SOPA and PIPA

I can't be bothered to try to figure out how to "black out" this blog, but do go tell your lawmakers to oppose SOPA and PIPA, and do your part to help save the Internet as we know it.

Here's some important background:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/17/1055592/-Wikipedia,-many-other-websites,-will-blackout-tomorrow-in-protest-of-SOPA-and-PIPA?via=blog_508369

http://sopastrike.com/

Sign that you're both a language geek and a Trekkie

Step 1:Randomly stumble upon a site with every conceivable alphabet on it, including those throughout history.
Step 2: Look up Klingon (they have it).

http://www.omniglot.com/index.htm

Edit: Yes, I said Trekkie, not Trekker.  I don't take Trek seriously enough for Trekker status.  I have too many other interests.

Brief analysis of the Iowa Caucuses

Last night's Iowa Republican caucuses were an interesting political exercise that may in the long run prove to be quite meaningless.  However, I was struck by how well the outcome of the caucuses mirrors what I perceive to be the current state of the Republican Party.  The three frontrunners: Romney, Paul, and Santorum, each represents a particular demographic within the Republican Party, and the fact that the three of them essentially split the vote provides an illuminating glimpse into the current state of the GOP.

Santorum is a "social conservative," code for moralistic hatemonger, who believes gay people want to marry goats, the pill is murder, and Bibles should replace science textbooks.  He got the unified vote of the far-right evangelical base of the GOP - a base that had been hitherto split between Santorum, Bachmann, and Perry.  His sharp rise to prominence shows that this constituency was desperate to unite behind a champion.  I'd call this the "hate" wing of the Republican Party.

Paul is a libertarian, code for Ayn Rand worshiping super-capitalist.  He wants to privatize everything, believes poor people should be left to die on the street, and that anything that interferes with a corporation's right to exploit its workers, such as child labor laws, disability laws, civil rights laws, safety laws, are all unconstitutional.  He got the vote of the libertarian, government-hating, fences make good neighbors wing of the Republican party, whose only other choice was Gary Johnson, a candidate who couldn't get the attention of anyone.  I'd call this the "greed" wing of the Republican Party.

Romney, of course, represents the rest of the Republican Party - generically moralistic, more afraid of skyrocketing deficits than of skyrocketing economic inequality, militaristic, nationalistic, pro-gun, and pro-business.  His voters have to be more concerned with winning than anything else, because Romney hasn't taken a coherent position on any subject that he hasn't then subsequently argued against.  Romney is the John McCain of this election - he's a political machine, and his handlers and analysts pull his switches one way or the other depending on how the political winds are blowing.  I'd call this the "fear" wing of the Republican Party. 

Thus, the three candidates who won Iowa represent the three wings of the Republican Party: hate, greed, and fear.  It's an illuminating look at the current state of one of our two major political parties, and we'll have to see how doth it bode for November.

My husband's letter to American Airlines

My husband Matthew wrote this letter & emailed it to AA's top executives based on an experience he had on one of their flights, in which the word "bisexual" was censored from an episode of 30 Rock shown on the flight.  Read on.

Hello,

On November 24, 2011 (Thanksgiving day) I flew with your company on your flight 442 from San Francisco to Miami.  The flight and service was excellent, and I enjoyed the trip.  But, I want to let you know I was deeply offended when I watched your in-flight episode of 30 Rock. 

The in-flight entertainment on your flights is censored for content.  I understand that you would want to censor foul language from movies or truly objectionable content.  What I object to is the censoring of the word 'bisexual' from the episode of 30 Rock.  As a gay man, I am shocked that a national airline which I have always perceived as being open and accepting would censor the word bisexual from a prime-time program.  I would like to know how the mention of bisexuality is offensive?  The context in the show is not sexual at all; the line from which the word was censored is a joke referencing a television program wanting to appeal to a bisexual audience. 

My partner and I frequently fly with American for vacations or to see family.  We both also have a deep connection with American.  My partner’s parents were both employees of American, and his father retired from the company.  My grandfather worked at the Tulsa maintenance base for over thirty years.  My aunt, uncle, and cousin all work at the Tulsa maintenance base.  I spent many hours as a child watching your planes at Tulsa International with my father and grandfather.  I love aviation, and I love to fly American, and have taken your airline whenever possible.  In fact, I chose this routing through San Francisco because I trust American Airlines, and because I wanted to take one of your 767s for the first time.

