Just a brief pre-Thanksgiving post.
From a student essay:
"If you join the military, you risk having to kill people or getting killed yourself and then having to live with that."
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Unjustified
I've watched a few different videos of the UC Davis pepper-spray incident. In case you've missed it, a number of protesters at the college, inspired by both the nationwide "Occupy" movement and the ever-increasing tuition at California state schools, staged a sit-in. They were confronted by campus police, one of whom (as the video shows) strolled along the line of seated students, pepper-spraying them casually as if he were freshening his living room with Febreze.
For the record, I like the police. I respect the police. I think police officers do a difficult and often dangerous job, and any time I have had to deal with police, I have found them helpful and considerate. So I want to give the police the benefit of the doubt when possible. And I am sure that the police officers involved in this incident will offer some kind of justification for their actions. But watching the various videos, I can see none.
For me, the most distasteful moment comes early on, as the officer triumphantly brandishes the can of pepper spray before the crowd. Perhaps he is warning the seated students about what's about to happen, but, if so, why isn't he facing them? Instead, he appears to be addressing the watching crowd. The way he waves the can around reminds one of nothing so much as a magician showing the audience that he's picked the correct card. There is something so stylized in the motion, and then so casual about the way he walks down his row of victims, that it looks as though the policeman is performing--like this is some big moment for which he's rehearsed.
What's also striking is the sheer arrogance of the police. It was shocking when the video of policemen clubbing Rodney King surfaced: It was sheer luck (if that's the right word) that a witness with a camera happened to be in position to capture the action. But in Friday's incident, the police could see cameras all around--both professional caliber video gear and ubiquitous cell phones recording every wretched moment.
One wonders if the police will use the very fact of the cameras' obvious presence as a defense: Of course we were justified! How stupid would we have to be to pepper-spray helpless students--unprovoked--when we know there are cameras everywhere?
How stupid indeed?
For the record, I like the police. I respect the police. I think police officers do a difficult and often dangerous job, and any time I have had to deal with police, I have found them helpful and considerate. So I want to give the police the benefit of the doubt when possible. And I am sure that the police officers involved in this incident will offer some kind of justification for their actions. But watching the various videos, I can see none.
For me, the most distasteful moment comes early on, as the officer triumphantly brandishes the can of pepper spray before the crowd. Perhaps he is warning the seated students about what's about to happen, but, if so, why isn't he facing them? Instead, he appears to be addressing the watching crowd. The way he waves the can around reminds one of nothing so much as a magician showing the audience that he's picked the correct card. There is something so stylized in the motion, and then so casual about the way he walks down his row of victims, that it looks as though the policeman is performing--like this is some big moment for which he's rehearsed.
What's also striking is the sheer arrogance of the police. It was shocking when the video of policemen clubbing Rodney King surfaced: It was sheer luck (if that's the right word) that a witness with a camera happened to be in position to capture the action. But in Friday's incident, the police could see cameras all around--both professional caliber video gear and ubiquitous cell phones recording every wretched moment.
One wonders if the police will use the very fact of the cameras' obvious presence as a defense: Of course we were justified! How stupid would we have to be to pepper-spray helpless students--unprovoked--when we know there are cameras everywhere?
How stupid indeed?
Monday, November 21, 2011
Monday Miscellany
From the "Way-Too-Much-Time-on-Their-Hands" Department: Some folks in Arizona have launched a campaign to name the chimichanga the state's "official food." We suspect that this will come to pass. And immediately after being named the official food, the chimichanga will be asked for its papers and deported.
**********************************
**********************************
"WASHINGTON — The summons from the president came without warning the Thursday before Labor Day. As she was driven the four blocks to the White House, Lisa P. Jackson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, suspected that the news would not be good. What she did not see coming was a rare public rebuke the president was about to deliver by rejecting her proposal to tighten the national standard for smog." ("Re-Election Strategy Is Tied to a Shift on Smog")Is anyone else troubled by the fact that the head of the Environmental Protection Agency "was driven the four blocks to the White House"? The woman couldn't have walked?
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Silly Afghans! Triskadekaphobia Is for Kids!
Regular readers of this blog know that the writer of this blog is a regular reader of The New York Times. Despite the parlous state of newspaper journalism, the Times remains the paper of record not only for New York, but for the nation as a whole. Still, every once in a while, an editorial oversight so glaring occurs that the Solipsist has to step in and fix things. And so it was today.
