Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Wonderful Christmas Story
I would encourage all of you to read this. The high school in this story, Grapevine, is just a few minutes to the northwest of one of my areas in Texas, Frisco. Anyway, its a great story, reminds me of the movie Gridiron Gang, which I liked and recommend.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Wolverine. Thats right, he is awesome.
X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE HD
So, as some of you may know, Wolverine is the coolest superhero ever. So he isn't the most powerful, thats fine. (the most powerful is clearly Professor X, Jimmy).
Anyway, this movie looks great. I am glad that they decided to ignore the fact that they ruined Sabertooth in the original X-Men movie (one of many, many complaints I have with that movie). I am also glad that Marvel got to write this story, instead of a bunch of idiots who have Hollywood stuffed shirts telling them what they can and can't do. Marvel has its own movie studios now, and we get such winners as Iron Man and The Hulk this last year. Soon to have Captain America, Thor, and The Avengers. Its a great time to be a geek.
Anyway, this movie looks great, I'm excited for it.
And, speaking of movies, Alisa and I just watched The Greatest Game Ever Played. It was quite good. I was impressed. Shia Lebouf stars, and it has a pretty good supporting cast. I especially liked the guy who played Harry Vardon (british golfer), he also played Thomas Jefferson in the recent John Adams miniseries, and the british guy who discovers the soccer player in Goal!
Good movie, I recommend it The Greatest Game Ever Played ***
So, as some of you may know, Wolverine is the coolest superhero ever. So he isn't the most powerful, thats fine. (the most powerful is clearly Professor X, Jimmy).
Anyway, this movie looks great. I am glad that they decided to ignore the fact that they ruined Sabertooth in the original X-Men movie (one of many, many complaints I have with that movie). I am also glad that Marvel got to write this story, instead of a bunch of idiots who have Hollywood stuffed shirts telling them what they can and can't do. Marvel has its own movie studios now, and we get such winners as Iron Man and The Hulk this last year. Soon to have Captain America, Thor, and The Avengers. Its a great time to be a geek.
Anyway, this movie looks great, I'm excited for it.
And, speaking of movies, Alisa and I just watched The Greatest Game Ever Played. It was quite good. I was impressed. Shia Lebouf stars, and it has a pretty good supporting cast. I especially liked the guy who played Harry Vardon (british golfer), he also played Thomas Jefferson in the recent John Adams miniseries, and the british guy who discovers the soccer player in Goal!
Good movie, I recommend it The Greatest Game Ever Played ***
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Hold the freaking phone.
So, wait a minute, I just read that the State of Utah has a rainy day fund in excess of 400 million dollars. The governor is planning on slashing the budget, in these bad times by 300+/- million dollars resulting in the loss of at least hundreds, if not thousands of jobs. I'm sorry, does the government have a different definition of rainy day than I currently have?
I would think, the last thing anyone would want in a time of economic turmoil, and lost tax revenue, would be less people working and paying taxes into the system. While I am in no way saying that budget cuts aren't appropriate, why are there people who are saying the rainy day fund should be left alone....are we envisioning worse than this????
If there is a way to trim the fat, and keep as many people employed as possible by both cutting budgets and dipping into the rainy day fund, isn't that the smartest move?
I think back to the Great Depression, we got out of that by employing as many people as possible. Cutting jobs, and leaving a giant pile of money alone for 'real troubled times' seems to be the stupidest possible idea right now in the state. And for full disclosure, yes I am employed by the state, no I don't think my job is in too much trouble, but yes I know several people in my office who are legitimately worried for their jobs. Putting them out, when there is no market currently for them to get new jobs, doesn't help us out of the current budget/economic crises. I know that sometimes there just aren't any options, lay offs have to happen, its sad, its regrettable, but it is absolutely necessary. But, if the state has money, that has specifically been squirreled away for a time when there are big problems that some extra cash could be used to help, isn't now exactly one of those times? Does anyone disagree?
I would think, the last thing anyone would want in a time of economic turmoil, and lost tax revenue, would be less people working and paying taxes into the system. While I am in no way saying that budget cuts aren't appropriate, why are there people who are saying the rainy day fund should be left alone....are we envisioning worse than this????
