An open letter to Senator Richard Burr (R-NC)
Dear Senator Burr,
Thank you for your response to my letter regarding the repeal of the discriminatory Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. Your letter, dated June 23, 2010, came almost one month after my initial contact with you - May 24, 2010. I would like to point out that your colleague, Senator Kay Hagan (D-NC), responded to me on May 24, 2010 - the very same day I contacted her. The promptness with which you respond to constituents is not the only difference between you and Sen. Hagan I would like to discuss in today's letter.
In her letter, Sen. Hagan discussed the Military Readiness Enhancement Act which will repeal DADT. The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have both testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that they are in favor of overturning DADT. According to her letter to me, Sen. Hagan supports the repeal of DADT "as soon as possible. North Carolina is the most military friendly state in the nation, and I believe that anyone willing and able to serve should be able to do so openly."
You, on the other hand, stated in your letter:
"I strongly oppose and condemn unjust discrimination and would not support a policy that encouraged harassment against any American. At the same time, our country is currently at war, and any changes to our military personnel policies must be carefully reviewed to ensure they do not jeopardize the security and safety of our men and women in uniform, including the gays and lesbians who are currently serving our country bravely. For this reason, I do not support a change in policy at this time."
In light of your reply, I have the following questions: How would the repeal of DADT "jeopardize the security and safety of our men and women in uniform," both straight and gay? How do you reconcile your strong opposition to unjust discrimination with your unwillingness to repeal an unjustly discriminatory policy? How do you simultaneously condemn a policy and vote to uphold it? If both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs both support the repeal of DADT and you oppose it, what do you know that they don't? Apparently I'm missing a nuance of your argument and would appreciate if you could elaborate upon it.
I sincerely hope you will reconsider your stance on the repeal of DADT.
Regards,
Mara
Thursday, July 22, 2010
What I've Learned From Daytime TV
Up until a few weeks ago, my only access to "current" TV was what I could get via PlayOn (i.e. The Colbert Report) and other computer-via-PS3 means. Then I joined a gym. Now, Monday through Thursday, I get a 45 minute dose of afternoon network TV's finest. Fortunately (I think), my gym time corresponds with Ellen's time slot. Some observations:
1) Ellen often rocks the shirt & tie combo, sometimes with the addition of a vest. A VEST! I'm talking both the suit-type vest and the sweater vest. Who else can do that and still look that good? I'm definitely down with sweater vests as a general rule, but don't often see someone rocking the vest-vest all that successfully. Obviously she's not wearing some acetate-backed monstrosity from JC Penney's (like some people in some middle school photos I could mention). Anyway, thanks Ellen for letting me comment on VESTS, of all things.
2) People in her audience LOVE to shriek. The fucking LOVE it! That's all they do!
3) She always has terrible musical guests on the show (American Idol cast-offs and the like). As far as "bands" go, she seems to favor groups with a hipstery lead singer who holds the mic with both hands and sings with his eyes closed.
Every. Fucking. Day.
4) Daytime TV commercials are as silly as they ever were. I'm looking at you, John Orcutt, bankruptcy attorney! You website is BILLSBILLS.com!! I'd love to shake your hand if it weren't so full of other people's money!
1) Ellen often rocks the shirt & tie combo, sometimes with the addition of a vest. A VEST! I'm talking both the suit-type vest and the sweater vest. Who else can do that and still look that good? I'm definitely down with sweater vests as a general rule, but don't often see someone rocking the vest-vest all that successfully. Obviously she's not wearing some acetate-backed monstrosity from JC Penney's (like some people in some middle school photos I could mention). Anyway, thanks Ellen for letting me comment on VESTS, of all things.
2) People in her audience LOVE to shriek. The fucking LOVE it! That's all they do!3) She always has terrible musical guests on the show (American Idol cast-offs and the like). As far as "bands" go, she seems to favor groups with a hipstery lead singer who holds the mic with both hands and sings with his eyes closed.
Every. Fucking. Day.4) Daytime TV commercials are as silly as they ever were. I'm looking at you, John Orcutt, bankruptcy attorney! You website is BILLSBILLS.com!! I'd love to shake your hand if it weren't so full of other people's money!
