Drilled too deep

Dear Senator Lamar Alexander,

Regarding your statement to the press,

"What we know about this individual, for example, is that he was reading Karl Marx, and reading Hitler, and burning the American flag," Alexander said. "That's not the profile of a typical tea party member if that's the inference that's being made."

Taken from here.

It also doesn't fit the profile of your typical liberal or "lefty" either, if that's the inference your making. Which I think you're trying to do. Considering the Right and the Tea Party claim to be experts on both Socialism, Communism and Nazi-ism, I would think that they would have studied those seminal documents of the movements to know just what they're talking about. You know, as long as your weren't pulling rabbits out of your nether-regions and using terms that you have no idea what they mean. So, I would think that Tea Party members who spout drivel such as the "president's socialist ideas" would have read such works. Or I'm left to conclude that you're just idiots and bullies. You wouldn't want me to make that inference, would you?

Dear Mark Mekler,

If you want to say that you find it appalling that anyone would tie the shootings to the hightened rhetoric of your movement, or the glorification of firearms and violence and the attendant language that also flows from your movement, I can understand. Even to say you "condemn such linkages," I can understand you're argument. However, to say sinks to the level of evil and also call those who say it "scumbags," well, sir, it just let's me know you don't know WTF you're doing. And you're a lawyer? I've known and worked with plenty of lawyers, some of them on the opposite side of the table in contentious issues, and none of them publicly use such idiotic and inflammatory terms. Seriously, are you really conscious of what is coming out of your mouth or of your actions? Because it doesn't appear that you are. You're calling not only the local sheriff, but national figures like the FBI's Robert Mueller that. Do you really want that?

With all do respect, please crawl back to your play pen and let the adults handle the conversation.

To both of you, please make it harder for those of us on the left to find examples of your extreme ignorance and hate. Right now it's all to easy. And in case you're missing it, we're not tying this person to you, but we are saying that the level of discourse and imagery that you and yours have brought to the table is creating the atmosphere that such things become easier to reach. I know you probably don't understand that, because to do so means you need to go beyond yourself and think of others and how you're affecting them.

If this was a blog flame war, I'd use the rhetorical trick of, "So, hit a nerve did we?"

Not yours, truly,
Me

Words are the currency of thought

George Orwell was correct in his views of language, power and thought in 1984.

Because it seems relevant to some discussions going on (and because it's now becoming a knee-jerk defense, mostly from one side of the political spectrum). A criticism of speech (print, verbal, blog, whatever) is not censorship of said speech. I understand that some people can be confused on that issue given their world view and their "absolutist" stances on ideas.

So, if you would say something like, "I believe the sky is blue," and I would say, "You're wrong, it's azure," this doesn't mean I think you should be muzzled and prevented from providing any thoughts on the matter of color (of the sky or anything else). Even if I should say, "Your ability to recognize color selection is ignorant and until you learn better you should STFU and sit down," that isn't censorship.

Now, if I would try and make a law that only people who can discern a delta-E of 3 (That's a color sensitivity term that is a scientific determination on who close two colors are, most people can readily see a delta-E of 18-20, and if the colors are next to each other a delta-E of 10, highly trained people can discern down to a delta-E of 3. That's where mine is at, BTW. Below a delta-E of 3, it's presumed only machines can discern the difference.) should be allowed to give their opinion of what a color is, that would be censorship. If I would exert my minimal influence to make sure that anybody who didn't have the same level of capability couldn't have their opinion of color given to the public through the print, digital, or broadcast media, that would also be an example of censorship. If I would remove the word "blue" from the lexicon to keep you from making such a statement, that would also be a form of censorship.

But standing up and saying, "You're wrong, that's azure," or "that's an ignorant statement," or even, "you have no idea just what you're saying," isn't an example of censorship. Even if I say, "I'm not going to listen to you," isn't an example of censorship. And to the far end, if I say, "What you've been saying about the color of the sky has ruined the ability of others to correctly name said color and you should really rethink how you discuss color before you do any more damage," isn't censorship.

