A Meerkat's Bolthole

*sigh*

I just wrote a long rant about the difference between a quick intercession to support the financial infrastructure of an entire economy and handing money out to industries that failed to adapt to the new markets of the 21st century, despite being given a decade-long lead time filled with clear warnings. [edit: note I said the infrastructure, not the players who screwed with it]

And then I realized that would segue into a rant about the banking institutions who were given that support and still insist on screwing the pooch [and us] with it, which would in turn lead to a rant of OMG you PEOPLE, WTF, get your HEADS out of your HOLES!

And then I decided I was just too tired, and had too many other things to do. Like, y'know, adapting to the new markets of the 21st century.

If you're within reach of the Santa Barbara fires, stay safe and sound. I'm turning off the news and getting back to work.

And, for those of you who missed the bit of exciting-in-a-good way news: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/science/space/14planet.html Baby exoplanets! We are not unique. This gives me great pleasure (for those who want/need to believe in a Greater Plan, just call them God's backup plan for when we blow it entirely, and a new starting point is needed)

EtA: and, in the way things often happen, truepenny just externalized something I've been mulling for a while, about perfection, and how it's actually a bad path, rather than a good one. The money shot, for me: "But my point is, if you don't fail, or don't allow yourself to fail, you don't become a better person. You become a more rigid person. More brittle. More uptight. And because you don't allow yourself to fail, you have no empathy for other people when they fail. You don't have room for it, because you can't give yourself the leeway to imagine failing."

Yes. That.

The more I learn about Palin, the less I like/trust her. Setting aside my philosophical disagreements: your kid is going through major stress right now. Male or female parent, your priority should be to take care of your daughter, not use her as a talking point/campaign tool [or marry her off in what sounds to me like a Very Bad Idea]. In this at least, Obama's got the high ground staked out and filed, declaring the kid off-limits to his campaign crew.

Meanwhile, let me share this lovely quote with you:

On Hannity & Colmes, Hannity said, in reference to Internet rumors about Gov. Sarah Palin's daughter, "[T]hey tried to make the attack that she has a young daughter, pregnant and engaged. Is that fair that they would attack that? I mean, I don't remember Chelsea Clinton being attacked. I don't remember Al Gore's children being attacked. I thought there was a general rule that children of candidates ought to be left alone."

Let me refresh your memory...

Columnist Molly Ivins reported (Arizona Republic 10/17/93) this incident from Rush Limbaugh's TV show--"Here is a Limbaugh joke: Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is a White House dog?" And he puts up a picture of Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea Clinton is 13 years old.

And from The Man McCain himself? "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father". And his cronies laughed.

Yes, kids are exempt from politicking, and sexism and rude jokes are WRONG. Except, apparently, when the GOP's supporters do it to the underage children of Democrats. Then? Oh, that's amusing, and acceptable.

You know, I don't mind disagreeing with political figures -- that's the way the system sorta-works. But this level of two-faced, sanctimonious CRAP of Holier Than Thou while screwing the devil....

I will accept a politician who has an ego, who cats around [of either gender and with either gender, so long as everyone's of age and consenting], who has a reasonable level of low-lying graft because that's the type that gets into politics in the first place, and the rest of us are too sensible to take the job ourselves. But there's a level of mean-spirited nastiness and denial-of-responsibility that infects the GOP all the way from root to roof, and that I refuse to reward, and have no respect for anyone who does.


(oh, and did you hear about the McCain staffer who announced that Palin was, among other things, screened by the FBI? FBI is now saying "did not!" Ooops. We meant to say the CIA did it! yeah, that's what we meant!)

Dear Major NY Publisher I Used to Work For:

If you are going to charge me $14 for a slight and obviously page-inflated trade paperback by a Name Author, there are a few things I have the right to expect. First and foremost is that you will have had someone - an editor, a copy-editor, a proofreader, an intern doing the slugging -- at some point actually READ THE BOOK.

I should not constantly be encountering "there" for "they're," "your" for "you're," sloppy and obvious tense changes, or having the narrator say they could only talk to a character during the hours of x to y because of it was too crowd-noisy, and then 20 pages later have the narrator say that he could only talk to that same character in that same location after J-where-J-is-before-X, because that's when the crowds left and it got quiet.

Because that? Is bullshit.

Nolove,

Your Former Employee.


P.S. I am very tempted to mark up the book and send it back to you with an invoice....