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
A Math Problem
[Don't be scared, Vee!]
Q: When is it mathematically possible to say: 77 > 98?
A: When you're talking about the temperature. Specifically the temperature difference between northern Minnesota and central North Carolina. Can't wait to be home next week!
Q: When is it mathematically possible to say: 77 > 98?
A: When you're talking about the temperature. Specifically the temperature difference between northern Minnesota and central North Carolina. Can't wait to be home next week!
On a Lighter Note
I hope this is true!
"Why The Next Big Pop-Culture Wave After Cupcakes Might Be Libraries"
I'm all in favor of a pop-culture wave that centers around reading instead of frosting. And I say that as a lover of frosting. However, if I could only choose one, well... for chrissakes obviously it would be READING. Jesus!!
"Why The Next Big Pop-Culture Wave After Cupcakes Might Be Libraries"
I'm all in favor of a pop-culture wave that centers around reading instead of frosting. And I say that as a lover of frosting. However, if I could only choose one, well... for chrissakes obviously it would be READING. Jesus!!
I'm No Economist, But...
I'm more than a little bit fed up with people clamoring for tax cuts while so many of our important, tax-funded programs are having trouble keeping their doors open. Who wants to pay taxes? Probably no one. Who benefits from taxes? EVERYONE.
Taxes pay for public schools.
Taxes pay for roads.
Taxes pay for public libraries.
Taxes pay for law enforcement.
Taxes pay for firefighters.
Taxes pay for city water & sewer systems.
Taxes pay for parks.
Taxes pay for garbage collection.
Taxes pay for Veterans benefits.
Taxes pay for city transit systems.
Taxes pay for the postal service.
And ON AND ON. Taxes pay for all these services, AND THE PEOPLE WHO WORK WITHIN THEM. I work in education and the number of teacher layoffs that have occurred DUE TO BUDGET SHORTFALLS is staggering. When schools systems can't afford to pay their teachers, they also cannot afford to pay for any programs that benefit their teachers - programs like professional development in math, science, technology, and language arts. They can't afford to give teachers the materials they need to be effective in the classroom. Teachers, who plead to their schools for extra funding, are lucky if they get support from their local PTA. And what does that mean? That means that parents who are already contributing toward the school system via property taxes have to *further* dip into their ever-shrinking pockets to help teachers buy classroom materials.
Here's an informative article (from the crazy librul NY Times - gasp!) about the recent figures reported from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. I think the article does a good job at pointing out how the the numbers can be interpreted based on an "cleverly selective reading of the facts." People are not interested in research; they're interested in sound bites. In particular, they're only interested in sound bites that confirm their opinion- whether or not those soundbites are truthful. Economics and taxes are complicated topics. Why take the time to learn more and understand them? BO-RING! I'd rather just voice my knowledge-less opinion.
Sophia Nelson - a black woman aligned with the Tea Party - had a chance to add to the conversation on Talk Of The Nation on Monday. I'm really looking for someone from that group to *tell us something substantive* about what they believe, and why they think we're being taxed too much. [Taxed too much under Obama, that is. I don't recall the Tea Party forming when W. decided to go to war with Iraq on the taxpayers' dime.] Here's a quote from the transcript:
NEAL CONAN: You just talked about burdensome taxes. And you mention that in your piece, as well. And slightly off the subject of your op-ed, but there was just a analysis by the Bureau of Economic Analysis that said taxes, federal, state, local, are at historic lows, lowest level since 1950.
SOPHIA NELSON: Hmm. That's interesting. When I look in my pay check, I don't see that. Maybe it's because I'm single and, you know, you don't get the deductions, single, head of household - I mean, household, I'm sorry - and children and all those things. But I don't know anybody I know, as I talked about in the piece, who thinks they're not taxed too much. And I'm not just talking about, like...
NEAL CONAN: Or you could still believe they're too high, but they are, in fact, historically low.
SOPHIA NELSON: Well, that depends on who you have saying that. I bet if I go to CATO or Heritage or one of those sites, they're going to tell me they're historically high. How much you bet?