To consider such statements as censorship is to fail at discourse.

Dark thoughts for a Sunday Morning

Here's something that I'll bet you never expected of me, I agree with Speaker Boehner, an attack on one is an attack on all who serve. That I agree with him probably won't happen again for a long time.

Just a comment in general, there is a big difference in saying that "it'll be hand to hand combat to get our agenda through the congress" and "if ballots don't work, maybe bullets will" or even "second amendment solutions." If you can't recognize that, I'm not sure we can have a rational discussion.

I said earlier in this whole bruhaha that certain elements were playing with fire, not understanding the potential consequences. Maybe now people might become a little more sober. Given the responses I've seen so far, I don't have high hopes.

Notes on the Job Thing

So, I've never gone through and closed out my accounts with the various job search sites. Consider it just market research. While normally the auto emailed job listing never actually had any jobs in my field (related, but not really design jobs) while I was looking, I now see a few.

Dear employer,
When your job description reads...

...needs talented pro ready to work in a dynamic creative environment. Must be proficient with computers, posses top-caliber design skills, thorough knowledge of print production and the ability to work on multiple projects simultaneously. Must be well-organized and comfortable working with tight deadlines...

it makes me think that you don't know WTF you're doing. Every design job can read exactly the same. It's two decades since the desktop revolution. If you're not proficient with computers, you haven't worked in this industry for 15 years. Everybody is looking to top-notch design skills. Who looks for sloppy designers? The "thorough knowledge of print production" is about the only thing that tells me what this job actually entails. And, again, if you're a designer and don't know ink on paper, try greeting al Wal-Mart. This statement is like the McDonald's people asking if you want fries with that. Finally, must be able to work on multiple projects, well-organized, and meet tight deadlines, what design job doesn't require these things? No, seriously, where do these people work that these aren't the bare minimum qualifications?

And then there's the new links showing up for placement agencies. "Tired of applying to jobs? Let a professional do it for you." Unfortunately the majority of these employee pre-paid schemes. Just as a hint, most of the reputable services are either employer paid, or paid after you get your first paycheck.

Plus, with all the "discouraged workers" out there, I've always wondered just what they're doing? How do they live, pay bills, make mortgage/rent, etc? It just makes me wonder.

Linkee-poo is considering a political 12-step program

I keep trying to find other things to write about, I do. At least the first one isn't political

It seems bad design isn't just related to print materials. If you're designing for humans to interface with your application, you might want to read the f#$%ing human interface guidelines. Seriously. A lot of work went into those guidelines, and it's not like they charge extra for it. (sent by Dan)

What happens when you let the public drive your intelligence/police work. So while technically he was arrested for failing to cooperate fully with the flight attendants, it was over a frickin' bagel. Some of my conservative friends like to bewail the new FCC regulation of "Net Neutrality" and yet when we allowed pilots to carry firearms and made it illegal to not comply with a flight attendant, nary a peep. The guy may have even gotten obstreperous, but 1) no questioning of the source (an untrained source) and 2) it's a frickin' bagel. What, we didn't like he violated our good sense by not bringing a box of Krispy Kremes instead? (also sent by Dan) Or, you know, you could go all ballistic over some signs that encourage you to snitch on your neighbors.

Because, you know, those of us progressives just don't listen to the other side. Instead, we invite them to speak against the law we're signing into effect. You know, instead of making them stand in a "Free Speech Zone" three blocks away and behind a parking deck.

So much for actual openness. Then again, he is using the work differently than you or I do. He's talking about "amendments" as "openness" equating an "open process" to an "open bill." I wonder when he'll backtrack on the 3 day reading period where everything is open to the public. Oh, wait, he hasn't even put that in place yet (and in all the other hoopla, he hasn't mentioned it at all after winning the majority). Good thing we still have the Thomas tool from the Library of Congress. Like we did before. And, Eric says it better than I do, anyway.

