Recently, I have been pondering the phenomena of rekindled interests. For years, I loved the hard sciences, particularly astronomy and chemistry. Never really dug physics per se, but was more than capable and found some concepts to be interesting (e.g. Newtonian mechanics, light, etc...). But over time, the interest faded and I moved into sociology, theology, etc...

About six months ago, the old flame began to emit some sparks again. I found myself watching documentaries on outer space. Following that, I began to find myself looking up at the stars, wondering about things I had wondered about in years. Now, for Christmas, all I want is two things: (1) a telescope, and (2) Richard Fenyman's Easy and Not So Easy Pieces, a landmark collection of twelve lectures on physics. Moreover, I've been reading God, Time and Stephen Hawking, a book about Einstein's Theory of Relativity, quantum mechanics, chaos theory and a the search for a unifying theory of quantum gravity.

What the heck?

Did you guys know about this? I haven't heard anything about this--even on Drudge. Maybe George Bush is like Batman...

Had an interesting discussion at lunch today. Wondering what you guys think...

Is acceptance (of a person) on the same continuum as judgment (of a person)? (In other words, are they polar opposites of each other?)

I'll withhold my views (or changing views) if/until there's any replies. Just kind of curious...

This turned out to be a really interesting read (come the 5th page). Stick it out--there's an interesting hypothesis at the end.

Hey OPEC, why not read about book about supply-side economics. You just cut production, which (in theory) raises energy costs for your consumers--which will reduce their cash-flow, thereby limiting their ability to buy your product.

Feel free to continue cuting output at this point--I like having lower gas prices...

Maybe it's my arm-chair-quarter-back mentality to point out the flaws of liberalized America--and as such, I'd like to take a few minutes of your time to talk about Special Education.

I've been working in the public schools for about 2 years now; it's fun because I get to 'keep it real' with my SLP peeps, and it's a great change of pace from the ivory tower. (I also need to do it for professional reasons.)

As an aside, a parent called an elementary school principle today and asked why their kid had to learn about "predicate", and when that became an important concept.

In any event, I've got this middle school kid that I see. He's in special ed. Regardless, of his special-ed status, this kid's going to be a freakin' millionaire. This 13 year old is already hustlin' deals on a daily basis. Each week, he shows me his booty, like a functional cell phone (Moto. Razor) with accessories that he bought off another kid for $11 bucks. He then fllipped the phone for what he really wanted--a 15-speed mountain bike. $11 bucks for a name-brand 15-speed mountain bike? Good deal, I think.

This kid is a freakin' genius. And special ed is doing nothing for him. To me, it's yet-another example of public school failure. The traditional concept of education will be lost on this kid. He's not college material, and that's not a bad thing. The kid's already an entrepeneur--why not optimatize that. (Why continue to offer academic programs to try and remidiate his area of weakness? Especially one that he doesn't even value?)

This one-size fits all approach suggesting that we need to have a college-educated populous is just goofy. Maybe I could come up with a better solution, maybe I couldn't. But I know what fails, and I don't see why we need to continue throwing money at what's broken--hoping for a magical change in results.

So ... my neighbor (the wife) comes to my door yesterday afternoon with tears in her eyes. As I open the door, she thrusts a garbage bag into my hands and says, "Here, can you take this?" Being the astute student of human body language, I clearly deduce that something is wrong and I gladly take the bag off her hands. At which point she says, "It's a bunch drugs and other stuff. J (son's name) is dealing and he showed up at my work all paranoid and flipped out. It's just marijuana. Can you throw it out in your trash. I don't want it around to tempt him."

Hmmm ... So now I holding a bag of marijuana, and I'm more than certain that marijuana is not all that's in it. Because the ganja does cause you to hallucinate and have paranoid visions. Nor does it lead to temptations of self-violence. So I gently inform this mom that in all likelihood, her son is probably using weed that is laced with other ingrediants. At which point, she tells me that yes, this is true. He is also using something called DOM.

