Friday, August 24, 2012
No, Mitt
Mitt, giving 10% of your income to the Mormon Church is not giving the money to charity, it's giving it to the Mormon Church. Charity is helping people, not an established religion become rich(er) and restrict their work to just Mormons. Charities don't discriminate, religions and churches do. That's what your money supports, discrimination by a church.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
A Choice
We have with the 2012 presidential election a choice, one more divergent than we've had in many elections. We have the choice between the sitting president who weighs the full range of choices, hears all the voices for reason, and then decides. Someone who then explains his choice with reasons.
And we have a presidential candidate who simply cites rhetoric and says, "Trust me." Does he explain anything? Has he explained his religion in his life, his decision and would be in his role as president? Has he explained his financial wealth and income and his income taxes?
Has he told us who's backing his campaign and why he has private, secret meetings with wealthy donors out of the public eye and media? Has he told us who's all in his campaign staff and everyone he's listening to for advice? Has he full explained his position besides rhetoric and attacking Obama?
In short, we have a choice between a President who listen, thinks, decides and then explains and we have a candidate who simply says, "Trust me." Like all those companies Bain Capitol bought and sold and all those employees who lost their jobs, their health insurance and their pensions?
It's our choice, choose wisely. Rememer George W. Bush's "Compassionate conservatism", where did it go with the tax cuts, annual deficit, national debt, two wars and more so the economy and jobs? Did he say, "Trust me"? And how did that choice go for us?
And we have a presidential candidate who simply cites rhetoric and says, "Trust me." Does he explain anything? Has he explained his religion in his life, his decision and would be in his role as president? Has he explained his financial wealth and income and his income taxes?
Has he told us who's backing his campaign and why he has private, secret meetings with wealthy donors out of the public eye and media? Has he told us who's all in his campaign staff and everyone he's listening to for advice? Has he full explained his position besides rhetoric and attacking Obama?
In short, we have a choice between a President who listen, thinks, decides and then explains and we have a candidate who simply says, "Trust me." Like all those companies Bain Capitol bought and sold and all those employees who lost their jobs, their health insurance and their pensions?
It's our choice, choose wisely. Rememer George W. Bush's "Compassionate conservatism", where did it go with the tax cuts, annual deficit, national debt, two wars and more so the economy and jobs? Did he say, "Trust me"? And how did that choice go for us?
News Bits
Every Sunday I buy three newspapers, the Tacoma News Tribune, Seattle Times and the New York Times. They don't sell other Sunday papers on Sunday anywhere anymore, but I'd love to read the old Seattle PI and the Washington Post. Yes, it's the age of on-line and download newspapers, and yes I subscribe to the New York Times download edition (great for daily paper).
But I really like print. I love to take over the table, get the endless pot of coffee, some snacks and feast on reading every page. Ok, scanning every page, reading the headlines and the opening paragraphs for the gist of the article, and then more if it's interesting. it all makes for a good Sunday morning.
Anyway, there were two articles of note in the New York Times, one which I'll address directly and one indirectly. First, the article by James Gleick, "Auto Correct Ths!", about how we rely on autocorrection of grammar but mostly spelling to not just help us but save us from our own stupidity.
There is a very simple solution which I do all the time. First, I turn off all automatic checks in all my applications for anything, spelling, grammar, html code, etc. I see what I type and then reread and edit or run checks to correct the errors. It's why there are typos in my posts. Sometimes I catch them while typing, some while editing and some later when reading them after they're posted.
This requires me to think more than just type and hope. I also keep my Oxford American-English dictionary application open on my desktop as well as a print edition of the same dictionary by the desk to access when I write. The app is part of Mac's software for Mac's. I also have the Oxford American-English dictionary app on my iPhone and iPad.
Dictionaries are useful, especially if you actually use them.
Second is the article by Matthew Hutson, "Still Puritan After All These Years." Well, if there is anything I've learned about psychological or sociological studies reported or used in articles, it's not to accept those done by university professors on college students. Why?
We're not college students anymore.
As adults we are far different than we were in college, if we went to college. Doing psychological research studies on college students is a captive and biased audience and population base for studies. They're not normal people from anyone older than 25 years old.
And so any results don't apply beyond being interesting, and any article citing those studies isn't worth much more than interesting and totally useless for the general population. I read the article for their conclusion then ignore those conclusions for the same reasons, just a biased study to prove a point.
And what's more is that all too often the study is a small, very focused study where they or the writers extrapolate big conclusions about all of us. Really? In implying conclusions from the results they forget the rule about assuming too much. And in this article, they simply stated the obvious which they didn't need to cite the study.
Anyway, that's my reading for this Sunday.
But I really like print. I love to take over the table, get the endless pot of coffee, some snacks and feast on reading every page. Ok, scanning every page, reading the headlines and the opening paragraphs for the gist of the article, and then more if it's interesting. it all makes for a good Sunday morning.