But, hey, you know there's always those Freudian slips. I know. Big words, they're so confusing sometimes.

The other day I mentioned the #2 reason why I dropped my Republican affiliation. Here's an example of reason #1. The "social conservatives" are running the show now. I understand how many people who are gay are also conservatives. I mean, it's a good line and all. But someday they'll have to come to grips with the fact that the Republican Party left those values they hold dear a long time ago and instead went about courting the social conservative vote (who were people who also didn't get involved in politics before, sound familiar?) during the Reagan era and missed that the looneys took the ship over and no longer really care about conservative issues if there's a conflict with their social conservative views.

In case you were wondering

The crazy as batshit continues today. I'd make a pithy comment about how this at least gives the comedians a full employment clause with the new legislature and that may be a few more jobs, but I have to live in this world. And right now it's just making me sad.

Linkee-poo just shakes it's shaggy head and walks away

To make up for my sin of no political links yesterday, apparently everybody decided to go batshit crazy.

Hey, it's like the early 2000's all over again. Remember "50 plus 1 is a mandate"? Ah, good times. And here they are again.

"(on the HCR repeal), the GOP hasn't (but Democrats have) asked the CBO to score its health care repeal bill. Republicans know what that score will say: that repeal will blow up the deficit. But they don't buy the numbers, and, whenever those numbers conflict with their policy priorities, they'll ignore them."

To those that will argue, "It's just what the Dems did." Uh, no. HCR is to the right of what Trent Lott proposed as a counter to Clinton's Heath Care Reform. If the Dems "did it too", we'd all be wondering when the Public Option would kick in. Also, the Finance Reform has how many hundred Republican sponsored amendments in committee? Yeah. Just goes to the point that conservatives, when in power, are about that power. Liberals, when in power, are about governance. You may disagree with that direction (initially I was going to say, "helping real people with real problems," but that's a qualitative statement that's open to even more interpretation). But at least it is a governance. Where as the other side just calls anybody who disagrees with them either liars, incompetent, or "they just aren't looking at the whole picture."

And because I'm just tired of the trite "What the People Want" and "the Public Doesn't Like Congress/Democratic Rule" and it all being a one sided argument. Well karma comes knocking in a Rasmussen Poll. Read that again, a Rassmussen Poll. You know, the people who ask, "are you upset about anything the President has done" and lumps those into "those who think the President is doing a bad job." Also notice that those who think a Republican Congress would do better has gone down since the election. They have barely taken power (and in this poll, they hadn't yet), and already their numbers are "tanking" (that term used according to Hannity Statistics).

And I'm sure this will get the Bread and Circuses crowd. However, it's a dangerous precedent, and one based on intentional lying. And this new Congress is unfortunately filled to the brim with these kinds of stories (people appointed into positions of power who have no business being there, including some conservatives who are now chairmen of committees that have investigated them in the past, which would be like putting Charlie Rangle in charge of the Ethics Committee). However we now have a party in power that feels changing the name of the Energy and Labor Committee to Energy and Workforce Committee is a priority. So, how much did that cost to have new letterhead and business cards printed.

Oh, and the new Conservative House Leadership is going to cut the House Memeber's budgets by 5%. Big. Frickin'. Woop. Want to get close to what we in your local governments have been facing. Our income last year, while better than we expected (by about 1.5%), is still running at 50% of our budget three years ago. Cut your budgets by 30%, or you ain't whistling' dixie.

Add another voice to the growing cacophony on the disparity of wealth in our country. Yes, it's another progressive. In case you're wondering, this topic was #2 on why I became disillusioned with the conservative movement. A rising tide may lift all boats, but if you're chained to the bottom, you drown. And even if you're on one of the boats, or hanging on to the ladder, the water level doesn't change for you. Only those who have a vested interest in the tides gain and they buy bigger and bigger boats. You also can pull yourself up by your bootstraps if you don't even have boots to begin with.

