosexuals who serve in the military. I am appalled to learn that About.com allows this kind of thing to get posted and remain posted on its website -- especially in the year 2004:
Homosexuality
A DI catches a recruit losing his bearing by not keeping his eyes locked on in front of him.
DI: "Recruit Smith (last name changed), Did I just catch you checking out my ass?!!!"
Smith: "No, sir!"
DI: "Are you a faggot, Recruit Smith?"
Smith: "No, sir"!
DI: "Well if you are, then you're out of luck! I'm so straight, I don't even know what the word homosexual freakin' means!"
This kind of joking does nothing more than foster an atmosphere of homophobia in the nation's military. Gays and lesbians have served this country honorably for decades and will continue to do so. We should not be subjected to this kind of disrespect in boot camp anymore than a woman or an African American should have to hear jokes related to gender or race:
This past week in my NROTC, OW, the Marine option MIDI got a kilt for a kid who was scottish and madE him wear it. He then went up to another kid and this was the dictum"
M: "Do you like Mr. Smith in a skirt?"
Kid: "Yes, Sir!"
M: "So you like men in skirts?"
Kid: "Um... no sir!"
M: "Are you lying to me Mr. Schmoe?"
Kid: "Um... no sir!"
M: "So do you like men in skirts?"
Kid: "Ah........ yes sir!"
I'm not quite sure how we all kept our bearing.
In this example, one recruit was subjected to humiliation by being forced to wear his traditional attire and taunt another recruit in a sexual manner, insinuating that the recruit was a homosexual. This forced the recruit to defend his heterosexuality. This also insulted any homosexuals who were present and witnessed the event. I find this absolutely unacceptable.
I find it absolutely unacceptable that About.com would allow jokes of this nature. If they allow this, they might as well allow racist jokes, sexist jokes, and jokes about people with disabilities. But do they?
. . . the poll suggests that Republicans achieved virtually all their objectives last week in New York, particularly in their goal of making Kerry less acceptable to voters.
Winning the election anyway ya can is how the Dubya camp is running their campaign. I mean, honestly, that's what the whole Federal Marriage Amendment was about too -- doin' whatever ya gotta do to win an election.
09.08.04 (12:45 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Ok, so I read this article and I said . . . well, you know what I said. You can guess what I said, right? My language is pretty colorful.
Vice President Cheney warned on Tuesday that if John F. Kerry is elected, "the danger is that we'll get hit again" by terrorists, as the Bush campaign escalated a furious assault on the Democratic presidential nominee that has kept Kerry from gaining control of the election debate.
Ya know, that scare tactic stuff is getting pretty damn old. Republicans are using future terrorists attacks to scare us into voting for Dubya. Democrats and Kerry-is-all-we-have-homo sexuals are using a future with Dubya to scare us into voting for Kerry and not voting for an independent. In the meantime, no one has convinced me that either candidate is good for the country. They've just convinced me that . . . I should be scared -- of something!
09.07.04 (6:13 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Just as I was completing this post earlier, the SistersTalk blog was suddenly replaced by my business blog. Everything in the side margins suddenly disappeared and was replaced with every single item present on my business blog. I'm not quite sure how good ole Rocky pulled that one off, but Rocky and I have a very long history of getting on each other's nerves so I won't even bother to write him and ask. I just set about the task of simply fixing the problem myself.
So, on with the original post I started with:
I don't know where the hell I've been, but the infamous Beloit College Mindset List was released while I was off in a daze. I must claim all bragging rights to my beloved alma mater.
I once worked as a research assistant for the list's co-editor Tom McBride. I remember Tom was a very high-energy kinda man. His shirt was always untucked on one side and he always placed a chair in the center of the room to use as a sort of focus point.
The best course I ever remember having with Tom was a course in which we studied Alice in Wonderland. That course was actually a Literature and Math course. Aaaah, the good ole days of living the life of a liberal arts student. Now, I'm wondering why I'm bothering with Quantitative Analysis, Operations Management, and learning how to hide money -- the legal way, of course. I'll be the most jaded MBA graduate the world knows in about 5 months.
So, about this mindset list:
BELOIT COLLEGE'S MINDSET LIST® FOR THE CLASS OF 2008
1. Most students entering college this fall were born in 1986.
2. Desi Arnaz, Orson Welles, Roy Orbison, Ted Bundy, Ayatollah Khomeini, and Cary Grant have always been dead.
3. “Heeeere’s Johnny!” is a scary greeting from Jack Nicholson, not a warm welcome from Ed McMahon.