In an article about a recent loya jirga in Afghanistan by Rod Nordland, the following factoid appeared:
(DIGRESSION: Technically, comittee #39 should have become committee #40, and committee #40 should have become committee #41, but this is Afghanistan we're talking about; any solution that avoids the beheading of a goat is something to be thankful for. EOD)
But, come on Nordland! How can you provide us with this delightful--yet essentially meaningless--tidbit without explaining where this superstition comes from?
Don't worry, Nation. The Solipsist is on the case. According to a few different sources, the precise origin of the superstition is unclear. Several sites, however, suggest that there was, in fact, a pimp nicknamed '39' because the number appeared on his license plate and was also his apartment number. Another reliable source (OK, Wikipedia) suggests that the number 39 translates into 'morda-gow,' which is a slang term for 'pimp.'
Just to throw my own meaningless interpretation into the mix: '39' is three times 13, the only TRULY unlucky number.
Now, was that so hard?
(NOTE: I know the post title isn't exactly relevant, but I couldn't resust.)
In an article about a recent loya jirga in Afghanistan by Rod Nordland, the following factoid appeared:
"Even before the delegates, divided into 40 working committees, began to take up the jirga’s main issues on Wednesday, there was the thorny matter of Committee 39.Now, the jirga simply adopted the strategy--long practiced by elevator-designers in more-than-thirteen-floored buildings--of skipping the offending number, thus making committee #39 into committee #41.
In recent years, Afghans have come to strongly associate that number with pimps, considered the absolute dregs of Afghan society. Most Afghans are so touchy about it that they won’t buy a car with 39 on the license plate, or even use a telephone number with those digits in it."
(DIGRESSION: Technically, comittee #39 should have become committee #40, and committee #40 should have become committee #41, but this is Afghanistan we're talking about; any solution that avoids the beheading of a goat is something to be thankful for. EOD)
But, come on Nordland! How can you provide us with this delightful--yet essentially meaningless--tidbit without explaining where this superstition comes from?
Don't worry, Nation. The Solipsist is on the case. According to a few different sources, the precise origin of the superstition is unclear. Several sites, however, suggest that there was, in fact, a pimp nicknamed '39' because the number appeared on his license plate and was also his apartment number. Another reliable source (OK, Wikipedia) suggests that the number 39 translates into 'morda-gow,' which is a slang term for 'pimp.'
Just to throw my own meaningless interpretation into the mix: '39' is three times 13, the only TRULY unlucky number.
Now, was that so hard?
(NOTE: I know the post title isn't exactly relevant, but I couldn't resust.)
Saturday, November 19, 2011
All the Shamefulness of Cockfighting without Quite So Many Disembowelments
Best. Weekend. Ever.
As I write, not one but two major cat organizations--the International Cat Association and the Cat Fanciers Association--are throwing their annual feline fetes. Let me be clear: While I enjoy the spectacle of mass quantities of kitty cats, I have also always suspected these events to be shams. Pure popularity contests! Which is why I was happy to see that some passionate cat fanatics (you know, you can't spell 'fanatic' without C-A-T--albeit rearranged) have taken it upon themselves to organize actual competitions to determine objectively who is the top dog among cats (you know, you can't misspell 'competition' without C-A-T).
According to the New York Times, the newest distraction for sport-hungry animal lovers (or animal-hungry sport lovers) is feline agility contests ("In Feline Agility Competitions, the Biggest Obstacle Can Be the Cat"). In these competitions, cats negotiate obstacle courses of hoops, ramps, and tunnels, coaxed along by their owners with feathers and other dangling enticements. The challenge is not so much physical--any non-geriatric cat with basic motor functions can negotiate these obstacles--as psychological: You will likely go insane before convincing your cat to run the course.
Frankly, as much as I enjoy watching cats do pretty much anything, I can't see this "sport" taking off. Aside from the technical issues mentioned above, there are limited sponsorship opportunities. After all, the more people invest in cat-training, the more cats will choose to negotiate the obstacle course--if only to get these humans to leave them alone. And given that a successful "run" takes less than ten seconds, the opportunities to sell stuff during a match are only slightly fewer than those offered by a typical sumo-wrestling match. And we don't even get to see two fat guys collide.