NEAL CONAN: Well, I bet if John McCain were president, you'd be trumpeting lower taxes.
BOOM.
For the record: The Bureau of Economic Analysis (the one Neal mentioned) is non-partisan. The CATO Institute (that Sophia mentioned) is a Libertarian think-tank. And the Heritage Foundation (which she also mentioned), according to their website, focuses on Conservative Policy Research and Analysis. I'll let you draw your own conclusion about that.
If anyone out there feels differently than I do, please feel free to write in and tell me why I'm wrong. I'm sure there's a private sector/free market answer to all these problems, right? What IS Blackwater up to these days, anyway? Well, aside from being indicted on federal weapons charges? Damn that big gubmint!!!!
Taxes pay for public schools.
Taxes pay for roads.
Taxes pay for public libraries.
Taxes pay for law enforcement.
Taxes pay for firefighters.
Taxes pay for city water & sewer systems.
Taxes pay for parks.
Taxes pay for garbage collection.
Taxes pay for Veterans benefits.
Taxes pay for city transit systems.
Taxes pay for the postal service.
And ON AND ON. Taxes pay for all these services, AND THE PEOPLE WHO WORK WITHIN THEM. I work in education and the number of teacher layoffs that have occurred DUE TO BUDGET SHORTFALLS is staggering. When schools systems can't afford to pay their teachers, they also cannot afford to pay for any programs that benefit their teachers - programs like professional development in math, science, technology, and language arts. They can't afford to give teachers the materials they need to be effective in the classroom. Teachers, who plead to their schools for extra funding, are lucky if they get support from their local PTA. And what does that mean? That means that parents who are already contributing toward the school system via property taxes have to *further* dip into their ever-shrinking pockets to help teachers buy classroom materials.
Here's an informative article (from the crazy librul NY Times - gasp!) about the recent figures reported from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. I think the article does a good job at pointing out how the the numbers can be interpreted based on an "cleverly selective reading of the facts." People are not interested in research; they're interested in sound bites. In particular, they're only interested in sound bites that confirm their opinion- whether or not those soundbites are truthful. Economics and taxes are complicated topics. Why take the time to learn more and understand them? BO-RING! I'd rather just voice my knowledge-less opinion.
Sophia Nelson - a black woman aligned with the Tea Party - had a chance to add to the conversation on Talk Of The Nation on Monday. I'm really looking for someone from that group to *tell us something substantive* about what they believe, and why they think we're being taxed too much. [Taxed too much under Obama, that is. I don't recall the Tea Party forming when W. decided to go to war with Iraq on the taxpayers' dime.] Here's a quote from the transcript:
NEAL CONAN: You just talked about burdensome taxes. And you mention that in your piece, as well. And slightly off the subject of your op-ed, but there was just a analysis by the Bureau of Economic Analysis that said taxes, federal, state, local, are at historic lows, lowest level since 1950.
SOPHIA NELSON: Hmm. That's interesting. When I look in my pay check, I don't see that. Maybe it's because I'm single and, you know, you don't get the deductions, single, head of household - I mean, household, I'm sorry - and children and all those things. But I don't know anybody I know, as I talked about in the piece, who thinks they're not taxed too much. And I'm not just talking about, like...
NEAL CONAN: Or you could still believe they're too high, but they are, in fact, historically low.
SOPHIA NELSON: Well, that depends on who you have saying that. I bet if I go to CATO or Heritage or one of those sites, they're going to tell me they're historically high. How much you bet?
NEAL CONAN: Well, I bet if John McCain were president, you'd be trumpeting lower taxes.
BOOM.
For the record: The Bureau of Economic Analysis (the one Neal mentioned) is non-partisan. The CATO Institute (that Sophia mentioned) is a Libertarian think-tank. And the Heritage Foundation (which she also mentioned), according to their website, focuses on Conservative Policy Research and Analysis. I'll let you draw your own conclusion about that.
