The boys were thrilled to have me pick them up tonight. As we were walking back, watching the rain turn into winter mix, we were humming the melody to "Iron Man" -- waiting at an intersection, this babe was with her date, standing next to us. When she realized what the boys and I were singing, she joined in -- I didn't realize it until I heard her, and she looked on and smiled in approval, bobbing her head -- her look cracked me up, because she was processing that, like this image of a dad and his boys singing "Iron Man." That amused me, and her boyfriend/date was like "What song is that?" (HUH?!) and she said "Iron Man! You know?" and she sang a few more lines of the melody. Sorry, dude -- you're in dire trouble manwise if your girlfriend knows Black Sabbath and you don't -- that's too much woman for you! He probably likes Dave Matthews Band. I thought about mentioning that B1's FIRST SONG he'd ever sung was "Iron Man" -- like when he was two or something! But I held back, for the sake of the guy, who clearly had no idea what the song was.
Then, a few blocks later, the boys and I were heading home, and this cab pulled up and this older woman walking with two canes worked her way across our path. I stopped the boys so she could make her way (I framed it like "Hey, [B2], let's wait for your brother to catch up." Once she'd passed us, I said "Alright, Gentlemen, let's go." (I tend to call the boys "Gentlemen") -- the older woman said "And you ARE a gentleman!" That caught me off-guard. I just blushed and thanked the lady. For me, it's just self-evident to be courteous, but anymore, not being an asshole practically qualifies as courtesy, so actually being courteous must seem otherworldly?
Friday, March 2, 2012
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Off the Deep End
Seems like a Leap Year is the perfect time to consider the ongoing drive toward war with Iran. The latest bout of saber-rattling on our part, relative to Iran, is reflective of a long-simmering neoconservative wet dream about going to war with Iran. It's something they've wanted to do since the Bush/Cheney co-presidency -- hell, I saw the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as Rounds One and Two for the war with Iran, as a rather pernicious Round Three.
Anyway, when the Republicans lost the White House, the drumbeat for war with Iran was somewhat muted, although the war drums did pick up volume at two discrete intervals in the Obama years, among DC policy elites. And now that's kicking up again, with more force than I've seen before, so I'm more than a little worried that our country is seriously contemplating a war with Iran.
This would be a disaster for our country, and an apocalypse for Iran. I really, really hope we don't do this. I remember reading up about Iran and seeing that its rank-and-file populace had several key qualities:
Now, left to its own devices, I believe that Iran's theocracy will eventually be toppled by a "Persian Spring" much in the way that the Arab Springs have been scuttling dictatorships throughout the Middle East (again, dictatorships America has supported for decades).
The ONE THING that could give a shot in the arm to the theocrats in Iran would be -- you got it -- American invasion of Iran. It would be exactly what those dunderheads would need to unit their guardedly pro-American populace against an invading foreign nation.
It's very frustrating, because if our country pursued peaceful diplomacy with Iran, engagement instead of aggression, it would put the theocrats at odds with their own populace, and would erode what little legitimacy those creeps have on the reins of power.
But our foreign policy is so tone-deaf to this kind of stuff, that I'm worried that we're going to rush headlong into war with Iran and have a fight on our hands that is far worse than the Pyrrhic victories in Iraq and Afghanistan. And it's just so damned needless, even by our own standards of pointless warmongering.
A war in Iran, should it actually occur, will be a disaster, and will set back healing the wounds between the US and Iran for a generation or more.
Obama has, unfortunately, governed much like the "third term" of the Bush/Cheney co-presidency, continuing so much of their policies that it's caused this country incredible harm. It would be a terrible shame if he continued along that path and went to war with Iran.
So, I'm hoping we're not stupid in this, but hoping against American stupidity is like hoping that the sun isn't going to rise. And, yes, cynics will point out that Iran has tons of oil (and, gee, that wouldn't possibly motivate us to go to war, now would it?) but the vastly larger population in Iran, the terrain, and everything about it would make Iraq seem like a walk in the park by comparison.
And it would absolutely give those tottering theocrats -- who are in serious danger of being consumed and overturned by their own people in a few years -- a stranglehold on power as they sought to unite their country against "The Great Satan."
The above opinion is, of course, completely outside of the mainstream. The "Beltway Consensus" about Iran is something like this: "We should invade them NOW." (hawk position) or "We should invade them LATER." (dove position) -- and it's sad but true, reflecting just how little range of opinion is allowed in this issue of vital national importance.