As I write, not one but two major cat organizations--the International Cat Association and the Cat Fanciers Association--are throwing their annual feline fetes. Let me be clear: While I enjoy the spectacle of mass quantities of kitty cats, I have also always suspected these events to be shams. Pure popularity contests! Which is why I was happy to see that some passionate cat fanatics (you know, you can't spell 'fanatic' without C-A-T--albeit rearranged) have taken it upon themselves to organize actual competitions to determine objectively who is the top dog among cats (you know, you can't misspell 'competition' without C-A-T).
According to the New York Times, the newest distraction for sport-hungry animal lovers (or animal-hungry sport lovers) is feline agility contests ("In Feline Agility Competitions, the Biggest Obstacle Can Be the Cat"). In these competitions, cats negotiate obstacle courses of hoops, ramps, and tunnels, coaxed along by their owners with feathers and other dangling enticements. The challenge is not so much physical--any non-geriatric cat with basic motor functions can negotiate these obstacles--as psychological: You will likely go insane before convincing your cat to run the course.
Frankly, as much as I enjoy watching cats do pretty much anything, I can't see this "sport" taking off. Aside from the technical issues mentioned above, there are limited sponsorship opportunities. After all, the more people invest in cat-training, the more cats will choose to negotiate the obstacle course--if only to get these humans to leave them alone. And given that a successful "run" takes less than ten seconds, the opportunities to sell stuff during a match are only slightly fewer than those offered by a typical sumo-wrestling match. And we don't even get to see two fat guys collide.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Utterly Pointless Entry
In newspaper articles, one frequently hears commentary from the Union of Concerned Scientists. UCS is a Cambridge, Massachusetts, based organization dedicated to "working for a healthy environment and a safer world." The non-profit organization "combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices."
When asked to comment about the UCS, a spokesman for the Union of Indifferent Scientists said, "Meh."
When asked to comment about the UCS, a spokesman for the Union of Indifferent Scientists said, "Meh."
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Thursday Trendwatch
For those of you who still believe you will someday be able to retire, RETIREMENT PLANNING (10) makes sense. Financial planner David Ning offers some tips for fifty-somethings on avoiding problems in retirement, including things like not taking out a new 30-year-mortgage, watching out for debt, and investing cautiously. Looking for a savvy investment? One word, people: Eels.
They eat eel in China, don't they? At any rate, if you're thinking about retiring, you might want to avoid China, at least if you're planning on driving anywhere. With its enormous population and liberalizing attitudes toward private property, China has a growing number of car owners--and a correspondingly growing number of inexperienced drivers--which may partially account for the increasing number of accidents including a horrific BUS CRASH (9), that killed 20 people, including 18 kindergartners.
If there is a bright side to such a tragic story, it is that these children will be spared the spectacle of the new and improved WOODY WOODPECKER (8). The iconic cackler will receive a cinematic reboot by the same studio that brought you "Despicable Me." In the modern version, Woody will find himself imprisoned by the CDC after an outbreak of bird flu. Harrowing scenes of avian waterboarding are being scripted to give the character more "edge."
No word on whether TAYLOR LAUTNER (7) will appear in the Woodpecker extravaganza. If he does, though, I just hope, for his fans' sake, he takes his shirt off. Apparently, legions of tween girls, repressed housewives, and Jerry Sandusky are frustrated that the well-pectoraled werewolf appears shirtless only once in the latest "Twilight" movie.
The trendwatch certainly puts things in perspective. Clocking in at number 6 is JESSIE JAMES. She's a country singer who's trending because she's singing during halftime of tonight's Jets-Broncos game. The sad part of this is that the article pointing out this fact feels the need to clarify that Jessie James is NOT to be mistaken for her two famous namesakes: The guy who cheated on Sandra Bullock and, of course. . . "leggy British singer Jessie J."
I weep for our generation.
Because no Trendwatch would be complete without a bit of technology (except, of course, for all those previous trendwatches that didn't include a bit of technology), we present a story about 2013 FORD ESCAPE (5). In addition to being shiny, this model allows you to open the trunk by kicking the underside of the car. In the 2014 model year, Ford will introduce a feature whereby you can turn on the radio by tickling the windshield.
Thanksgiving is almost upon us, and with it will come the inevitable mishaps: an insufficient number of chairs for the dining room table; too many raisins in the stuffing (which, by the way, means ANY raisins in the stuffing); and, of course, an epidemic of third-degree burns suffered by those who improperly deep-fry their turkeys. Not to worry, though, WILLIAM SHATNER (3) is on the case! The venerable star of television, movies, and travel-website commercials has filmed a public service announcement warning people about the dangers of careless turkey-frying. Ah, Shatner! Is there anything he CAN'T do?
