hrugh

so i had so many things i learned that i wanted to talk about. and i just remembered one. so i'll write it before i forget again. it's time.

I was listening to NPR the other day. this in itself should require explanation, since i've sworn off news until the election. so i failed. fine.. hold it against me. and as much as i hate to impugn the integrity of NPR Nina Totenberg was heard to remark: "The United States has the *OLDEST* constitution in the world..."

Now.. how many of you believe this statement? I need to know.

The popular opinion in this country, as researched by malisonian, is that this is true. but sometimes in these parts it's easy to overlook the parts of the world you know nothing about when making statements. statements like this: "every time a nation loses the sanctity of marriage, they fall into decay" as i heard the other day on the radio. that's just nonsense. there might be evidence to back it up, but then there are easily as many that would contradict. so correlation does not imply causation, and you can't make retarded statements like that. and if anyone i know makes one, i'll call them out on it (which is not generally my style, but sometimes you got to get out the big guns) ..

Back to NPR. .. and the story. This claim, about our constitution is FALSE! did you know? How about this little fact: the tiny nation of San Marino (locked within Italy) ratified their constitution on october 8, 1600! now, i won't assume you all know when ours was completed in 1787 (ratified later). .. so that's 187 years later, for those of you who read faster than you do math. and when you're talking about something that's 404 years old compared to something that is 217.. i'm sorry but this is a big difference. and quite an oversight. so get off your high horse, those of you who think we invented constitutions.. we didn't.
Sweden has a system of laws taken together as a constitution, the first of which was enacted in 1719.. that's pretty old..

so anyway. my point was... i don't know. everyone was mislead. MISLEAD.... so everyone should learn history and world georgraphy/history. because everyone talks like they know so much, and then people believe them. and the irony is not lost on me... like sideshow bob when he's appearing on tv in order to decry it. enough. got to work tomorrow. good night.

Googahs

googahs is like boobahs. we went to the store the other day and saw some baby crap, like toys and crap. it was funny because they had boobahs.. which we are disturbed by. i mean honestly. i didn't mind the teletubbies. really, i think they were probably a valid argument for having so little linguistic content in the show, mainly because the target audience is not primarily concerned with linguistic growth but physical coordination growth (i suppose an argument can be made that although a very young child may not speak their linguistic growth is extreme because they are gaining comprehension of the sounds and words of their environment even without speaking themselves).. . . where was i going with this. oh yeah. boobahs. damn that show sucks. the characters just make retarded fart noises.. and don't get me wrong, i love fart noises. no question... but on that show, they're just not funny. and what's more, they took the creepiest parts of those aweful kewpie dolls and made them alarming colors and then rigged up some seizure-inducing lights on their eyebrows.. and voila.. you've got yourself a children's show bordering on obscene. i won't say that it should be stopped, because i don't want to sound like falwell, but my reason for disliking this show isnt' any homosexual innuendo, or any of the other three issues falwell is personally obsessed with, it's just not fun to watch when you're brain is on vacation... let's say you're ill, or grossly sleep-deprived, or one of the myriad other reasons one thinks like a child. this show just doesn't cut it. what a pile. a pile.

hooplah

i went to a baby shower today, for my evil twin sister. we were born the same day. she's 7 or 8 hours older than me. we met on the first day of diagnosis class at bastyr, i was doing a practice intake on her and she said her birthday, and i was like: "what the hell, that's my birthday!" then we found alot of other strange similarities between us.. and our families. it was neat. anyway.. so now she's way pregnant. i haven't seen her since we graduated, which was nearly a year ago now. it was great though. and there are 4 girls from my class who are pregnant now. as alison would say--What the butt?? it was really really cool to see them all, and i want to see them all more.. but anyway. no one makes food like those folks i went to school with. no one.. .

i think it's a little bitter-sweet though, seeing them.. because it really pulls to the front of my mind that i'm *not* doing the thing i am educated to do. the thing that makes me happy to do. so if anyone who reads this has any ideas of a good space to rent here in town in an alternative health environment??? i'm interested in hearing it.

brain tax

huh. so for the past couple/few days on the way home from work, Cat and i have had long discussions about whatever topic. it's both stimulating and draining at the same time... my brain is done by the timewe get home, as is my voice. regardless. it's making it tough to come up with something to write about at night. despite spending the afternoon in remarkable discussion. i mean, lots of things are brought up that i could recall and put on the blog. however, i don't. i don't feel like it. so this is what you get. a crappy excuse. and i don't recall my last post causing any significant uproar.. which was what i was hoping for. if someone gives me a challenge i will produce something worth reading. but until then.. i'm as boring as lenny kravitz. and in case someone out there thinks he's not boring.. i envy your very slow pace of life.. i'll leave it at that. i've made clear my position on the important election issues of lenny kravitz, and my evening discussions. maybe tomorrow you'll hear the talking points on hardball. if i were more important you might hear them tonight.

fallacy... hoohaa

Shannon the brilliant posted a link to this site. here is a sample of what i found there:

"False Compromise:
if one does not understand a debate, it must be "fair" to split the difference, and agree on a compromise between the opinions. (But one side is very possibly wrong, and in any case one could simply suspend judgment.) Journalists often invoke this fallacy in the name of "balanced" coverage.
Television reporters like balanced coverage so much that they may give half of their report to a view held by a small minority of the people in question. There are many possible reasons for this, some of them good. However, viewers need to be aware of this tendency. "



i put that in quotes so you know they're not my words.. of course they're not, some things are capitalized.
so yeah. anyway. isn't this great?? of course it is. this perhaps explains what i find so dumb about the news, and most people lately. "i don't know what they were talking about, so i'll say they both made good points" even though that is clearly false. so that should be confrontational enough to have something to say about it.

what else fnord did i want to say.. there were some really really useful things in there. now i should say this: i do not believe that anything is absolute (with the oxymoronic exception of my claim), that is to say i think it's possible for the reality of something to be subject to interpretation and that the interpretation is as good as we can get anyway. so two people can contradict and be right. well, right has connotation.. but that's the point here, right is subjective. correct perhaps means something slightly different.. right, when compared to wrong, is a matter of personal definition. they may be similar to many people, but they are not identical, no more than two people are. i think taht's all i wanted to say fnord.

long day

today was very long. and i want to go to bed now. but there were so many things i wanted to write about. one of them is that i was enjoying listening to the canadian radio station that had some weird business, well, not weird as much as it's all in FRENCH. now you all know how i dig languages.. i love to just listen to them . as long as i can bear it. i used to be so exhausted at the end of the brain-consuming days of chinese at western. it was great.. i couldn't even talk to people after class for an hour or so.. anyway. i much prefer the canadian news *in french* to the american news in english. i feel just as informed but way less stressed out. anyway. where will i move to. oh. right.. the other things i wanted to talk about tonight. i don't know. anyway. i have to go to sleep. yes i do. so to all of you who read this.. and especially screwtape, well, not especially, anyway. i'm goin gto sleep.

i wanted to write at least something

but i really don't think i have much of anything to say.

today we had teh biggest potluck ever. it was so cool, but i got stuffed to the brim with pig-squeezins (barb's brilliant word)... anyhow. i got teh food stagnation.. and now i feel a little overstuffed. but i guess it could be way worse.. i mean, i used to always eat so fast that i would feel this way every time. who knows. somebody should track 'who' down and get some answers.

grrr

ok.. i have a habit of letting a general, non-specifically political rant get kind of political. i think it is in part due to the stress of this impending change. being an election and all. so fnord anyway, i don't know what would be the most of a relief: the election being over, or the election being over with the outcome i'm hoping for. i think it's fair to say everyone who knows me knows exactly what i want in this election. i'm fairly outspoken about my political convictions. but i'm also pretty sure that everyone is aware of how susceptible i am to rampant worry. so today i felt like whatever happens, i'll be very glad when it's over.

that said. i really don't want a certain president to win this election. i think he's genuinely unsound with his economic policy, and refuses to take the better advice of his associates. similarly his level of understanding of how to pay for his strange crowd-pleasing promises... those things really matter to me. his diplomacy is a problem. i'm waiting for him to say something i can't disagree with. but i've already got an adversarial relationship with him.. but still. .. i'm fairly convinced either he's lying through his smiling teeth or he's actually deluded into believing it's all true.. which would be a gross oversight, the kind for which you do not get a second term. and i'll make sure my own vote counts for something, but i know that in my state it's just another number on the pile.. i hope that bill in colorado passes. i hope it leads to the demise of the electoral college system. because it's f*&#ing retarded. deny it. defend it. i challenge you.

em... orange juice.

some of you know who said that. well, i know who said it to me. i wanted to write something about this quote:

Believe nothing just because a so-called wise person said it. Believe nothing just because a belief is generally held. Believe nothing just because it is said in ancient books. Believe nothing just because it is said to be of divine origin. Believe nothing just because someone else believes it. Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true. [paraphrased]

these are allegedly the words of the Buddha. as i recall it there was a part that said "believe nothing, even if I have said it to be true, that you yourself have not tested and judged to be true" i think that's the really unique part.

Most religious leaders/founders do not say things that impugn their authority... i find this endearing. enlightened. it makes me think that this religion was to give power to none. nor to take power from any. i think though, that once the words were written down, they lost something. and then translated, probably lost some more. so what was it that they lost?

here's a question. when we learned in chemistry about all the significant figures, do you remember that? there was a certain order of magnitude that you knew what you were talking about, and beyond that you should not pretend you did. for instance: if you have a quantity of dang gui dried root, it balances the scale at 15 grams. if you were to write 15.0000 grams you could be correct, but you don't know for sure. so you can say 15 gram, might be actually 16.0345 grams, but it seemed enough like 15 for your purposes. now, lets say you had and herb like fan xie ye, which in even small amounts can cause severe diarrhea and subsequent dehydration (when used improperly) well, let's say your scale says 1 gram. you really should find out if that means .02 grams or 2.02. because that's a very important difference to the effect.