Our country does not need another pointless foreign war. We really, really need investment at home, not squandering money abroad.
Anyway, when the Republicans lost the White House, the drumbeat for war with Iran was somewhat muted, although the war drums did pick up volume at two discrete intervals in the Obama years, among DC policy elites. And now that's kicking up again, with more force than I've seen before, so I'm more than a little worried that our country is seriously contemplating a war with Iran.
This would be a disaster for our country, and an apocalypse for Iran. I really, really hope we don't do this. I remember reading up about Iran and seeing that its rank-and-file populace had several key qualities:
- They liked American culture -- yes, they disliked our government's hostility to their own country, but the people of Iran had a surprisingly positive view of America. Sadly, their rank-and-file were far more positive about Americans than the rank-and-file American is about Iranians.
- They were more than a little disenchanted with the reactionary theocracy that has ruled Iran since the 70s. The Iranian Revolution has failed to help everyday Iranians live better, and they know this. Much of that revolution's energy came from Iranian resistance to the dictatorship of the Shah (who was our man in Iran for generations)
Now, left to its own devices, I believe that Iran's theocracy will eventually be toppled by a "Persian Spring" much in the way that the Arab Springs have been scuttling dictatorships throughout the Middle East (again, dictatorships America has supported for decades).
The ONE THING that could give a shot in the arm to the theocrats in Iran would be -- you got it -- American invasion of Iran. It would be exactly what those dunderheads would need to unit their guardedly pro-American populace against an invading foreign nation.
It's very frustrating, because if our country pursued peaceful diplomacy with Iran, engagement instead of aggression, it would put the theocrats at odds with their own populace, and would erode what little legitimacy those creeps have on the reins of power.
But our foreign policy is so tone-deaf to this kind of stuff, that I'm worried that we're going to rush headlong into war with Iran and have a fight on our hands that is far worse than the Pyrrhic victories in Iraq and Afghanistan. And it's just so damned needless, even by our own standards of pointless warmongering.
A war in Iran, should it actually occur, will be a disaster, and will set back healing the wounds between the US and Iran for a generation or more.
Obama has, unfortunately, governed much like the "third term" of the Bush/Cheney co-presidency, continuing so much of their policies that it's caused this country incredible harm. It would be a terrible shame if he continued along that path and went to war with Iran.
So, I'm hoping we're not stupid in this, but hoping against American stupidity is like hoping that the sun isn't going to rise. And, yes, cynics will point out that Iran has tons of oil (and, gee, that wouldn't possibly motivate us to go to war, now would it?) but the vastly larger population in Iran, the terrain, and everything about it would make Iraq seem like a walk in the park by comparison.
And it would absolutely give those tottering theocrats -- who are in serious danger of being consumed and overturned by their own people in a few years -- a stranglehold on power as they sought to unite their country against "The Great Satan."
The above opinion is, of course, completely outside of the mainstream. The "Beltway Consensus" about Iran is something like this: "We should invade them NOW." (hawk position) or "We should invade them LATER." (dove position) -- and it's sad but true, reflecting just how little range of opinion is allowed in this issue of vital national importance.
Our country does not need another pointless foreign war. We really, really need investment at home, not squandering money abroad.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Arcadia
I had picked up "Midway Arcade Classics" (1 & 2) for PS2, and am amused to play some of those old games that I played back in the day, like Spy Hunter, for example. My boys both love that one, and it cracks me up to hear them singing the "Peter Gunn Theme" from time to time. What amuses me is how playable those old games remain. I think they're more playable than a lot of far more advanced games that came out since then. Amazing to think I was 13 when that game came out. I haven't even shown the boys Tempest. B1 will lose his mind when he sees that one, I'm sure! I was 10 when that one came out! Lordy! One of my favorites, for sure.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Friday, February 24, 2012
D'oh, Canada
Well, so much for the "Saskatchewan Screamer." While it was sloppy-snowy-wet this morning, I don't think the city got more than three inches of snow. The winds are definitely howling right now, and it's pretty chilly, but the amount of snow was paltry, compared with the usual breathless weather coverage of it. Deal with it, people -- it's SNOW. It's still WINTER. It's not the snowpocalypse! Sheesh. I sometimes think the newspeople build up this kind of stuff for lack of anything otherwise newsworthy to report. Chickenshittery carries the day.