And can I just say, that for all this talk of "we should be focused on jobs and doing something that can help people" and then focusing on repealing HCR which has zero chance of not being vetoed (without the votes for an override) if it even passes the Senate and some other priorities of the new Congress before they get to anything that will actually help (which they haven't said what that would be, but promised it) until late February? Yeah, thanks guys.

And lastly, we have Ronald Reagan on socialized medicine (aka Medicare). Say, has any of that fear mongering come true? And Medicare has been going for how long now? And, yes, doesn't that rhetoric sound awfully familiar? Why, yes, it does. Especially the line, "we'll tell our children stories about when men were free." Aren't we the free-est nation on Earth? Why, yes, I hear that too. From those same mouths that spouted the other things as well. Awfully slow damn socialist revolution if you ask me. They must be out getting coffee.

Linkee-poo is thinking Orthodox Xmas should be a holiday, too

Holly Black on why unicorns are better than zombies. Can't we all just get along? (Grokked from Camille Alexa)

A few tips on electronic submissions. A little basic, but it never hurts to review some of the basics. We all have our Homer Simpson moments from time to time. (Grokked from Cat Rambo)

Donald Maass speculates on the contradictory nature of great fiction. I disagree a little what where he starts, that readers both want pablum and to be moved by what they read. I would classify it as two different classes of readers, not so much the same person. Or not so much two different people, but people in different stages. Sometimes you want to try the thing on the menu you can't pronounce, but sometimes you want those comfort foods. However, what he gets to at the end is something vital. It can be summed up with what my sister-in-law tells the kids, "Drive fast, take chances." You can't always go the easy road, and the first step of that journey is to realize you can't be easy with yourself.

Maybe that's my problem. With all the turmoil of the past year, I've been in search of comfort food and that's why I haven't pushed myself as hard as I should have been doing. Don't mind me, just a little internal psychoanalyzing going on here. Nothing to see. Move along now.

Dendrophilous links to Kaplan free books. If I'm anything, I'm wild about free books. Especially when Kaplan has a lot of medical text that are free. (Note, when browsing with my ipod, some of the titles they list as free, aren't listen in the iBook Store as free).

Jim Hines discusses his writing income. Understand, Jim is approaching "wildly successful" land (and has been at this from the other side of the "Published Author" line since early this century). He has not one, but two popular series out in the wilderness. So, yeah, don't quit your day thing. What he's making is nothing to sneeze at, mind you. Just with thinking about self employment taxes around 50%(a good round number to do your forecasting to), he's also not rolling in the dough. If you're a starting genre writer thinking you'll make it to the be profiled on "Cribs of the Famous" from your mad writing skilz, look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair! (no slight on Jim, who is a genuinely nice guy, even through he writes jokes about nose picking)

Look, a linkee-poo where I didn't even mention politics. Oh, damn.

Linkee-poo is Mr. Cranky Pants This Morning

Because I'm reading instead of writing. Sigh. Will get this one day. Also one of the reasons I've thought of taking a hiatus.

If you're in the NY area, and are looking for some part time work, Tor.com is looking for a "Community Aggregator." Why this job requires coming into the office seems a little beyond me (except, I think one of those lines translates to, "and sell the social media thing internally"). And I'm not one to trash another's opportunity, but this strikes me vaguely of being a professional video game player. I understand the need, and the business model behind it (except for the "in their offices" part), but haven't we gotten to the point where this is just part and parcel of the business? (Disclosure, yes, the day thing is struggling with its own "social media" presence so I may have had more connection to this than most)

Another example of a separate legal system working in tandem with our civil law. In this case it's Jewish law and orthodox members (one of whom happens to be working within government) and how they perceive things compared to our secular law. It's a divorce case and the tension is between both how divorce is done within Jewish Law, and how it's done in our secular law. Also notice how the "shared custody" issue would be perfectly reasonable within the secular law, but is prohibitive when you consider Orthodox Jewish Law. I wonder why we don't hear those people who scream about sharia also scream about the beit din? (Grokked from Jay Lake, who had a different interest in it)