This is when the conversation takes a really weird turn. Apparently, her boss is getting tired of these "family issues" and she is beginning to fear for her job. So she has to go in to work tomorrow and she wants me to "babysit" J because his psychologist fears that he may be a threat to himself.

So I do a little research and discover that DOM remains in the system for 16 to 20 hours after ingestion, and that's just the baseline normative. If he took a stronger version, it would still be in his system causing delusions during the time that she would like me to watch him along with my three sons. She assures me that all will be fine. I do not share her optimism.

In the end, I contacted a police officer from my church and I asked him about anonymously dropping of the drugs at a police station (seeing as how I am not excited about having this stuff on my property or in my trash). Interesting, his station (which is an hour west of my house) will take the anonymous drop off, no questions asked. My local station, however will not do this. Their advice to my police officer friend was to have me double bag the drugs and then drive them to a local dumpster. Now let's think about this, shall we? A police officer is unwilling to come and remove the drugs "off the street" so to speak, but he would like for me to transport illegal substances in my vehicle before dropping them off in a public dumpster where any dumpster diver will likely find them. Interesting ...

What a mess! I've had to find a babysitter for my boys today so that I can watch this kid for three hours until his mom gets home to take him for his appointment. Most maddening of all, the mom doesn't want him to be checked into an inpatient facility. So instead, she'll impose on neighbors by having them dispose of drugs and deal with her druggy son.

The sad thing is: I really like my neighbors. But they are awful, permissive parents that let their kids run wild.

Two things.

One, Michelle and I are in the throes of purchasing a home. We're excited about the place itself, and we know we've made a good decision, but there's a lot of crap down in which one can get bogged. We've received a lot of congratulations, but it's hard to fully accept them just yet. We close (Lord willing) on Friday the 14th, and moving day is Sunday the 23rd (sorry Lord).

Two, there's another series of videos on the Uncommon Knowledge site (the same guys that had the Andrew Klavan interview). They are now interviewing Ward Connerly. I've never heard of him, and honestly I haven't had time to even watch the videos yet (see point #1 above), but they look really good.

Interesting thing, OPEC greed. Oil is falling over reduced demand (and more importantly) fears of a global "recession". So OPEC wants to cut production to artificially inflate prices.

During a negative market. Their plan should work out just great.

As a bit of a surreal aside, this podcast thing is still kinda blowin' up (albeit in a micro sense). It looks like we might start getting an advertisement contract (of sorts), and some movie producers asked us to review an independent film and discuss it 'on air'.

Final Debate (in progress) play-by-play... A quick blog as the debate is being debated...

1) It really annoys me that republicans (i.e., McCain) have accepted the premise that we're in a financial "crisis". Or that this is "the worse since the great depression". Neither is true. And to believe such tripe is the essence of historical ignorance. This isn't a crisis--and those that think it is will have a really rude awakening if and when an actual recession is in place (which is 2 quarters of negative growth). And what about the Carter years? The misery index? We're *no*where*near* the Carter misery index years at this point.

2) McCain's rhetoric is starting off really slow. And at it's core, it's because McCain has accepted the liberal (i.e, the savior's) premise. You cannot and will never win a fight in which the opponent creates the premise.

3) The moderator is biased; he's cutting off McCain, but not his most merciful. (Update: He also framed his questions in the form of a 'gotcha', such as the supreme court justice / abortion question.)

Courtney says I've got to be on baby-duty, so maybe I'll post on this later...

4) Off baby duty. McCain had more lost opportunities that I can count. By accepting the opposing view's premise, he will continue to lose every time. McCain's failure to reject the premise may cost him the show. Great example--why didn't McCain ask the savior (dubbed by Nancy P) to operationally define what a "small business" is? He would have killed him--simply by saying, "businesses would be forced to fire just enough people to get under your limit, Senator. Your plan will result in increased unemployment and a reduction in economic growth."