I'm glad to be home, though, with the steam heat going, having a beer, and otherwise just savoring my Friday. Work's been crazy-busy all week, which has worn me out more than usual by the end of the day. I've always been a morning person, anyway, and do my best work in the morning. By day's end, though, my brain is fried.
I bought B1 some new shoes today; since I'd gotten his brother some new shoes the other week, I check out B1's shoes, too, and could see that he's due for some knew ones. At the rate the boys are growing (B1 is now 4'11" and B2 is over 3'10"), I'm going to be having to get them shoes every other month, I swear! Already B1's feet are just a little bit smaller than Exene's, which is amazing. I think B1's going to be about 6'6" when he grows up. He's going to be a giant. But lordy, it's going to be a challenge to get him clothes when he's a proper teen. I can see that already.
I'm glad to be home, though, with the steam heat going, having a beer, and otherwise just savoring my Friday. Work's been crazy-busy all week, which has worn me out more than usual by the end of the day. I've always been a morning person, anyway, and do my best work in the morning. By day's end, though, my brain is fried.
I bought B1 some new shoes today; since I'd gotten his brother some new shoes the other week, I check out B1's shoes, too, and could see that he's due for some knew ones. At the rate the boys are growing (B1 is now 4'11" and B2 is over 3'10"), I'm going to be having to get them shoes every other month, I swear! Already B1's feet are just a little bit smaller than Exene's, which is amazing. I think B1's going to be about 6'6" when he grows up. He's going to be a giant. But lordy, it's going to be a challenge to get him clothes when he's a proper teen. I can see that already.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Oh, Canada
So, I guess we're supposed to be hit by a "Saskatchewan Screamer," the term trotted out by the weather folks -- a big-ass winter storm heading through. It's purportedly heading in here around midnight, dropping 2 to 7 inches of snow. We'll see if it happens.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Fat Tuesday
Hope everybody has a great Mardi Gras, the most corpulent Fat Tuesday you can possibly have! In Chicago, with so many Poles here, they call it Pączki Day, in honor of their yummy Medieval uberdoughnuts. I don't think I'll go through the effort and wait in line for any Pączkis at the good bakeries today, but it is tempting, because they really are good. My favorite bakery for getting them is Dinkel's, but it's like me and half of Chicago. At least on the North Side -- it's like waiting in line for tickets to see a band. And I hate waiting in lines, and with work and all, I'd only be able to get there at the end of the day, so I'll pass on that today, but only with some reluctance.
Monday, February 20, 2012
BJ Blows
I love this takedown of Billy Joel...
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_spectator/2009/01/the_worst_pop_singer_ever.html?wpisrc=obinsite
A performer who I have described for most of my life as making "music for non music lovers." Much the way there are writers out there for non-readers (Stephenie Meyer, etc.), comedians for people without senses of humor (Dane Cook, Colin Quinn, etc.), intellectuals for non-thinkers (Newt Gingrich, etc.), artists for non-art lovers (Jeff Koons, etc.), directors for non-movie lovers (Michael Bay, etc.), restaurants for non-food lovers (Olive Garden, etc.), and so on.
Well said! For me, it goes back to my childhood, when a certain tone-deaf sibling would caterwaul to his songs. She had all of his LPs and probably an eight-track or two. I remember actually looking at his albums and playing them on my folks's hi-fi and thinking, even as a kid, "Wow, why does my sibling like this?" I didn't even have a musical aesthetic, yet, and I STILL disliked it, found him just dreadful on the ears. It's hard to pinpoint it, too -- I know I wasn't analyzing lyrics back then; it was the actual sound. The songs themselves, and how he sang them. I hated it. And then, when I could actually decipher what he was singing about, I disliked him all over again, in newer and deeper ways.
Aesthetically, artistically, and musically bankrupt, he is. His success speaks volumes about our country. And to friends, semi-friends, non-friends, and acquaintances who might say "Aw, come on, Daibh, don't be so judgmental; he's not THAT bad." I'd say "Oh, he's WORSE."
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_spectator/2009/01/the_worst_pop_singer_ever.html?wpisrc=obinsite
A performer who I have described for most of my life as making "music for non music lovers." Much the way there are writers out there for non-readers (Stephenie Meyer, etc.), comedians for people without senses of humor (Dane Cook, Colin Quinn, etc.), intellectuals for non-thinkers (Newt Gingrich, etc.), artists for non-art lovers (Jeff Koons, etc.), directors for non-movie lovers (Michael Bay, etc.), restaurants for non-food lovers (Olive Garden, etc.), and so on.