If anyone out there feels differently than I do, please feel free to write in and tell me why I'm wrong. I'm sure there's a private sector/free market answer to all these problems, right? What IS Blackwater up to these days, anyway? Well, aside from being indicted on federal weapons charges? Damn that big gubmint!!!!
Friday, July 9, 2010
Shout a Hip Hooo-Ray!
The Twins are 2 games out of first, going into a 3 game series with the division leaders - the Tigers. These mark the final 3 games before the All-Star break (where Mauer and Morneau will no doubt kick some ass, as if anyone even cares about the All-Star game anymore). Get out your brooms, Twins fans! Let's take the lead! And then? Let's put the hurtin' on the ChiSox next weekend. Yar!!
This isn't actually me, but it sure coulda been.
This isn't actually me, but it sure coulda been.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Filmjitsu!
Lucky gal that I am, I have some really hilarious friends. Thankfully, one of the most hilarious of the bunch (which puts him high in the running for most hilarious world-wide) has started a downright awesome film podcast: FILMJITSU.
The basic premise: the two Filmjitsu hosts take turns picking atrocious movies for the other to watch and review. Sounds like a typical Friday night around these parts! Who doesn't love a shit-tastic movie? The Filmjitsu guys don't pull any punches, and possess extensive film knowledge, to boot. All-around fun podcast, and I'm not just saying that because Merrigunz happens to RULE.
If you have the means, I highly recommend listening to Filmjitsu. It is so choice. And, come on, it's free, so you have the means, which means you have no excuses!!
The basic premise: the two Filmjitsu hosts take turns picking atrocious movies for the other to watch and review. Sounds like a typical Friday night around these parts! Who doesn't love a shit-tastic movie? The Filmjitsu guys don't pull any punches, and possess extensive film knowledge, to boot. All-around fun podcast, and I'm not just saying that because Merrigunz happens to RULE.
If you have the means, I highly recommend listening to Filmjitsu. It is so choice. And, come on, it's free, so you have the means, which means you have no excuses!!
Who's the Man?
You know, I really REALLY love the album I'm The Man by Joe Jackson. Super-catchy songs, great lyrics, fun, and truly some of my favorite bass playing (and bass tone). Would you expect anything different from a bass player who wears a MESH TANK TOP? I thought not. What a total stud. Graham Maby, you're the man.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
I Know You Are, But What Am I?!
I must say, I'm completely fascinated by the phenomenon of Pee-Wee Herman. Specifically, at this moment, I'm fascinated by the change in tone between 1980's The Jerk and Pee-Wee's Big Adventure in 1985. Merely five years separates these films - films that really have quite a bit in common - but they feel like they come from different planets.
Was Slate right when it said Steve Martin's primary trademark is nostalgia? I think so, and, at least for me, this comparison illustrates that more than ever. Navin Johnson's roots are nothing if not old-timey. He's captivated by Lawrence Welk, plays the ukelele, and - most of all - doesn't seem to know how to operate in the modern world.
Fast forward to Pee-Wee's Big Adventure. To these eyes, many aspects of the movie/characterizations seem rooted in early 20th century opulence and 1950s suburbia but utterly transform in Tim Burton's lens. The nostalgic elements here (the bicycle, the props, the joke shop) are so specific to Pee-Wee and his world that they lose their sense of time/place.
It's so interesting to think of Pee-Wee *truly* as a character invented and portrayed by a man, and not as an actual person. Throughout the '80s, we only ever saw Paul Reubens in costume. Pee-Wee did interviews. Paul was the puppeteer. And think of all the comedic and artistic minds that helped shape Pee-Wee as we know him: Phil Hartman, Danny Elfman, Tim Burton. All have their own warped take on the world - sincerity mixed with menace; sexuality mixed with celibacy; squeaky-clean mixed with seedy.
Will there ever be another "real life" character like Pee-Wee? I'm not talking about lame-ass Joaquin Phoenix grow-a-beard-and-now-I'm-crazy stunts, but people who go to extreme lengths to embody their characters at all times. What incredible dedication!
Right now the two "people" about whom I'd most like to read biographies are Leonardo DaVinci and Pee-Wee Herman. I don't even think that's as incongruous as it seems.