5) While they were talking abortion, I was holding my wee-one, and I actually was getting pissed off again. (Which is why I walked away from politics a few weeks ago.) To hear a discussion on such tripe while holding an infant is infuriating. Why the hell can't McCain come out and be pro-choice in that he is anti-rape. And then start touting the merits of personal accountability in dealing with the consequence of personal choice?

the savior (per the DNC) is utterly incompetent and ill-equipped to be our leader. His polices would result in another misery index. John McCain is trapped and limited by his own ideology, and is likely not enough drag himself across the finish line. It's as if I'm watching a race between two losers. Obama is such an imminently beatable opponent, and McCain is failing at that task.

P.S. Couric is such a twit.

Matt, have you seen this?

A couple of random thoughts...

I took my family to the Zoo on Sunday, and we all had a really good time. I think one of the reasons why I like the Zoo is cohort attraction. I'm sure this is some sociological or social psych phenomenon, I'm just not aware of it's documentation... But I've always noticed how I've been attracted to like-aged and like-minded peoples--and the Zoo is such a place. Younger families, young kids... My kind of place. But here's the thing--I saw more cohort-fathers with stupid t-shirts on. You know, the kind of t-shirt that displays a "message." (I'm with stupid, or that kind of thing.) Why haven't they grown out of the stupid t-shirt phase? It just baffles me. I'd be embarrassed and ashamed. You've got kids--start acting like it.

Secondly, have you guys seen the (new) gestures for the (new) MacBooks? Wow. It's a great leap in UI.

Parenting is hard, mmkay?

Dang that kid is stubborn. Almost as much as me. Kinda gotta have to respect that.

(Tonight was a rough night; pretty much all avenues toward behavioral modification were traveled...)

I'm seriously thinking about voting for Bob Barr.

But only because I live in a state that is going to go 90% for Obama.

Save My Ass let me down. The site that was supposed to improve the quality of my life, as well as my significant other, did not do as it was told. It failed to send a scheduled delivery. (Fortunately, I was on it, and made local arrangements--so the event was saved.) In any event, "SMA" didn't live up to it's name now, did it? Instead, they should call it "LMAOTD". Suffice it to say that the account has been canceled. I'll just get the local florist to do all this for me...

Finally--something useful out of Germany. This kind of thing fascinates me, and I could spend hours on it. The science of biological attraction.

(Potentially) Funny Update: The following was in my email inbox this morning. I wonder, oh how I wonder, how this will turn out:

"Is Sarah Palin a Feminist?"
A panel discussion by the UM student chapter of The Feminist Majority
All are invited to participate! 10/8, 4 p.m. in the Student Union

"The Feminist Majority" ? ... reminds me of Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. Which reminds me, I gotta get one of those 'safe place' stickers...

Dang--Tina Fey does have it down.

For all you hobettes out there, here is Oprah's Is He Cheating on You? quiz... Once again, Oprah comes through in a pinch. (Also--remember that Oprah suggests that you embezzle 1o% to 15% of the grocery budget to create your super-duper top-secret savings account for when your man does cheat on you. Yes--I actually saw that on TV about a decade ago...)

Our Elected Officials Are Stupid. They just passed a bill to try and borrow their way out of a (self-imposed) cash flow and debt problem. Common sense will prevail, and we will go the way of Rome. The terrorists needn't worry about us; we'll take care of killing ourselves via debt and sheer stupidity.

And on a funny side note, here is an elected official making an ass out of himself:

"Let's not kid ourselves: We're in the midst of a recession. It's going to be a rough ride, but it will be a whole lot rougher ride" without the rescue plan, said Rep. John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, the minority leader, as he prepared to cast his vote for the most sweeping federal intervention in markets in decades.

Hey--buddy... A recession is operationally defined as two consecutive quarters of negative growth. We've yet to see a single quarter of negative growth. As a matter of fact, last quarter had positive growth. Yeah--things sure are really tough out there for the American populous; our inflated standard of living had to decrease by a fraction.