Well, apparently he can't do EVA LONGORIA (3). The "Desperate Housewives" sexpot is rumored to be dating Los Angeles Laker Matt Barnes. 'Cause her marriage to San Antonio Spur Tony Parker worked out so well, I guess. You think maybe she should start watching a different sport?
Of course, the rumors might not be true. Maybe the celebrity gossip mill is just hungry for a romance between a raven-haired beauty and an NBA baller, what with the whole Kardashian marriage implosion. And what's happening with Kim Kardashian you ask? (You know you did!) Well, if a group organizing a KARDASHIAN BOYCOTT (2) has its way, you may never know. The Facebook page calling for a boycott of this drain on the national attention span has over 113,000 "Likes."
Keeping up with the Kardashian, though, at least in terms of marital success is the number-one trendiest topic of this moment on the time-space continuum, RUBEN STUDDARD (1), who is getting a divorce. You may remember that Ruben Studdard won the second season of "American Idol." More likely, though, you remember the guy he beat, Clay Aiken. Poor guy just can't catch a break.
They eat eel in China, don't they? At any rate, if you're thinking about retiring, you might want to avoid China, at least if you're planning on driving anywhere. With its enormous population and liberalizing attitudes toward private property, China has a growing number of car owners--and a correspondingly growing number of inexperienced drivers--which may partially account for the increasing number of accidents including a horrific BUS CRASH (9), that killed 20 people, including 18 kindergartners.
If there is a bright side to such a tragic story, it is that these children will be spared the spectacle of the new and improved WOODY WOODPECKER (8). The iconic cackler will receive a cinematic reboot by the same studio that brought you "Despicable Me." In the modern version, Woody will find himself imprisoned by the CDC after an outbreak of bird flu. Harrowing scenes of avian waterboarding are being scripted to give the character more "edge."
No word on whether TAYLOR LAUTNER (7) will appear in the Woodpecker extravaganza. If he does, though, I just hope, for his fans' sake, he takes his shirt off. Apparently, legions of tween girls, repressed housewives, and Jerry Sandusky are frustrated that the well-pectoraled werewolf appears shirtless only once in the latest "Twilight" movie.
The trendwatch certainly puts things in perspective. Clocking in at number 6 is JESSIE JAMES. She's a country singer who's trending because she's singing during halftime of tonight's Jets-Broncos game. The sad part of this is that the article pointing out this fact feels the need to clarify that Jessie James is NOT to be mistaken for her two famous namesakes: The guy who cheated on Sandra Bullock and, of course. . . "leggy British singer Jessie J."
I weep for our generation.
Because no Trendwatch would be complete without a bit of technology (except, of course, for all those previous trendwatches that didn't include a bit of technology), we present a story about 2013 FORD ESCAPE (5). In addition to being shiny, this model allows you to open the trunk by kicking the underside of the car. In the 2014 model year, Ford will introduce a feature whereby you can turn on the radio by tickling the windshield.
Thanksgiving is almost upon us, and with it will come the inevitable mishaps: an insufficient number of chairs for the dining room table; too many raisins in the stuffing (which, by the way, means ANY raisins in the stuffing); and, of course, an epidemic of third-degree burns suffered by those who improperly deep-fry their turkeys. Not to worry, though, WILLIAM SHATNER (3) is on the case! The venerable star of television, movies, and travel-website commercials has filmed a public service announcement warning people about the dangers of careless turkey-frying. Ah, Shatner! Is there anything he CAN'T do?
Of course, the rumors might not be true. Maybe the celebrity gossip mill is just hungry for a romance between a raven-haired beauty and an NBA baller, what with the whole Kardashian marriage implosion. And what's happening with Kim Kardashian you ask? (You know you did!) Well, if a group organizing a KARDASHIAN BOYCOTT (2) has its way, you may never know. The Facebook page calling for a boycott of this drain on the national attention span has over 113,000 "Likes."
Keeping up with the Kardashian, though, at least in terms of marital success is the number-one trendiest topic of this moment on the time-space continuum, RUBEN STUDDARD (1), who is getting a divorce. You may remember that Ruben Studdard won the second season of "American Idol." More likely, though, you remember the guy he beat, Clay Aiken. Poor guy just can't catch a break.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)