In an earlier post, I seem to have hit someone's hot-button by the unintended implication that I don't think Christmas cards should be sent.

Not true. I think that, if you enjoy sending out Christmas cards, you should so so. You might want to remember that not everyone you're sending them to celebrates Christmas, but at the risk of arousing the ire of the "War on Christmas" folk, that's why they have cards that say "Happy Holidays" or -- my personal preference-- "Happy New Year!

My own personal feeling on the entire subject, since it was raised, is ( as follows: )

I made the donation in the name of my LJ readers because I appreciate all y'all, and because I wanted to do something good, and allow you to share in that. End of story.

In other more important news, it is raining instead of snowing, damn it, the cats are sleeping in a peaceful lump, and I have been tasked to make scones. Yum. Sould I make raisin scones, or maple scones? Decisions, decisions....

Have you heard about the New Rules According to Six Apart's Morality Police?

"Thousands of LiveJournal customers are rebelling against the company's recent decision to censor hundreds of sex-themed discussion groups, a broad swath that has led to the removal of literary critiques and fan-written fiction about Harry Potter.

LiveJournal, which is owned by San Francisco-based Six Apart, confirmed Wednesday that it deleted around 500 journals this week in hopes of better "protecting children." It said the deletion was prompted by activist groups, including one called Warriors for Innocence that claims to track sites promoting pedophilia, the sexual abuse of minors, and other illegal activities."

The article then goes on to point out that

"Legal experts say LiveJournal is clearly not liable for fictional stories and related discussions posted by its users, thanks to a 1996 federal law immunizing Web-based discussion forums from lawsuits. 'If the content is otherwise legal, then LiveJournal has no obligation to police its site or remove any legal content it finds,' said Eric Goldman, who teaches at the Santa Clara University School of Law. "

(emphasis mine)

EtA: mind you, if something crosses the boundries into illegality, I agree it should go. But using a broadsword instead of a scalpel just proves you're a moron, and defending the broadsword means you're a moron without a PR person.

etA2: this post hasn't been verified yet, but it suggests that the so-called "Warriors For Innocence" have ties to several radical and extremely racists 'Christian militia" groups. You know, the kind that say if you're anything other than Them, you're a god-hating, child-abusing, liberal-voting, devil-worshiping....

hey. Has anyone told this group that LJ's mascot is a goat? And that they're based in San Francisco?



Anyone else really tempted to list "highly sexualized goat-pr0n" as an interest, to see how long it takes to get their account deleted as being "bad for the CHILdren?"

I'm not going to jump ship just yet -- I'm digging in and fighting back the only way I know how -- with words here, and a hit to their wallet there. I encourage everyone else to do the same. Leaving just makes these anally troubled organizations think they've taken the field without resistence. Hell no, I won't go. And if it takes posting explicit pr0n to this journal to make a point, well, my family's always been a big fan of civil disobedience....

from CNN.com: Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey has resigned in the wake of the Walter Reed hospital scandal, two days after firing the 2-star general who was heading up Reed.

This is a scandal that veteran groups knew about years ago. A scandal that civilians knew about years ago -- it was being discussed on LJ, openly. Substandard facilities and treatment, for those who were wounded in war, serving this country.

Only now, two weeks after the story broke in the news, is anyone resigning. And Bush has said not word one on the topic.

"We support the troops."

Yeah. Right.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17423439/

In kradical's journal, he went on a semi-rant about the (ab)use of "i" and "e" in front of everything.

Me, I'm still stuck on the fact that it's now considered acceptable usage to say email instead of e-mail. Not by me, it isn't, she said, brandishing her (wooden) cane and chomping her (ivory) fake teeth....


I blame text messaging. Lord knows I abuse texting as much as the next non-teenaged non-geek (my cell phone bill proves that) but it takes me the same amount of time to type the full word in as it does to enter some stupid semi-abbreviated code. Using "U" instead of "you" or similar silliness while corresponding with me? Some folk have already learned that this is...dangerous. To say the least.

If I'm worth the time to talk to, I'm worth the effort of a complete word. Except 'k. At this point, I've caved on the use of 'k. But I feel slightly dirty for it.

On that topic, I have come up with a new technological breakthrough that will make me famous, if not rich. It's an attachment to your iPod that allows you to interact with other people, exchange ideas, and put forward propositions into a group.


It's called an iThink.


In stores by next December. Start saving your pennies now.