Why is it that a slowdown in our growing economy is viewed as such a crisis? These people have zero historical perspective, and seem to think that history began at their birth. If they think that less than 3% annual growth is tough--just wait until a legitimate slowdown really occurs. A true reduction in our GDP, for example. What utter Buffoons. And Bush signs it.

This actually makes me angry. What foolish, foolish ignorant FUD elected officials. What pampered historical and global ignorance. Our democratic republic is fatally flawed, and this is yet another example of it. They got us into the problem, and they just made it severely worse with their FUD "fix" to get out of it. Again--this actually angers me quite a bit.

Did you guys know that with the money that will be borrowed or printed to make this deal happen is enough to give every American w/ a mortgage approximately $75,000? That would have been a simpler (albeit equally stupid) solution, with perhaps a better outcome.

I gotta stop--I'm actually getting myself worked up about this. I've seen much of the world, and I love this country above all others...but it absolutely eats me up to see us tear ourselves down. This nation has become ignorant (and spoiled) relative to true struggle and hardship that we whine and moan when we can't have everything immediately. So we'll just borrow and print more money such that the nation can continue to live beyond its means--at the cost of national security and future prosperity.

I think the thing that ticks me off the most is all of the obvious missed oppurtunities.

Let's talk about this whole banking issue. (1) I'm not convinced it's a crisis. (2) Stop bringing up the great depression. We're so far away from that--people are just 100% historically ignorant. (3) People can't even (properly) define a 'recession', which is 2+ quarters of negative growth. (We've yet to have even a single quarter of negative growth!)

A little more time on the "banking crisis"... "Greed" on Wallstreet isn't the cause. The cause is governmental tamping with the market. Beginning in the Carter admin, and later in the Clinton admin, there was a big push for "affordable housing" and "equal opportunity of home ownership". In essence, there was a forced reduction of standards on home loans. What business, in their right mind, would make loans to people that can't afford to pay them back? None. Thus, the whole industry of underwriting came into being--which is investigating the applicants to see if they're a safe bet. However, regulations were put into the underwriting process; in essence, elected officials undermined the underwriting process. Let's increase minority home-ownership. Sounds great--let's do it...regardless of reality.

I'm not seeing so much of a Wall Street problem, but a value problem. That somehow, renting wasn't good. Renting wasn't right. That it's "throwing money away". And it's just more complex than that. A 15 or 30 year committment is absolutely categorically the wrong choice for an unstable income. The banking industry was pushed into that, and the feeding frenzy began.

Why isn't the conservative ticket *snickers* touting this? Why aren't they pointing their fingers at economically stupid elected officials that created this mess, rather than trying to blame Wall Street that simply executed it? Palin (as does McCain) fails to make this point.

I could go on, but I don't want to be a blog-hog.

Maybe I'm biased... but I see her as killin' him. (And isn't he supposed to be the scrapper?) He seems to be on his heels a lot. (Post made after the first 20 minutes...)

Palin's showing great media savvy as well, looking directly into the camera--etc...

Update: He came on stronger at the end; she edged him out--a draw at the worst. No doubt about it, I think he underestimated her.

For an utter and complete threadjack, I listen to any number of podcasts and audiobooks to save sanity while I'm not sleeping. One such podcast that's intermittently on the rotation is You Look Nice Today: A Journal of Emotional Hygiene. I think it tries a little too hard to be "wizard of smart" and/or "subtle and nuanced"--and at times, it has a bit of bathroom humor. I took a hiatus for a couple months, but gave this last episode a shot. It's title, "Man School", appealed to me. And while some of the show's characteristic flaws remain, I found the latter portion of the show (at around 12:00 minutes in) to be thoroughly enjoyable.

If you've got a commute or a couple of minutes and are so inclined--consider giving it a shot. It's rated PG-13, so I wouldn't do it in front of the kids or students.

Here's a scary thought - one that I have yet to hear articulated in a meaningful way.

FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt -- love the term, Greg!) is on the rise. Consider. Last week, we had two very bad days in the market. Between them, the DOW dropped about 950 points. But we had a couple of good (great days in a normal economy!). DOW goes up about 650. So a net loss of 300 points on a massive turbulence.

Now, we enter the new week with the bill pending in the house. House declines to pass the bill. DOW drops 777 points in one days (a record point - not percentage - drop!). Tuesday rolls around. Tuesday we gain around 400 points back. Wednesday, we trade flat (although not without significant dips of over 200 points throughout the day) as we wait for the Senate to handle the bill. Wednesday night, the Senate passes the bill. Thursday, DOW drops another 360 points (with a few minutes left to trade). So, wall street doesn't get what it wants and we lose 777. Wall street gets what it wants and we lose 360.

The really scary thing is that this economic downturn is starting to have worldwide ramifications. The BRIC countries (Brazil, India, Russia and China) are taking a pounding, right alongside of us.

So here's the question: what happens if we don't pass the bail out bill? I'm not talking about should or shouldn't. I'm just asking, what can we expect if we do not pass the bill? Is it reasonable to assume that in such a case, the inter-related nature of the globalized economy will cause other economies to continue to collapse? And if so, in a world environment where global economies are nosediving, do we potentially see a rise in violence and war as countries attempt to seize limited commodities (e.g. oil) by force?

I guess what I'm asking is really this. If we do not pass this bill, is there is a significant chance the we contribute to national security risks by allowing the world economy to crash causing a rise in FUD and destabilization?

Thoughts?

I think what it comes down to--at least with me--is my Oppositional Defiant Disorder. At this point in my life, I don't even pay attention to the "news" coming from the traditional mass media--because I don't trust it. Not one bit. Every single time I accidentally run into the traditional mass media, all I see is the presentation of an opinion. Their agenda. And I refuse to give them the ability or opportunity to be successful. My disdain, if not hatred, for their propaganda runs that deep.

And if all of my utterances were recorded for public record, I have no doubt that in no time at all, I would have said something that either: (a) sounds stupid; (b) was stupid; or (c) was offensive to some people. It's not a shocking revelation--it's a function of time.

Further, the traditional mass media wants to kick crap up. They want to increase FUD. (Fear, uncertainly, doubt.) Again--that's not news--that's propaganda. And I refuse to give such attempts a second of my time.

Does Alaska really deal w/ Russia? Any? At all? Further, do state governors really oversee the national guard? They can ask for NG support, but does it go any further than that? Further, do other governors know the status of their state's NG? Since we don't know, I'm not going to pass judgment on the one that doesn't. Two of my friends/acquaintances are about to get deployed in the coming months--it's not like that was Barber's decision.

Recently, my ex-chair was demoted--and two untenured rookies got the call to step up. There has been a 180-degree turn-around in nearly every facet of service and product. It wasn't easy, but I honestly suspect that the fresh eyes coupled with scrap and gumption was the right thing at the right time. Experience might have made a few things easier, but I'm not sure it would have been an asset.

Perfect example--the bail out. The elected officials, whose policy created the problem, are wanting to take massive loans out to fix the problem? Since when can one borrow to get out of debt or to increase cash flow? And how in the heck are people even swallowing such a proposition? When has government every done anything right?

I'm to the point where I don't know if I care about experience. I'm not even sure that I want it. I want fresh eyes, scrap, gumption, teamwork and a strong supportive team; most of all, I want a return to true conservatism--ultimately leading towards individual self-reliance and self-sufficiency...The very characteristics that created the concept of American exceptionalism and American prosperity.

Scott, I'm actually surprised that her surge comment bothered you more than this did.

Yes, Couric's a so-and-so, media's out for blood, I know. But this did not seem like a "gotcha" question. In fact, I would have expected Palin to take Couric to school, since I can imagine that Alaska's governor would indeed have significant dealings with Russia (and Canada). But she seems to be preoccupied with hammering home the point that... well, Alaska and Russia are very close together.