4. The Energizer bunny has always been going, and going, and going.
5. Large fine-print ads for prescription drugs have always appeared in magazines.
6. Photographs have always been processed in an hour or less.
7. They never got a chance to drink 7-Up Gold, Crystal Pepsi, or Apple Slice.
8. Baby Jessica could be a classmate.
9. Parents may have been reading The Bourne Supremacy or It as they rocked them in their cradles.
10. Alan Greenspan has always been setting the nation’s financial direction.
09.06.04 (6:10 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I received this in email today. I almost missed it because I thought it was one of those mass emails received from one of the newsgroups I belong to. Thanks to Alena Davis for sending it in:
Hello. I attended yesterday's protest of Bush's visit to Parkersburg, WV. It seemed the only media present was a local TV station, and after watching their coverage of the event (both the speech and the protest), I'm rather outraged. I have no issues with media wanting to be supportive of the President, but the media went so far as to misrepresent the demonstrating crowd, making it seem as if we were crazy and out of control, when in fact, the protest was peaceful and everyone followed police directions (in fact, I don't think there were any arrests).
Not only this, but the President snuck in and out of the back, not even bothering to come down the route they said he would arrive. Of course, this route was where the protesters were, and subsequently, we never even got to see him. This is the second time in two visits to our town that he has purposely dodged protesters. The fact that he came in and out of a back route is more significant when you compare these visits to Reagan's visit here in '84. Supporters lined the streets after tickets sold out, and I don't believe there were many protesters, if any. Reagan's entourage came up the street in front of the high school (the same route they told us The Shrub was coming), whereas Bush snuck in the back.
After hearing this misrepresentation (check out the streaming video at wtap.com, you'll see just how bumbling and slavish our local newscasters are), I'm very outraged. It's one thing to support the President, but another to completely misrepresent what happened outside of the speech. Not only was coverage of the demonstrators limited, but it was almost totally negative.
One thing that really angered me about the news coverage was that the newscasters didn't bother to mention that *ALL* the in-your-face verbal and physical intimidation efforts were by the Republicans leaving the speech. All the protesters were behind yellow police tape, and the Bushies could have walked around us to avoid us -- the police had set up a secure exit zone far away from us -- yet many of them insisted on walking *through* us, so they could harass, yell, and get in our faces. I had a sign that said 'Leave No Billionaire Behind', and one man of about age 70 told me he wanted to shove it up my ass. For the record, none of the protesters that I witnessed were making threats or swearing at anyone in such a fashion.
I will be writing an article about my experience at the protest, as well as the negative spin local media put on the event. I find it somewhat amusing, in kind of an ironic way, as I protested the Gulf War in San Francisco back when I was still in high school, and that is more my idea of a 'rowdy' crowd than the 700 protesters yesterday obeying the police and behaving peacefully. After all, there were plenty of arrests then, and true civil disobedience as we even walked on the Bay Bridge, stopping traffic. I have to wonder at the local media, if yesterday's event consisted of an out-of-control crowd! We were truthfully very well-behaved.
09.06.04 (5:28 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I can hear my most recent ex-lover tellin' me it's really none of my business what people choose to do with their time as it relates to collecting a paycheck, but I really must address the recent Home Depot issue of pet insurance but no domestic partner insurance for same-sex partners.
In my email today, I received a news item that suggested that Home Depot was shamed into offering domestic partner health benefits a day after the company announced it would cover hospitalization for the family pet, but it would not cover an employee's same-sex partner's health insurance. I would definitely agree with that assessment. I would be ashamed to admit that John's rottweiler was important to our company, but John's male partner of 10 years was not.
I love animals (I am owned by 3 cats), and I am in no way claiming that people are more important than animals; however, I'm wondering why any company that employs people and relies very heavily on human capital (not pet capital) would make the statement that the health of pets is more important than the health of people.
By the way, I agree. It really isn't any of my business what people do with their time as it relates to collecting a paycheck; however, I love to do my part to make sure companies are ridiculed for a long time to come. I'll start on Wal-Mart soon.
09.06.04 (1:50 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
And that was short-lived. Fun. Warm. Exciting. Many pleasurable moments. A few bad ones. The one moment that made a huge difference. I can't even chalk it up to the whole trials and tribulations of homosexual dating because I know there are so many heterosexuals out there who can relate. And what am I rambling about, you ask? My romance has ended. Already? Yep. Already. Ain't that a bitch? Nope, not really. She'll say one thing happened. I'll say another thing happened. The stories won't match. They never do.
It's back to work, work, work as usual. There's safety and sanity in ranting about politics. Don't you agree?
liberal bloggers
