Sunday, November 30, 2008
Roof Trash
I am very intrigued by the use of the roof next door as a trash receptacle. I noticed several random discarded items appearing on the roof starting shortly after I moved in. First, I think, was the bag of oranges, which is now decayed passed recognition, followed by the rug, window screen, and dead potted plant. Today, when I looked out of my window I saw a new even more impressive addition, an actual full bag of garbage. The thing that really intrigues me about these occurrences is how and why? One possibility could be that someone is throwing the items from my building which is taller and I could easily open my window and toss something over. But I ruled out this explanation because the items are on the far side of the roof, not the side closest to us. Also, it would be impressive to throw a plant and have it land right side up with all the soil where it should be. The other option would be that someone on the top floor of the roof trash building is swinging it up on the roof, which would be a lot more difficult, and the plant still doesn't make sense. The third option is that someone is walking up onto the roof with trash and leaving it there. This is the most likely scenario. This is where I get to the why. Why on earth would someone do this? If someone is too lazy to take out the trash, it takes probably just as much energy, if not more, to walk the trash up stairs to the roof instead of downstairs to the actual trash receptacles. Maybe they are saving it for later, which would be very strange indeed. It is beyond me.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Word of the Week
apo·tro·pa·ic - adjective: designed to avert evil
As in, bailing out the US auto industry may prove to be an apotropaic move according to a wide range of pundits. I happened to catch Michael Moore's interview on Larry King Live last night and thought he made some interesting points about why we should bail out the auto industry. The number one reason is the autoworkers who will lose jobs if the car companies go down. With unemployment at an already extreme high, this is definitely something to consider. The auto industry employs huge numbers of people in the Midwest region and the loss of those jobs could spell economic disaster. On the other hand, as numerous critics, and Michael Moore, point out the auto industry has been the architect of its own disaster. Any bailout plan should come with regulations meant to maintain American jobs and improve production of cars that will actually sell in a climate of economic and environmental worries. Just say no to SUV's, GM. It is amazing how much more debate and apprehension there appears to be over a bailout for the auto industry then there was for the financial industry, who were equally as culpable in their own downfall. The current debate and apprehension would have been more appropriate in deciding to bailout white collar criminals, whose bankruptcy would not be nearly as disastrous to the average American as the bankruptcy of any of the major car companies. Yes, the execs at GM, Ford and Chrysler made some major mistakes, but we should allow their mistakes to turn the guys down on the factory floor out onto the streets.
Some further reading:
"For Detroit, Chapter 11 Would Be the Final Chapter," Spencer Abraham, NYTimes
"Congress should finalize loan to car makers soon," George Harris, Kansis City Star Reader Advisory Panel
"GM Must Re-Make the Mass Transit System it Murdered," Harvey Wasserman, CommonDreams.org
"No viable auto industry bailout plan: Democrats," AFP
As in, bailing out the US auto industry may prove to be an apotropaic move according to a wide range of pundits. I happened to catch Michael Moore's interview on Larry King Live last night and thought he made some interesting points about why we should bail out the auto industry. The number one reason is the autoworkers who will lose jobs if the car companies go down. With unemployment at an already extreme high, this is definitely something to consider. The auto industry employs huge numbers of people in the Midwest region and the loss of those jobs could spell economic disaster. On the other hand, as numerous critics, and Michael Moore, point out the auto industry has been the architect of its own disaster. Any bailout plan should come with regulations meant to maintain American jobs and improve production of cars that will actually sell in a climate of economic and environmental worries. Just say no to SUV's, GM. It is amazing how much more debate and apprehension there appears to be over a bailout for the auto industry then there was for the financial industry, who were equally as culpable in their own downfall. The current debate and apprehension would have been more appropriate in deciding to bailout white collar criminals, whose bankruptcy would not be nearly as disastrous to the average American as the bankruptcy of any of the major car companies. Yes, the execs at GM, Ford and Chrysler made some major mistakes, but we should allow their mistakes to turn the guys down on the factory floor out onto the streets.
Some further reading:
"For Detroit, Chapter 11 Would Be the Final Chapter," Spencer Abraham, NYTimes
"Congress should finalize loan to car makers soon," George Harris, Kansis City Star Reader Advisory Panel
"GM Must Re-Make the Mass Transit System it Murdered," Harvey Wasserman, CommonDreams.org
"No viable auto industry bailout plan: Democrats," AFP
Friday, November 21, 2008
Oscopy
Ladies and gentlemen, my video blog, Oscopy, is finally up and running after many months of seemingly insurmountable obstacles in my life. I've thrown up a video poetry piece that I just put together to get the ball rolling. I have set a deadline to have the other short documentary piece that I've been working on since June up by the end of next week. After that, I am hoping to update with a new video every 2-3 weeks. I plan on including everything from short docs to artsy fartsy experimental stuff. So check it out every now and then and let me know what you think.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Word of the Week
ig·no·min·i·ous - adjective: marked with or characterized by disgrace or shame
As in, it was an ignominious move by the US government to hold juveniles at Guantanamo. If you don't believe that our government would do this read "U.S. confirms it held 12 juveniles at Guantanamo." And if you don't believe that it is wrong to hold a child under those circumstances, I have to wonder about your level of moral development. According to this article, one of the juveniles committed suicide while detained in Guantanamo. Children do sometimes commit crimes (I work with them), but under no circumstance should they be put in a situation where they feel compelled to do such a thing, or are not given the necessary support if they are contemplating such an act. From what I have read, Guantanamo is not a place for anyone, let alone the fact that it is not determined whether or not many of those held there have committed any crime. A UC Berkeley study looked at the released prisoners and found them to be traumatized and shamed even though they never did anything to deserve being locked up to begin with. The article "Cal study finds ex-Guantanamo prisoners broken" shines a light on the abuses and torture that these men suffered through and that our government perpetrated. Yes, I would have to say that sending these people, especially the children, to Guantanamo is ignominious.