AAAAANYWAY, I'll shut up about it until Friday, when we have some more... data.

Here's the Palin quote regarding the surge:

Alaska Business Monthly: We've lost a lot of Alaska's military members to the war in Iraq. How do you feel about sending more troops into battle, as President Bush is suggesting?

Palin: I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq. I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe. Every life lost is such a tragedy. I am very, very proud of the troops we have in Alaska, those fighting overseas for our freedoms, and the families here who are making so many sacrifices.

Here's the problem. As Governor, she oversees the National Guard. So under her care are all of the National Guard troops that serve in Alaska. As a soldier, wouldn't you want a bit more out of your governor than a simple: "I've heard about it on NBC last night, but I really haven't been paying much attention."

I'm not saying that she has to be either for or against the war. I'm merely concerned that she may not be all that plugged into the world scene. And if she was a Democrat, and she was running for President, we would be eviscerating her on her qualifications. In the end, I believe that the VP should be every bit as qualified to run the country as is the P.

Couple of thoughts ....

1. I never mentioned the Couric interview because it was more than clear that Katie was out for blood. The more I see of her, the more desperate she looks to hang on to her job. So I wasn't talking about the Couric interview.

2. No one who responded to my post has yet to say anything about the surge comments. And that is the thing that has actually shaken my confidence in her. How do you not have an opinion about that issue? Seriously! And I'm sorry, but that is NOT a media bias / liberal slander issue. She didn't have an opinion. Next.

3. Totally in agreement with you that this vote is a vote against as opposed to a vote in favor of. Nevertheless, when Palin was announced, the conservative evangelical base with thrilled. I'm not sure that they/we didn't jump to premature enthusiasm.

4. Matt, please explain how my analogy does not hold up. Because we, as a society, as being asked to believe that her credentials as a governor give her executive experience that no one else on either ticket has. All I am saying is that governing the US is not just like governing Alaska on a bigger scale. The scale itself changes the dynamics of the position and thus I believe there is no one with applicable executive CEO-like experience on EITHER ticket.

That is all.

Hey Scott,

I just watched the Couric / Palin interview, and...

C'mon man. Couric was trying to create a "gotcha", and Palin was avoiding it. What I think people are hearing isn't incompetence, it's that she isn't playing their game.

Question: "Which papers and magazines did you read prior to your nomination?"
Gotcha question. (What--you mean you didn't read our liberal rags? You only read non-liberal sources?)

Question: "If a father rapes his daughter, you are on record forbidding the daughter from an abortion?"
Gotcha question. (It's apparent.)

Question: "What about the morning after pill? Can the raped victim daughter take that?"
Gotcha question. (It's apparent.)

Couric's a blowhard. I've only watched 1 interview, but based on this one interview--Palin's just trying to not step into their traps.

P.S. You think the media has a bias? Let's take Jack Cafferty as a case study.

Honest question here. Are any of you beginning to wonder whether the vetting process for Palin wasn't nearly as extensive as it probably should have been. When I hear about Palin not having an opinion on the surge way back in 2006, this suggests to me a person who is not in touch with what is going on in the world. Everyone who was even remotely connected to the world around them had an opinion on the surge. Palin did not. And that bothers me.

Conservative pundits keep calling her a CEO and they keep suggesting that she is ready because she is the only one with true executive experience. That's like suggesting that I am ready to run Apple Computers because I was the Executive Director of a pregnancy center. Yes, some of the basic skills are the same. But seriously, are you honestly telling me that you think I would be prepared. Not in the least. Sometimes, scale changes everything.

All that to say, what I originally thought was a brilliant move ... I'm not so sure any more. I had assumed that the McCain team had picked someone who had the head knowledge (just not the experience). But now, I'm not so sure ...

What do you guys think? Are you more or less confident regarding Palin now as opposed to when she was first announced?