Well, here's hoping the Tea Party holds to their expectations. Why do I wish that? Because of the ramifications. 1) I expect most TP members to become disillusioned in the reality of actual governance and 2) many of those they "helped" elect will be gone in two years as the TP throws their weight behind someone else. Also, it seems the TP doesn't want to expand the debt ceiling. So when government shuts down and we have trouble paying our warfighters, keep federal office lights on, and in general, make a hash of the place, I expect the blowback will be something they're not prepared for (having told themselves the myth they are the silent majority and the rest of the country holds to their ideals). While it may sound nice to shut down the IRS, the department we all love to hate, (or pick your favorite department to hate; Education, CDC, FCC, Energy, National Weather Bureau and Hurricane Forecast Center, whatever) when our warfighters are stranded in foreign countries trying to buy their ammo on the black market (or worse, behave like the Russians in Georgia, which I severely hope not, but it's hard to tell what someone will do when faced with starvation and working for no pay), National Parks and Monuments close, and your refund, social security, medicare, unemployment checks fail to arrive, or a hurricane slams into Florida with little warning, you think the TP were loud last year? You might want to invest in ear plugs for that avalanche. Okay, well, I'll use the euphemism of "social unrest."

And thinking of such, that is holding the new congress to their higher standard, I guess it doesn't include being consistent when it comes to rhetoric. Yes, all those "tricks and underhanded tactics" are back in vogue and perfectly acceptable when it's conservatives doing them. Or, you know, you could just exempt your priorities from being held to the same rules regarding the deficit. But then, they can also grand stand so they look good in their newsletters back home all the while saying, "Well, I tried, but you know Washington." Proud of your accomplishments yet? I guess when they toss out all those freshman conservatives, they can always get jobs on K Street. You know, like they've done since '94.

A New Year Arrived, a New Year to Live

Another long weekend shot and not much in the way of progress. I've accomplished exactly one tenth of what I had hoped to accomplish over the holidays. But then, there were external circumstances that took more time than expected and then the day job, trying to be helpful, filled up a few days that I expected to have vacation, and entertaining house guests also soaked up a good deal of time. So, less than a third of the time I expected actually was available.

And now we're into the long slog form New Year's to Memorial Day. Class begins in two weeks, one week will be taken up by travel, which I have no idea what will entail in the way of time sink. A weekend at the end of the month is going to be gone.

Several friends have taken hiatus from the internets when they've had to focus on their writing. I would be lying if I hadn't considered the same strategy. It wouldn't be soon, I have plenty of other things to distract me for the foreseeable future that any hiatus would not be profitable. However I expect that sometime this year it will happen.

Every year I've made some sort of prognostication on where I would focus my time, either writing or freelance. And each year, it's always turned out to be 100% the opposite. This year I think I'll refrain. I need to focus on both this year. Things are going well enough right now, but I expect some rockier road ahead.

Slow Motion Sunday

It seems the heat wave is over now that most of the snow has melted. The ice damn on the back of the roof is now gone, thank Brid. Unfortunately there's a remnant on the front. Fortunately it is much less than before (we had kept the house warm for a bit, hopefully we can go back to 68 now). It's supposed to snow again, soon.

I've spent the day trying to be offline and working like a good boy, but that hasn't happened. Maybe I could use a few more days off to get nice and bored. That'll get me working on this novel, by Jove. Well, I have been working on it a little. But I find the littlest thing now stops me in my tracks. Then I need to work through that. Suddenly something shiny goes floating past.

And now "Forbidden Planet" is on TCM. Leslie Nielsen looks so young. He's dead now, you know.