If there is a way to trim the fat, and keep as many people employed as possible by both cutting budgets and dipping into the rainy day fund, isn't that the smartest move?
I think back to the Great Depression, we got out of that by employing as many people as possible. Cutting jobs, and leaving a giant pile of money alone for 'real troubled times' seems to be the stupidest possible idea right now in the state. And for full disclosure, yes I am employed by the state, no I don't think my job is in too much trouble, but yes I know several people in my office who are legitimately worried for their jobs. Putting them out, when there is no market currently for them to get new jobs, doesn't help us out of the current budget/economic crises. I know that sometimes there just aren't any options, lay offs have to happen, its sad, its regrettable, but it is absolutely necessary. But, if the state has money, that has specifically been squirreled away for a time when there are big problems that some extra cash could be used to help, isn't now exactly one of those times? Does anyone disagree?
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Why the U is a crappy school for Anthropology.
I just saw this article on KSL (I also heard it on the news this morning, then read it, and then read the article about the 'study').
I already had a pretty low opinion about the U's Anthro department. In the nature of full disclosure, let me just say, I graduated from Weber with a degree in Anthropology, and feel their department was stellar, because the professors there were more interested in teaching, and being available to the students then they were in their own aggrandizement.
But, besides the problems I have with the 'anthropology' taught at the U (Alisa took several classes in it after we were married, I was less than impressed), this so called study is some of the worst anthropological 'research' I have ever seen.
It seems clear that the woman came up with her thesis, that anthropologically hourglass figures for women are worse, and then went about 'proving' it with some very sloppy pseudo-science, conjecture, and leaps of logic. Apparently, not being curvy, or hippy, makes you better able to deal with stress, and means you are stronger, and not submissive to men. Okay......
Generalizations aside, this just puts a stain on Anthropology, which many people already think is assumptions based on unproveable theories. I love anthropology and find it bar none the most fascinating of any intellectual area, but this stuff was just crap.
I already had a pretty low opinion about the U's Anthro department. In the nature of full disclosure, let me just say, I graduated from Weber with a degree in Anthropology, and feel their department was stellar, because the professors there were more interested in teaching, and being available to the students then they were in their own aggrandizement.
But, besides the problems I have with the 'anthropology' taught at the U (Alisa took several classes in it after we were married, I was less than impressed), this so called study is some of the worst anthropological 'research' I have ever seen.
It seems clear that the woman came up with her thesis, that anthropologically hourglass figures for women are worse, and then went about 'proving' it with some very sloppy pseudo-science, conjecture, and leaps of logic. Apparently, not being curvy, or hippy, makes you better able to deal with stress, and means you are stronger, and not submissive to men. Okay......
Generalizations aside, this just puts a stain on Anthropology, which many people already think is assumptions based on unproveable theories. I love anthropology and find it bar none the most fascinating of any intellectual area, but this stuff was just crap.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Why, Utah Legislature, why?
Riding in to work today, I heard a new story about our esteemed Chris Buttars. If you don't know who that is, it is too long to go into, suffice it to say he is the biggest joke/embarrassment of a state representative possible. I do not understand how he keeps winning his re-election bids, but that old man will not die (figuratively....or literally, either would solve the problem).
His most recent storm of genius comes in the form of a proposed non-binding resolution telling businesses to use the term Merry Christmas instead of Happy Holidays. Now, ignoring for the moment the fact that there may well be many business owners that are not Christian and may celebrate various holidays religious or otherwise during this time, a non-binding resolution is just that......non-binding. It has no authority. Its basically an issued opinion, not legislation.
Non-binding resolutions are the worst form of pandering. They waste time, they accomplish nothing, and they usually are about subjects that are either unconstitutional, or unpopular, hence the fact that legislators will not actually pass legislation on them.
This kind of stupidity goes on at all levels, things like resolutions honoring the World Series Champ and the like. They are annoying. But this one is not as innocuous as simply a pat on the back for some sports team that did well this year. Let's return to the previously ignored points. What about a business owner who doesn't wish to alienate customers who don't celebrate christmas? Now, I for one don't see why anyone would be alienated or offended to go to a store that said Christams in big bold letters, frankly I think its stupid to be offended, but shouldn't that be the business owners call? And why should the legislature even offer an opinion on the matter?