Was Slate right when it said Steve Martin's primary trademark is nostalgia? I think so, and, at least for me, this comparison illustrates that more than ever. Navin Johnson's roots are nothing if not old-timey. He's captivated by Lawrence Welk, plays the ukelele, and - most of all - doesn't seem to know how to operate in the modern world.
Fast forward to Pee-Wee's Big Adventure. To these eyes, many aspects of the movie/characterizations seem rooted in early 20th century opulence and 1950s suburbia but utterly transform in Tim Burton's lens. The nostalgic elements here (the bicycle, the props, the joke shop) are so specific to Pee-Wee and his world that they lose their sense of time/place.
It's so interesting to think of Pee-Wee *truly* as a character invented and portrayed by a man, and not as an actual person. Throughout the '80s, we only ever saw Paul Reubens in costume. Pee-Wee did interviews. Paul was the puppeteer. And think of all the comedic and artistic minds that helped shape Pee-Wee as we know him: Phil Hartman, Danny Elfman, Tim Burton. All have their own warped take on the world - sincerity mixed with menace; sexuality mixed with celibacy; squeaky-clean mixed with seedy.
Will there ever be another "real life" character like Pee-Wee? I'm not talking about lame-ass Joaquin Phoenix grow-a-beard-and-now-I'm-crazy stunts, but people who go to extreme lengths to embody their characters at all times. What incredible dedication!
Right now the two "people" about whom I'd most like to read biographies are Leonardo DaVinci and Pee-Wee Herman. I don't even think that's as incongruous as it seems.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
TEXTING SUCKS
Anybody out there text while they're driving? Even if you're "just" at a stop light? FUCK YOU. You should lose your goddamn license. Nothing incenses me more than texting drivers. Absolutely nothing you have to say IN A TEXT MESSAGE could be that important for you to risk killing or injuring someone. What is wrong with you?? Honestly, I would love to know. What makes you think you're different/special? What makes your messages that important? What makes you think the law doesn't apply to you? Since "everybody" does it, does that make it OK for you to do it?
Distracted driving is NOT A JOKE. People fucking die at the hands - at the fucking THUMBS - of narcissistic MORONS who can't put their personal life on hold for 5 minutes while they get from A to B. HOW HAS CIVILIZATION PROGRESSED FOR MILLENIA WITHOUT TEXTING?! OMG WTF?!??!
North Carolinians who text while driving? IT IS A CRIME. A "primary," in fact, which means that a patrol car can stop you without any other traffic violation. Hopefully you won't kill someone before you stop texting in your car. Wishful thinking.
Distracted driving is NOT A JOKE. People fucking die at the hands - at the fucking THUMBS - of narcissistic MORONS who can't put their personal life on hold for 5 minutes while they get from A to B. HOW HAS CIVILIZATION PROGRESSED FOR MILLENIA WITHOUT TEXTING?! OMG WTF?!??!
North Carolinians who text while driving? IT IS A CRIME. A "primary," in fact, which means that a patrol car can stop you without any other traffic violation. Hopefully you won't kill someone before you stop texting in your car. Wishful thinking.
Which Is Worse?
Having recently watched both "movies," I can definitively state that CON AIR is way worse than POINT BREAK. Is that even a question?
versus
JUDGE FOR YOURSELF!!
versus
JUDGE FOR YOURSELF!!
YOU PUKEY THINGS!
It no longer appears that we're inching toward an inevitable/impending Maximum Overdrive situation. Nah, folks. It's so much better than that. We are our very own 2nd Wave Heaven's Gaters, riding on - nay, PILOTING - the Rhea-M as it charts a path for our ultimate destruction.
In twenty (ten? five? one?) years, when you see me on a highway median with this warning sandwich-boarded to my torso, be sure to text EMILIO to 56514. That's all I ask.
WE! MADE! YOU!!!!!
In twenty (ten? five? one?) years, when you see me on a highway median with this warning sandwich-boarded to my torso, be sure to text EMILIO to 56514. That's all I ask.
WE! MADE! YOU!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)