Billy Joel, they can't stand you because of your music; because of your stupid, smug attitude; because of the way you ripped off your betters to produce music that rarely reaches the level even of mediocrity. You could dress completely au courant and people would still loathe your lame lyrics.
It's not that they dislike anything exterior about you. They dislike you because of who you really are inside. They dislike you for being you. At a certain point, consistent, aggressive badness justifies profound hostility. They hate you just the way you are.
Well said! For me, it goes back to my childhood, when a certain tone-deaf sibling would caterwaul to his songs. She had all of his LPs and probably an eight-track or two. I remember actually looking at his albums and playing them on my folks's hi-fi and thinking, even as a kid, "Wow, why does my sibling like this?" I didn't even have a musical aesthetic, yet, and I STILL disliked it, found him just dreadful on the ears. It's hard to pinpoint it, too -- I know I wasn't analyzing lyrics back then; it was the actual sound. The songs themselves, and how he sang them. I hated it. And then, when I could actually decipher what he was singing about, I disliked him all over again, in newer and deeper ways.
Aesthetically, artistically, and musically bankrupt, he is. His success speaks volumes about our country. And to friends, semi-friends, non-friends, and acquaintances who might say "Aw, come on, Daibh, don't be so judgmental; he's not THAT bad." I'd say "Oh, he's WORSE."
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Summits
I saw that Chicago's hosting both the G8 and NATO summits in late May. That is going to be wild. The city's going to be insane that weekend. There'll be protesters and everything else. And it being an election year, what with a president from Chicago, too. It's going to be over the top. I guess it's the first time there's been a NATO summit in the US outside of DC; and the first time in 30 years that a city his hosting both summits at the same time. It's going to be nuts. I'll be sure to have my camera handy, taking pix.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Winter Mixology and Days of Future Passed
Weird weather today. Snow at one point, rain at another. The fabled "winter mix" that meteorologists sometimes like to talk about. Good flu-havin' weather.
I'm amazed that next month'll be March, that we're midway through February already. Winter's hardly really happened, and we're nearly facing Spring.
Lordy, I turn 42 this Spring. I don't know how my folks felt when they turned 42, but it's just weird for me. My stepdad would've been my age now back in 1980, so, yeah, that was a long time ago. It'll be that way for B1, as there's the same span of years between him and me as between me and my stepdad (and, bizarrely, between him and HIS dad). So, B1 will be my age right now in 2044. That's just crazy. My 21st Century boys!
Weird to think that we're already 12 years into the 21st Century. I remember, as a kid, thinking about the Year 2000, how exotic and alien that seemed. I'd be 30 in the Year 2000. I remember distinctly thinking that as a 10-year-old. My nearly 42-year-old self laughs at that, honestly. Lurched right through 2000, and sailed by 2010.
Watched "2001" the other day -- B1 loved seeing the spaceships in it, hearing the music. But it amused me to watch a 44-year-old vision of 2001, and how futuristic is still was, how hell-and-gone far from that we are. No HAL. No moon base. No deep space missions.
"The Road Warrior" is, sadly enough, the most prescient of cinematic SF portrayals. I think we're likelier to go down that road than anything in "2001." At least here in the States.
I'm amazed that next month'll be March, that we're midway through February already. Winter's hardly really happened, and we're nearly facing Spring.
Lordy, I turn 42 this Spring. I don't know how my folks felt when they turned 42, but it's just weird for me. My stepdad would've been my age now back in 1980, so, yeah, that was a long time ago. It'll be that way for B1, as there's the same span of years between him and me as between me and my stepdad (and, bizarrely, between him and HIS dad). So, B1 will be my age right now in 2044. That's just crazy. My 21st Century boys!
Weird to think that we're already 12 years into the 21st Century. I remember, as a kid, thinking about the Year 2000, how exotic and alien that seemed. I'd be 30 in the Year 2000. I remember distinctly thinking that as a 10-year-old. My nearly 42-year-old self laughs at that, honestly. Lurched right through 2000, and sailed by 2010.
Watched "2001" the other day -- B1 loved seeing the spaceships in it, hearing the music. But it amused me to watch a 44-year-old vision of 2001, and how futuristic is still was, how hell-and-gone far from that we are. No HAL. No moon base. No deep space missions.
