Friday, May 30, 2008

2nd Crane Collapses

I would like to preface this with "i am fine."

Second Crane Collapses in NYC @ 91st and 1st ave.

the noise of it woke me up at 8:08 am this morning, as the crane collapsed and hit the building next to mine.

1 casualty has been recorded as of now. Last time this happened (2 1/2 months ago) the head of the inspection agency resigned. who's going to get sacked this time?!

freaking cranes...

~M

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

I seem to be writing a lot about gay marriage...

but i'm not going to lie. I want a husband and kids someday. Straight men and straight women the world over refuse this sort of relationship, but i am kinda a romantic. As a side note, i find it funny that its usually the pursuit of a spouse and kids that leads one to conservative values, while that exact same search for me (for future years way off and all...) leads to liberal values.

anyways, not the point

two great articles/posts. This from the NYT about NY recognizing marriages made in other states, like Vermont or Cali.

oh, and speaking of Cali...turns out the people aren't so opposed to same-sex marriage as people might think. (yes, the post is from Andrew Sullivan. Again. I heart him, because he is smart) Yeah the innitiative is going to be on the ballot in November. But i don't think it will (and i pray to the God i don't believe in that it doesn't) pass. And, facinating and apropo to my other recent posts, acceptance of same-sex marriage is greater (read 2:1 in favor) in the younger generation, favored by more than 10 points in the middle generation, and opposed by high teen/low 20's in the 65+ crowd.

and people disagree with me when i say we are a more open and accepting generation....go GenY!!

the "liberal media" myth

This should be required reading for anyone who gets into arguments (as i do now online and used to in person with my roommate from freshmen and sophomore year) about the existence of a "Liberal" Media.

Background: Scott McClellan, the White House Press Secretary for many years, just published a harshly critical book about the administration's deliberate distortions of the truth in the run up to the Iraq War. Reviews for it abound online...go and find one.

Sunday, May 25, 2008

RIP Dick Martin 1922-2008

I would say most people my age don't know who he is. And that's a shame. There was sketch comedy before SNL, and he and his comic partner, Dan Rowan, created "Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In." And omg was it funny. FYI its where Goldie Hawn got her start. The show also can boast being the first television entertainment program to have a sitting president appear on it (Nixon). Yeah, it was that popular.

It also boasted guest spots by the Beetles, the Monkees...

Here is a sampler. Thats Martin on the right. If you're bored, go around YouTube and watch some clips.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Another thing about a Marriage Amendment

I mentioned before "separate but equal," and how in my opinion that's exactly what civil unions are. There's something else i wanted to mention.

the Religious-Right in CA is attempting to gather signatures to put a measure on the November ballot. The measure would be to amend the CA state constitution to forbid gay marriage. Bush, Rove, et. al. tried to do similar things last election cycle, and succeeded in several states, though not the US Constitution itself.

Discrimination exists in our founding documents, that can't be denied. But most of it has been fixed.

Whats that you say? Discrimination in the Constitution? noooo!

Article 1, Section 2:
"...according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons." (bolding mine)

This, of course, was changed by the 14th amendment, but that took the civil war to happen. It was ratified in 1868.

I'm not sure exactly what my point is there, but i know i have one. Discrimination has no place in the laws of any society, and it certainly shouldn't be enshrined in any Constitution, be they Sate or Federal.

on another note

Gen X vs. Millenials (Gen Y).

Omg, i laughed so hard at this article i got looks in the office.

...nice wand =P

~M

Why i love my home state

They allow gay marriage.

Looks like i'l be moving back there eventually =P

A few things about the decision that i've run across. 60 years ago, the courts in CA were the first to strike down something called miscegenation laws, which outlawed interracial marriage. They've now taken similar steps with gay marriage.

This isn't" activist judges," as the Rove-right would call them. The CA legislature - which is, um, you know, democratically elected - has twice passed laws permitting gay marriage. Both times, the Governator vetoed them, citing the voter approved ban that the courts now overturned. He is supportive of gay rights, and has said that unless another such ban is passed (and the religious right is trying to put it on the ballot for November, attempting to put it in the CA state constitution) he will be happy to sign any such pro-gay marriage legislature in the future.

Somewhere out it the blogosphere, someone made a very good point. Sexual orientation is actually more inherent, immutable, and self-defining than gender, or perhaps even race. Its not a choice, its something that is.

Lastly, again from somewhere in the Internets, was a discussion about civil unions vs. marriage. I've always detested civil unions. It wreaks of "separate but equal." But lets be honest here, gay marriage isn't about religion, or marriage, or gay, or whatever. Its about love, and two people wanting to proclaim their love to each other and the world, and become "family." It is the declaration of the discovery of a soul mate, one of the most inscrutable and important moments in one's life.

And it should be available to all. And there is no way to deny it without implicitly saying that homosexual love is something less than heterosexual love.

I am so very happy to be from California.

~M

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Apropos to Journalism

And also to my post yesterday about the study about The Daily Show/Colbert Report.

One of my main arguments for saying that they are journalists is the interview portion of the show. Stewart asked prepared, well-informed, and intelligent questions, with clear logic and a desire for an actual answer behind it.