After seeing this censoring, I am seriously reconsidering my preference for American Airlines.  We travel at least four times each year, to visit our families and for pleasure.  I just don’t feel welcome on your airline anymore.  My partner and I are openly gay; are we still welcome on your flights?  When we fly with you will we be asked to hide our relationship to one another?  And will you be dismissing your LGBT employees?  You seem to find even the existence of non-heterosexuals to be offensive, and I can’t help but take that personally. 

If you wish to get in touch with me to discuss this situation, please contact me at the number above.  I would love to talk with you about American’s commitment to diversity (if any) and what you are doing to rectify this situation.  You have a chance to win back my business; I know I’m only a single passenger, but I don't believe this kind of evil should go unchallenged.

Sincerely,

Matthew W. Holloway

Taking a cruise

I'm in Miami right now and tomorrow I will be embarking on a fabulous cruise vacation for a week.  I know I don't update very often, and not posting for a week isn't a big deal here, but hey, whatever.  I just wanted to make you all jealous.  I'm (going to be) on a BOAT.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7yfISlGLNU

Word of the day: Snain

I drove through some snain on my way home from work today.  Here's the definition from urbandictionary.com:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snain

EUTAM: Needs

This is an EUTAM that isn't so much an incorrect usage of English, just one that specifically gets on my nerves.

It's the use of the word "needs" as a noun, viz, "For all your albino elephant juggling needs."

I don't know why this particular usage bugs me, but it does. I don't even have a better way to say what this sentence intends to convey. The thing advertised serves all of your albino elephant juggling needs. It is the thing you need to have when you're juggling a lot of albino elephants.

I mean, I suppose you could say, "This thing is what you need when you're juggling albino elephants," but it doesn't quite convey the same sense, does it?

I don't know. Needs. I don't like it. Anyone have anything else like that - a EUTAM that isn't wrong, and you don't have a better way of saying it, but it just bugs you?

The benefits of regular writing

http://lifehacker.com/5855019/how-to-harness-the-mental-and-emotional-benefits-of-regular-writing

Today is the start of National Novel Writing Month, which I did two years ago and managed to hammer out the first draft of the novel I still haven't finished yet. I'm not doing NANO this year, because there's a huge chunk taken out of my November by a CRUISE TO THE CARIBBEAN (YEEEE!!!!) and I really do need to finish Shooter Vanished (and maybe the other two novels moldering on my hard drive) before I start a new project. Anyway, the above article has some good points about the mental benefits of writing regularly.

Grammar thing of the day: The Interrobang?!

The Interrobang is a thing that should really be used more often.

Ursula K. LeGuin on Occupy Portland

http://occupywriters.com/works/by-ursula-le-guin

What seems rather different about the Portland camp is that from the start, inevitably, it’s had to deal with and share space with a camp set up by homeless people right next to it as a kind of annex. Portland is more tolerant of the homeless than many cities and there’s a large population of them downtown. So far the two camps have managed to coexist pretty cheerfully. The homeless presence confuses the Occupiers’ message for some people, but reinforces it powerfully for others. Our mayor has been very Taoist in handling the whole business, gracefully evading decisions and ultimatums, then going off to China…. So far, so good! Having a huge urban university just up the street as a supply of young, unwearied relay Occupiers is helpful.

Word of the day: Effluvium.

ef·flu·vi·um (-flv-m)
n. pl. ef·flu·vi·a (-v-) or ef·flu·vi·ums
1. A usually invisible emanation or exhalation, as of vapor or gas.
2.
a. A byproduct or residue; waste.
b. The odorous fumes given off by waste or decaying matter.
3. An impalpable emanation; an aura.
[Latin, from effluere, to flow out; see effluent.]

From http://www.thefreedictionary.com/effluvium

Example: Herman Cain talked about "used food" at the Republican debate. I thought that "used food" was a euphemism for the effluvium that tends to emanate from Republican candidates' mouths most of the time.