"The Road Warrior" is, sadly enough, the most prescient of cinematic SF portrayals. I think we're likelier to go down that road than anything in "2001." At least here in the States.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Heartless
Valentine's Day, oohh! Guess I should do a love-themed post, right? Okay, here, goes...
I think people get into trouble where love is concerned when they either fail to understand what they really want, and/or fail to see the other person for who they really are.
- Loves you for you: True love
- Loves you for what/who they think you are: Deluded love
- Loves you for what you can give them: Selfish love
Everybody thinks their love is true, but just like everybody thinks they're a good person, it's simply not so. As an empiricist and a skeptic, I would call bullshit on this. Know them by their actions, by what they do, how they treat you, how they see themselves. People would be better off if they actually had the stones to be honest about their intentions with love. But most people are afraid to do that, to actually face who they really are, and come to terms with it.
The only one that really matters is Option 1, obviously. That's the strongest love, and if it's reciprocal, then you're in the best possible position. If you have a mismatch between loves, though, then you're in trouble. If you're not seeing the other person for who they really are, and/or if they're not seeing you for who you really are, and/or if you're not seeing yourself for who you really are, and/or if they're not seeing themselves for who they really are, then there's trouble right out of the gates. I've experienced this twice in my life, and it sucks. It is a roadmap for emotional pain!
People who are attracted to a "type" can also get into that kind of trouble, because, again, you're not seeing the person themselves, but some blend of 2 and 3, I suppose. I know many people who flounder through relationships because they are only attracted to that type, so it's like they're not even really seeing the person in front of them, but are drawn to a type, and can't figure out where it went wrong.
I know I have a type, and I wrestle with that. I'm old enough and experienced enough to understand that a type can be perilous, especially when stacked up against 1-3. It's easy to find attraction riding the coattails of love and fooling you. It's easy to be charmed by a type, only to understand, fundamentally, that she's not actually right for you. But the key is that self-understanding.
It's an identity tightrope. For it to work, you have to see yourself clearly, and you have to see the other person clearly. In so doing, in both cases, you have at least the possibility of true love. Any other situation, and somebody's going to get hurt.
Person A loves Person B as 1, but Person B loves Person A from 2 and 3. Net result: Person B feels some measure of contempt for Person A, and woe to Person A when they're not able to deliver whatever it is that Person B loves from 3. Person A then can either roll with it and suffer, or cut themselves loose.
Person X loves Person Y as 2, but Person Y loves Person X as 3. Net result: Person X gets used by Person Y, and either can't see it, or won't see it (depends on the degree of delusion they're carrying, and their capacity for self-abuse). Person Y just wants whatever it is that X gives, and woe to X when they can't deliver.
And so on. I would say two people "loving" each other as 3 would be a one-night stand, or a mutual hookup kind of arrangement, without anything deeper than that. Two people "loving" each other as 2 would be confusing and contradictory -- a case of two people probably not understanding themselves, and likely not understanding each other, either -- probably one of those dramatic unions where people argue a lot, just because they're a lot of misunderstanding. That's a union that would depend on mutual physical attraction more than actual love, is my guess.
Probably people inclined to love as 2 stagger from relationship to relationship, never understanding why it never works out for them. They're probably the ones who're embittered on Valentine's Day, wondering why it never works out for them, whereas I'd look at them and say that they need to get their heads out of their asses and understand who they really are, and what they actually want. Some introspection would serve them well.
Anyway, be honest about who you are and what you actually want, see the other person for who they really are, not who you think you are (or want them to be, or wish they would be), and certainly don't value someone for what they can give you (be it money, identity, security, etc.), and you'll at least have the chance of finding and experiencing true love. Beware of the "type" trap confounding your otherwise good sense, assuming you even have good sense.
"Happy Valentine's Day" | OutKast
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Onion
Oh, man, this week's ONION is packed with good stuff...
Intelligent, Condescending Life Discovered in Distant Galaxy
Bahah!
Report: Watching Episode of 'Downton Abbey' Counts as Reading Book
*snicker*
48-Year-Old Man Actually Very Open To Dating 25-Year-Olds
Bahahah!
And others. Oh, man! Great stuff this week!
Intelligent, Condescending Life Discovered in Distant Galaxy
Bahah!
Report: Watching Episode of 'Downton Abbey' Counts as Reading Book
*snicker*
48-Year-Old Man Actually Very Open To Dating 25-Year-Olds
Bahahah!
And others. Oh, man! Great stuff this week!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)