where was i going with that. ok. so when something is lost in translation or interperetation, it could change what is seen later.. i think what i mean is when someone's words are important enough for generations of people to want to know them or hear them, they will propagate. but even writing is subject to the true medium of all communication, the human brains that exchange the messages.. so even though the words maintain their integrity as if they had been written down verbatim, still, the meaning is incomplete when all you do is read those words. those words will require explanation, contemplation, and a bunch of other gerunds. so ultimately, the purity of any person's words, and the truth people find therein, come in large part from the people reading or hearing them. as far as that person is concerned anyway.

the problem with that is... well, all around us. we see it every day. someone says this is more right than that, that they are more righteous than someone else, that they understand better than someone else these great words of truth. the fact that i'm even talking about it now, this could be percieved as me telling you, the reader, that i'm right. of course that's something i don't want to do, but i seem to have to struggle with it... i don't know everything. but consider how this idea might apply to you. that what you've been told, what you've assumed, what you have read, might have been derailed along the way.. by someone completely unknown to you.. a reporter, an author, a translator, anyone who passed the message along and thought their efforts to clarify or augment the thing.

so in passing along a message or quote or something, perhaps it is wise to remember things like this... and when you get a message.. no matter who it is that conveys it to you.. remember this. i think i had best go to sleep now.

hoopdoo

i'm working hard to totally isolate myself from all news media whatsoever. it's been a worthy effort, with great rewards. the fnords are in retreat. but i do wish i had some orange juice. i should have bought the juice when i was at the store recently. why didn't i? eh? why? probably because i didn't want it at the time. it was eating the mac&cheese that made me want it.

in other news... i considered getting the new bjork album today, it was a little funky looking, but i'd like to listen to it before i get it. we'll see how that goes. or perhaps we won't. i may never mention it again. ok. well it's time fr me to get something to drink. like water.. i like water.

i wish i got to learn about economics at school.. i wish everyone learned about economics at school. then they'd understand things.. because they sure don't for the most part. they sure don't.

selfish and obstinate?

i think shannon just called me selfish *and* obstinate.. oh wait.. she didn't. well, she implied it. she said "X and Y are *almost* AS impossible as [i am]. I've never seen two [people] more selfish and obstinate... . " so what am i supposed to thing. because i am more impossible than them (since they are not quite as impossible as me) and then said i guess that there are no people *as* selfish and obstinate as those two, but what would my quality be such that i'm even more impossible than they? if not at least a healthy dose of selfish and obstinate. now, i won't say that i'm not selfish... or obstinate for that matter.. sometimes i might be more obdurate than obstinate.. i think that's all i can come up with for a post tonight.. so that's all you get.

blehg

i just want to make it known that i didn't care for the VP debates. they were unpleasant.. antagonistic.. irritating.. tense.. blah... i remember in high school learning about the role of a VP in the campaign was to attack the opponents, leaving the presidential candidate open to talk about themselves and so on.. but this was just a bit too much for me. i'm angry enough as it is.. really. quite angry. i'd like nothing more than for our political system to be spontaneously reorganized when i wake up in such a way as to have a peaceful coexistence, free of extremism and tyrrany. far far far from what we have right now.. tyrrants reign unrestrained, and even the supporters of those tyrants aren't satisfied with their gains.. this of course is only my highly biased perception, but you all must realize that i am omniscient, i've created my day, and this is what i created.. so this is

how
it
is.

now that that's out of the way. i wonder how long it will take for the daoist concept of denial of public office to those who would seek it will take hold here.. i guess since it went out of fashion in china a thousand years ago, it probably isn't gonna be the new rage here any time soon, but i think it's merits may win out someday, and we will simply foist civil service duties on the unexpecting homer simpsons of this country who can do no worse than the highly skilled but corrupt and greedy people who seek office today. i'm done for tonight.

rantorrhea.

to my cousin megan

i know you read this. so you should comment on things. same with everyone else. cat didn't work really hard so no one would comment. i mean if only for the vanity of seeing your name and words on the internet, damnit.

smack

i just read this hilarious article entitled "in defense of the chimpy corollary" ... i found it at mcsweeneys.net you might check it out. if you're not lame. the point is.. it was funny. i would like to try calling people chimpito whenver i get a chance. mostly at work. i'm going to start calling my coworkers that if i can. i like them so hopefully it won't offend any of them. maybe i will start calling my friends different chimpy names.. like chimparella, or george chimpton. or or how about chimpelyu, like the letter W as found in Jorje's name. so yeah. it would be good to measure the different level of offendedness with the different names. like if i start calling tony sluttychimparella, maybe he'll not be offended at all, but if i called say.... anyone else.. that. i think no one would like that. i do think i'll start calling barb chimpita, or maybe just chimpanada. or something like that. everyone will bask in my comic rip-off. it will be excellent. or i'll forget all about it tomorrow morning.