A Year of Magical Thinking

So, in a few days we begin the new political year. I'll be involved, again, with council. It'll be my last year (unless something VERY strange happens) as my tenure runs out 12-31-2011. With our own local budget, we have been lucky. Last year tax revenues came in higher than expected (not by much, but at least more than we originally budgeted). While it was a rough year, and we are severely ignoring some long term issues, we ended in the black. I'm saying this so you know I have some experience with budget austerity.

Then we look at the national issues. In a few days a new congress will be sworn in. A congress that has already shaped the national dialog. And here's where the magic comes in.

There was a lot of breast beating about the deficit and debt the past two years. And activists on the "ZOMG We're Going to Hell in a Handbasket" side made a change in the political landscape and helped usher in a new Freshman Congressional Class that leans heavily toward the Conservative end of the political spectrum. So you'd think things would get better, wouldn't you.

But what's the major victory so far? Extension of all the budget busting Bush-era tax cuts. You know, the ones that took us from budget surpluses (that were being used to reduce the long term debt) to record deficits. And now those same conservatives are running the line about how tax cuts don't have to be offset in the budget. As Paul Krugman opined, "Then why not just cut all taxes?"

Now, somehow, with lowered revenues, we're going to budget cut our way to fiscal prosperity but without having defense or medicare on the table. Yeah, almost forgot, we're also going to roll-back (or at least defund) the Obama HCR Act. You know, the legislation that will actually reduce our deficit in the long run. It's what's known as magical thinking. There's this mindset that there's a whole army of federal employees that can be cut from the rolls, we can outsource some functions, and other nonsense that has no basis in reality.

Obama announced a pay freeze for all federal employees in the coming year. It will save use $35 billion for the next ten years. With annual budgets over $1.3 Trillion, that's almost a magnitude of a rounding error. Also, we now have over a decade and a half's experience with outsourcing government functions (Medicare Advantage, IRS Debt Collections and Processing, Federal Student Loans, etc.). None (absolutely none) of those have saved us money. In fact, they have cost us on average 14% more than if we had kept those functions within the Federal Government (including all the new employees, buildings, and capital expenditures that would entail). In fact, the Medicare Advantage overpayments were enshrined in law by those same conservatives who talk about how much we can save by outsourcing (and it's where the majority of medicare savings will come from in the new HCR Act, by changing those mandated overpayments).

Let's not even start on the insanity of the new budgeting rules. You know, how tax cuts don't have to be offset, but any other spending increases need to be offset by cuts elsewhere (not by revenue increases - ie. tax increases or in reality, closing tax loops holes). But then, this is also by the party that likes to say we have the highest taxes in the world when even if you look at our nominal rates, we're in the lowest 15 (depending on your income) and for effective rates (after all the deductions, etc, and including all the taxes other countries collect, like VAT) we're the third lowest in the world. Because it's not about reality, it's about feeding on the fears and disgruntled (such as the new tax service who's commercial talks about how the IRS will take advantage of you for not knowing the rules, which they're forbidden by law for doing - okay, well, it's one of those complaints against the private contractor the IRS was forced to use, by the conservatives again, and has lead to record findings against the IRS because of the contractor's incompetence, which leads to their 22% higher cost of operation).

So all the ideas they're floating have been shown, with historical data, to do absolutely nothing to reduce the deficit. Including the canards of "reduce tax levels increase tax revenues" and "giving tax breaks to the top 1% increases employment" have been shown to be false.

But, I'm sure, if we just try one more time and really believe, this time it will work. We just need to clap harder and faster to bring Tinkerbell back.

And have I mentioned I've already heard the argument of how the new congress won't be able to do anything, so no changes will get done, and how that's a good thing. Coming from the same people who last year complained about how nothing was being done to increase employment and the government's/Obama's main focus should be that. (However, all that's a smoke screen and is basically saying "We don't want the current administration to roll back any of our Social Conservative advances")

So, welcome to the year of magical thinking. Thank Brid that the economy has actually been on the mend this past year (again, disproving the whole argument about how the Stimulus and Bailouts did nothing). Hopefully the new Congress won't screw it up too much.