Anyway, there were two articles of note in the New York Times, one which I'll address directly and one indirectly. First, the article by James Gleick, "Auto Correct Ths!", about how we rely on autocorrection of grammar but mostly spelling to not just help us but save us from our own stupidity.
There is a very simple solution which I do all the time. First, I turn off all automatic checks in all my applications for anything, spelling, grammar, html code, etc. I see what I type and then reread and edit or run checks to correct the errors. It's why there are typos in my posts. Sometimes I catch them while typing, some while editing and some later when reading them after they're posted.
This requires me to think more than just type and hope. I also keep my Oxford American-English dictionary application open on my desktop as well as a print edition of the same dictionary by the desk to access when I write. The app is part of Mac's software for Mac's. I also have the Oxford American-English dictionary app on my iPhone and iPad.
Second is the article by Matthew Hutson, "Still Puritan After All These Years." Well, if there is anything I've learned about psychological or sociological studies reported or used in articles, it's not to accept those done by university professors on college students. Why?
As adults we are far different than we were in college, if we went to college. Doing psychological research studies on college students is a captive and biased audience and population base for studies. They're not normal people from anyone older than 25 years old.
And so any results don't apply beyond being interesting, and any article citing those studies isn't worth much more than interesting and totally useless for the general population. I read the article for their conclusion then ignore those conclusions for the same reasons, just a biased study to prove a point.
And what's more is that all too often the study is a small, very focused study where they or the writers extrapolate big conclusions about all of us. Really? In implying conclusions from the results they forget the rule about assuming too much. And in this article, they simply stated the obvious which they didn't need to cite the study.
Anyway, that's my reading for this Sunday.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Dear MSNBC
Would the hosts of some of the news, opinion and anaysis shows on MSNBC, specifically Ed Schulz, Lawrence O'Donnell and Chris Matthews please stop interrupting your guests and let them speak. If they're off topic or talking too much, then fine, kindly interrupt them to bring them back to the conversation, but you frequently interrupt them for no reason.
And this is why I often turn the channel, or more so, just turn the TV off. I don't want to hear bickering on MSNBC's shows. I want good debate and discussion and occasionally good conversation, such as is found on Martin Bashir and Racheal Maddow show, often with guest host such as Ezra Klein and Michael Eric Dyson, and consistently found on the two weekend shows with Chris Hayes and Melissa Harris-Perry.
That's my bitch with ya'll tonight. After watching Michael Eric Dyson sub for Ed Schulz and Ezra Klein sub for Racheal Maddow, I turned off Lawrence O'Donnell when he did his usual loud interruption of his guests to make his point without listening to their point let alone let them finish. And for that I have stopped watching his show.
If you want to rant, save it for your time, not your guests. Otherwise, you've lost this viewer.
And this is why I often turn the channel, or more so, just turn the TV off. I don't want to hear bickering on MSNBC's shows. I want good debate and discussion and occasionally good conversation, such as is found on Martin Bashir and Racheal Maddow show, often with guest host such as Ezra Klein and Michael Eric Dyson, and consistently found on the two weekend shows with Chris Hayes and Melissa Harris-Perry.
That's my bitch with ya'll tonight. After watching Michael Eric Dyson sub for Ed Schulz and Ezra Klein sub for Racheal Maddow, I turned off Lawrence O'Donnell when he did his usual loud interruption of his guests to make his point without listening to their point let alone let them finish. And for that I have stopped watching his show.
If you want to rant, save it for your time, not your guests. Otherwise, you've lost this viewer.
Saturday, June 9, 2012
Dear Speed TV
I hope you understand that watching qualifying for Formula One is far more interesting than NASCAR qualifying. I like both but watching Sprint Cup car drive around Pocono Raceway does not compare to watching a Formula One car drive around Montreal Ciruit Gilles Villenue.
The decision not to switch to the qualifying at Montreal for the last runners at Pocono is really dumb and stupid for the viewers like me who want to see the whole qualfying sessons at Montreal than Pocono. And the decision to tape delay qualifying for the missed time is even dumber and more stupid as you can track the qualifying in real-time on Formula One's Website from your computer, tablet or smart phone.
And by the time they showed queue three qualifying for the top ten spots, the Formula One Website had already posted the final starting positions for the grid for Sunday's race. Kinda' takes the surprise out of it, ya think? And do your fans a favor, put a sock in Sam Posey. No one likes his hype anymore.
The decision not to switch to the qualifying at Montreal for the last runners at Pocono is really dumb and stupid for the viewers like me who want to see the whole qualfying sessons at Montreal than Pocono. And the decision to tape delay qualifying for the missed time is even dumber and more stupid as you can track the qualifying in real-time on Formula One's Website from your computer, tablet or smart phone.
And by the time they showed queue three qualifying for the top ten spots, the Formula One Website had already posted the final starting positions for the grid for Sunday's race. Kinda' takes the surprise out of it, ya think? And do your fans a favor, put a sock in Sam Posey. No one likes his hype anymore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