Last night, he had on Douglas Feith, who was Undersecretary of Defense under Donald Rumsfeld. Feith has released a book about the administration 's internal and external discussions in the run-up to the Iraq war. Believe me, i watch the news (because i'm a bit of a junkie), and you don't usually see interviews like this. In fact, you rarely if ever do.

Watch HERE. And learn.

~M

I am Millennial, hear me....well, roar over the internet!

For those who know me, you know i'm not really a person who has an overabundance of pride in things. School spirit? "eh." College spirit? "we have sports teams? God i hate my school..." patriotic spirit? "have you seen the title of this blog?"

About the main things i take pride in are my friends and my creative stuff (shows, stories, etc).

But i've been having an awful lot of Generational Pride. Or what you can call Millennial Pride, because i realize just how cool our generation is.

Guess what? others are noticing. Thanks Obama.

I can't tell you the number of articles i've been reading about the generational gap that has appeared in national politics (consensus reading something like this: below 45? Obama. Above 65? Clinton/McCain.) . As a result of this sudden noticing of the Gen-Y'ers, more and more attention is being spent analyzing who we are.

For those who don't know, Gen-Y (aka Millenials) is roughly those born 1984/5 onward to the late 90's. We're inventive, and the first tech/internet savvy generation. Oh, and did i mention we lean to the Left (come on, i had to throw politics into this). We grew up under Clinton I, but came of age in the catastrophe that is Bush II.

Don't believe me? looky-looky (i got Hooky!)

If you want a good article, here's Bob Herbert from today's NYT Op-Ed section.

money quote:

--
“Millennials mostly reject the conservative viewpoint that government is the problem, and that free markets always produce the best results for society. Indeed, Millennials’ views are more progressive than those of other age groups today, and are more progressive than previous generations when they were younger.”
--

Anyways, just thought i'd say that we rock. Hooray for inclusive, progressiveness. Take that, Boomers!

Monday, May 12, 2008

2 great articles

I highly suggest reading these two. If you only have time for one, do the second.

First up, a short article about The Daily Show/The Colbert Report, and dissecting the news they disseminate...and coming to the conclusion that despite what the shows' hosts profess, they actually are journalists.

read HERE.

The second is a piece by NPR about two families, each with a boy who at an early age (read: 1 year old) began to identify as trans-gender (a boy believing he is a girl trapped in the wrong body, and vice-versa). The families take radically different approaches to the thearapy. Further proof that nature is not, by default, hetero-normative. (That last one was a shout out to the one at Vassar...)

vie Andrew Sullivan, read HERE.

enjoy!

~M

and we're live in...

Hey, i know its been forever. I almost forgot about this, until yesterday when my brother asked if i was going to be writing in it ever again. So I thought i might do just that =)

As i've said, this is a place for my thoughts, and my thoughts don't include my day-to-day life. Yes, i realize that contradiction. But i've fully embraced the inherent contradictions in living, so i'm ok with it. So in keeping with contradictions, lets describe myself a bit further.

Socailly: liberal (if you know me, you know this to be true), economically: a realist (you can't have an econ major and not want to laugh at policy wonks and all they get wrong, not to mention discussions about NAFTA or other free-trade agreements), with a peace-nik/diplomacy based foreign policy view. But that certainly doesn't mean i haven't learned the lessons of the "real world," because i throw Machiavelli-cynicism into my world view. what does that mean, exactly?

It means we should consider invading Burma.

(And its Burma, not Myanmar. The Junta renamed the country because they felt like it, and recognizing the name change means recognizing the power of the Junta.)

This is not to say that we're going to, or even if we are litterally able to muster enough force to do so. I'm just saying that its something that should be done.

The war in Iraq is just stupid, because we should be focusing on Afganistan. And i would usually say "but that aside," but i can't at this moment. Because we never should have invaded Iraq. Ever. Never ever ever never ever. Stupid to the Nth degree.

But Burma is inhearently different. Its own government is seizing the aid sent by the US, the UN, and other organizations and countries, and isn't giving it out to its own cyclone-raveged people. They refuse to grant foreign works visas so they can help the sick, wounded, or dead. Burma used to be one of the worlds largest exporters of rice, and now it can barely feed itself. This is the same country that beat and imprisioned the Monks last year who were protesting governemnt mandated food prices and gathering money for the poor.

Not even China, everyone's older brother in that part of the world, can persuade the Burmese junta to allow foreign aid. Without aid to help clean the destruction, the possibility of a devastating disease ripping thru that part of the world becomes very real.

But why invade? I mean, isn't like invading Iraq? Saddam was certainly repressive to his own people. First off, teh basic premise is different. The cliche of "welcomed as liberators" wasn't true in Iraq, but it has definate possibility in Burma...only it wouldn't be "liberators" it would be "thank god, Food!" When a governemtn harms its own people, in this new, world community, there is an obligation for us to help our fellow man.

But it will never happen, specifically because Iraq happened. The era of US interventionalism is on its death-bed, and it has G.W. Bush and all the neocons to thank for it. Look, US Interventionalism can be a good thing. But it can also be disasterous. Espeically because the same problems from Iraq would resurface, except in the place of Iran you'd have China. How do you make a governemnt in Asia without China having a major say? You can't.

But forceful intervention, to save lord knows how many lives, is something to be considered.

~M