As in, it was an ignominious move by the US government to hold juveniles at Guantanamo. If you don't believe that our government would do this read "U.S. confirms it held 12 juveniles at Guantanamo." And if you don't believe that it is wrong to hold a child under those circumstances, I have to wonder about your level of moral development. According to this article, one of the juveniles committed suicide while detained in Guantanamo. Children do sometimes commit crimes (I work with them), but under no circumstance should they be put in a situation where they feel compelled to do such a thing, or are not given the necessary support if they are contemplating such an act. From what I have read, Guantanamo is not a place for anyone, let alone the fact that it is not determined whether or not many of those held there have committed any crime. A UC Berkeley study looked at the released prisoners and found them to be traumatized and shamed even though they never did anything to deserve being locked up to begin with. The article "Cal study finds ex-Guantanamo prisoners broken" shines a light on the abuses and torture that these men suffered through and that our government perpetrated. Yes, I would have to say that sending these people, especially the children, to Guantanamo is ignominious.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Wedding Bliss
With all the hubbub in California about Prop 8, I would like to share with you a link to an article by the SF Chronicle on the nuptials of two of my friends. I attended their wedding several weeks ago. It was great to see my friends so happy. Everyone should have the chance to have that kind happiness. I hope you agree, whatever your religious beliefs.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Word of the Week
cir·cum·loc·u·to·ry - adjective: the use of an unnecessarily large number of words to express an idea, evasion in speech
As in, politicians are particularily adept at answering questions in a circumlocutory way. I am sad to say that I never really use this word, but I am going to try from now on, because it is a fabulous, useful word. I'm sure if we all pay attention we can point out several examples everyday of someone using circumlocutory speach. Here is an entertaining article about the art of appologizing that gives as one example the circumlocutory appology.
As in, politicians are particularily adept at answering questions in a circumlocutory way. I am sad to say that I never really use this word, but I am going to try from now on, because it is a fabulous, useful word. I'm sure if we all pay attention we can point out several examples everyday of someone using circumlocutory speach. Here is an entertaining article about the art of appologizing that gives as one example the circumlocutory appology.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Election Day
Well, I just returned from my neighborhood polling place. It was a very pleasant experience. Everyone was friendly and it was nice to see a diversity of race and age participating in the process. The biggest happy surprise was the abundance of young people. There has been talk in past election about how the young people are going to step up to bat and vote, but they usually disappoint. I'd like to say that this year, based on my observations today, will be different. I guess many of us are actually civically minded after all. And to top it off, the little old ladies handing out ballots, were not all little old ladies, they were young people too! I have no reproof for those who are not going to vote based on political beliefs see my previous blog posts, but I have warm feelings towards those who do. I don't know what difference, if any, it will make (we'll see soon), but I would like to think that even small amounts of awareness and steps towards participation, will lead to greater things. I snapped a few quick pictures (which didn't turn out as well as I would have liked) outside to try and get proof of young people being there.
The polling place.
Young family on their way to vote.
Young person leaving polling place.
More young people (they couldn't have been much more then 18) leaving the polling place.
Some final campaigning happening outside polling place.
The polling place.
Young family on their way to vote.
Young person leaving polling place.
More young people (they couldn't have been much more then 18) leaving the polling place.
Some final campaigning happening outside polling place.
Monday, November 03, 2008
Word of the Week
pau·ci·ty - noun: smallness of number
As in, there is no paucity of signs both for and against Measure 8 in California. A couple of days ago, I witnessed two large groups of people with Measure 8 signs standing on opposite corners. They were, in turns, yelling "yes on 8" and "no on 8." It was quite a spectacle. I will say at this point that I do not support Measure 8. Everyone should have equal rights under the law. As far as marriage as a religious issue, I do not think that is for the state to decide. Keep church and state separate. If individual churches don't want to support same sex marriage, that is up to them. They don't have to perform ceremonies. But that does not mean that their beliefs on the subject should affect everyone else. Next thing you know there is going to be prayer in schools. Oh wait. That's already been tried. Not everyone has the same set of beliefs, and it would be wrong to impose one group's beliefs on everyone else. If two people love each other and want to make a commitment of marriage they should be able to do that. If those two people happen to be of the same sex it does not mean that everyone is going to have to participate in same sex marriage or that kids are going to be taught in school that that's how its supposed to be (some of the strange reasoning I have heard). No, it is between those two people. Rest of us don't need to get in the middle of it. There, I've had my say before election day.
As in, there is no paucity of signs both for and against Measure 8 in California. A couple of days ago, I witnessed two large groups of people with Measure 8 signs standing on opposite corners. They were, in turns, yelling "yes on 8" and "no on 8." It was quite a spectacle. I will say at this point that I do not support Measure 8. Everyone should have equal rights under the law. As far as marriage as a religious issue, I do not think that is for the state to decide. Keep church and state separate. If individual churches don't want to support same sex marriage, that is up to them. They don't have to perform ceremonies. But that does not mean that their beliefs on the subject should affect everyone else. Next thing you know there is going to be prayer in schools. Oh wait. That's already been tried. Not everyone has the same set of beliefs, and it would be wrong to impose one group's beliefs on everyone else. If two people love each other and want to make a commitment of marriage they should be able to do that. If those two people happen to be of the same sex it does not mean that everyone is going to have to participate in same sex marriage or that kids are going to be taught in school that that's how its supposed to be (some of the strange reasoning I have heard). No, it is between those two people. Rest of us don't need to get in the middle of it. There, I've had my say before election day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)