Moving on from that, what about those business owners who themselves celebrate something else, and so in an effort to be inclusive to their own culture they choose to use the all inclusive term holidays? Why is that wrong. I don't see how that is an assault on Christmas, and vicariously on Christ. That I guess is the bottom line of my annoyance. I frankly don't think that the Savior cares one way or another about the survival of the tree filled, present giving, Jingle Bells singing holiday. A Jehovah's Witness, or Hindu that spent his year caring for the sick and needy, and giving of his substance would have more of Christ in his life than anyone who puts up a tree, slaps some lights on his house, and lavishes his family with expensive christmas presents while belting out carols about the fat man in a red suit coming to town.
Please don't misunderstand me. I love Christmas. I get super geeked out about Christmas. For my whole life it has been a time when as much family as possible came to town, we got to spend time with them doing fun things and just being together. I like the spirit of Christmas, I like the lights, I like the carols, I like the tree, yes...I even like the presents. And I don't think there is anything wrong with anyone who does love Christmas. However, there is a perceived 'War on Christmas' constantly talked about by the right wing media talking heads, people like Glenn Beck *shudder*, and Sean Hannity.
There are people who hate all things religious, and want to wipe it from the face of the earth, however, no one will ever stop Temple Square from being lit up, or any person from decking their halls with boughs of holly.
Trying to force (albeit non-bindingly) businesses to specifically wish people Merry Christmas, is just as stupid as trying to force a business to not have anything Christmas/religious during this season. Why can't someone beat him in an election.
His most recent storm of genius comes in the form of a proposed non-binding resolution telling businesses to use the term Merry Christmas instead of Happy Holidays. Now, ignoring for the moment the fact that there may well be many business owners that are not Christian and may celebrate various holidays religious or otherwise during this time, a non-binding resolution is just that......non-binding. It has no authority. Its basically an issued opinion, not legislation.
Non-binding resolutions are the worst form of pandering. They waste time, they accomplish nothing, and they usually are about subjects that are either unconstitutional, or unpopular, hence the fact that legislators will not actually pass legislation on them.
This kind of stupidity goes on at all levels, things like resolutions honoring the World Series Champ and the like. They are annoying. But this one is not as innocuous as simply a pat on the back for some sports team that did well this year. Let's return to the previously ignored points. What about a business owner who doesn't wish to alienate customers who don't celebrate christmas? Now, I for one don't see why anyone would be alienated or offended to go to a store that said Christams in big bold letters, frankly I think its stupid to be offended, but shouldn't that be the business owners call? And why should the legislature even offer an opinion on the matter?
Moving on from that, what about those business owners who themselves celebrate something else, and so in an effort to be inclusive to their own culture they choose to use the all inclusive term holidays? Why is that wrong. I don't see how that is an assault on Christmas, and vicariously on Christ. That I guess is the bottom line of my annoyance. I frankly don't think that the Savior cares one way or another about the survival of the tree filled, present giving, Jingle Bells singing holiday. A Jehovah's Witness, or Hindu that spent his year caring for the sick and needy, and giving of his substance would have more of Christ in his life than anyone who puts up a tree, slaps some lights on his house, and lavishes his family with expensive christmas presents while belting out carols about the fat man in a red suit coming to town.
Please don't misunderstand me. I love Christmas. I get super geeked out about Christmas. For my whole life it has been a time when as much family as possible came to town, we got to spend time with them doing fun things and just being together. I like the spirit of Christmas, I like the lights, I like the carols, I like the tree, yes...I even like the presents. And I don't think there is anything wrong with anyone who does love Christmas. However, there is a perceived 'War on Christmas' constantly talked about by the right wing media talking heads, people like Glenn Beck *shudder*, and Sean Hannity.
There are people who hate all things religious, and want to wipe it from the face of the earth, however, no one will ever stop Temple Square from being lit up, or any person from decking their halls with boughs of holly.
Trying to force (albeit non-bindingly) businesses to specifically wish people Merry Christmas, is just as stupid as trying to force a business to not have anything Christmas/religious during this season. Why can't someone beat him in an election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)