Paris calls Brit

Paris: "Oh my god, Brit, we're like in a presidential commercial, we're like so political."

Brit: "Isn't that so cool? And I think it was the black one, not that other guy, the unpopular one."

Paris: "Of course, we'd never be seen with that loser."

Brit: "And just think what this will do for our images. Maybe people will finally start to appreciated how smart we are."

Paris: "This is the best thing that has ever happened to us."

Brit: "Yeah."

Where are all the tree huggers?

The building where I work is being torn down soon to make way for a bigger more impressive building without me in it. I'm being marched off to some trailer somewhere else. They've moved several trees that the deemed worth saving. Others have recently been marked with a giant fluorescent death mark in the form of an X. The sprinklers have been shut off and all the grass is dying the long yellow death of thirst.

Up in Berkeley, there are other trees marked for doom. For 17 months, some people have lived in these trees to prevent the falling of the ax. I'm not sure I fully get the protest. These weren't native trees. These were trees planted back in the 1920s to provide a pleasant environment. Yes, I guess it's sad when any tree dies, but many of these trees will be moved. Is this just a protest against all progress? The athletic program can't get a new facility built because of these protesters. 17 months. UC has stopped these tree folk from getting outside food. They get energy bars with 1800 calories a day, the minimum a doctor says they need to survive. And they get water. And I guess, they take this food to survivve even though it seems like they should refuse the food, if they really wanted to send a message. 17 months. I guess, these folks really didn't have anything else to do.

Still, I see the trees outside, and I wonder, where are all the tree huggers? Outside of Berkeley, does anyone care?

Hacking Thursday

It's been at least 3 or 4 years since I've even picked up a golf club. And yet, today, I found myself sloughing through 18 holes with a foreign delagation of amateur champions. For four and a half hours, I hacked balls all over the place as these patient players, each with over 20 years of experience patiently waited. The thing is I'm sure they could have helped my game out, if they had spoken any English. All they spoke was Korean. Incidentally, the balls I used were stamped with the name of an old dot com start up that died a slow death. If the company, Viquity, were still around, maybe they would have appreciated all the free advertising I left for them all over the place.

I guess there are a couple reasons that I haven't golfed in a couple years. Primarily, I can't really understand the obsession of hitting a small dimpled ball into a hole in fewer hits than someone else. It's nice to make a good shot. And I guess if I ever got good and could do it consistentl, that would be nice, but I don't think I'll ever get to the place, where it's like making a nice shot in basketball. There's just not the same elation. It's just a personal preference. And secondly, golf really does get to be a pricey habit. I just haven't been motivated enough to spend the time and money it takes to get good. I guess I'd like to hit around a little more, but I don't think I'd ever want to be anything more than a hacker.

Past weekend

So I went to a couple social events this weekend. The first was a first birthday for a set of twins. There were a couple kids there, all under the age of five. There was a sandbox and a bounce house. It was lots of fun for the kids. Us adults did okay too. It was a very nice day and there were several people I hadn't seen in some time. Social events are like tag team wrestling now. For a couple minutes, I'll watch the kid while Wifey socializes and then we'll switch off. It's also nice if an uncle or auntie are around for an occassional shift.

The second social event was also real nice, but we had the only little kid. In the end it still comes out to the same tag team socializing approach. Wifey eats while I watch the kid and then we trade off. But without the other little kids circling around, the conversations are different. There are different interrests. Suddenly, we're too old to really get it.

This isn't all a bad thing. It's nice to have the kids to hang with, but it's also nice to get out for some adult conversation. But I think I see why feel inclined to pressure their friends into things. Married couples push their single friends. Babied friends push their married friends to have kids. It's so everyone will have someone else they can talk to that can still relate. On some level it's even a little selfish. Strange. We really don't have to all be the same, you know.

Two things I learned yesterday

1. Changing bathtubs can be fairly traumatic for a little kid. Our little one has clearly outgrown her tub, so yesterday we replaced it with a larger tub. She stood in the water and refused to sit down. Then she howled at the top of her lungs for several minutes. I thought it would be freeing to have more space and more water. But somehow this was upsetting.

2. The Korean word for an American is "mi guk". American soldiers travling to Vietnam during the war would often be transported through Korea. They heard the term for Americans and thought the Koreans were saying "Me, Gook." Thus from American ear was born the racial slur for Vietnamese people. Since all Asians look alike. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a stupid racial slur has a stupid origin.

Keeping the eye on the ball

I've been avoiding ranting about presidential politics for a reason. It's a long season and it's early. But I've got to jump in today.

If I had ever been pretentious enough to be one of the 10 or so people that subscribed to the New Yorker, today would be the day I cancelled my subscription. I don't get it. I would expected this magazine to understand the difference between clever satire and offensive inappropriate personal attacks. I would have figured someone at the magazine would have seen this cartoon and held the presses and said, this really wasn't a good idea.

Or was this just another backhanded way to demonstrate some sort of political agenda? There's a large segment of the population that wouldn't get the satire and see it as a genuine position cartoon. Point McCain. Or maybe the New Yorker was trying to pull another Jesse Jackson type opportunity for Barrack to slam a bias and look good. Point Barrack. Is this just a meaningless media story during a lull in the campaign to generate hits/ratings? Point Media. Really, the losers are all of us. This type of cartoon and the resulting media field day have little place in political discourse. Because of this, we get distracted from the real issues again.

Shame on the New Yorker for causing all this.

Long past the early thirties, I teeter on the edge of the mid thirties towards the inevitable late thirties. Yup. Getting older once again. Today is basketball night. I wonder how many years I really have of running up and down the court. Probably many. Probably not very many at an effective level.

Every once in a while, I think it's time to quit. The equation of pain vs. fun, divided by diminishing skill keeps changing. Can't be too much longer, can it?

State says what to do with your hands

As of today, California's newest law says you must have a hands free device to talk on your cellphone while driving. I'm not sure what the citation is worth, and I'm not planning on finding out. I think it's an okay law, but it really doesn't get to the whole point. Arnie and other politics have lauded this as a law that's going to save 300 lives a year because that's how many accidents occur with people on cellphones. But here are the missing points. Studies show that most of these are because people get distracted by their conservations. NOT because their hands aren't on the steering wheel. The real impact of this law might be a lot less than 300 saved lives. Like I said, this law probably will save somebody and maybe that makes it a good law, but I think they may have over sold it a bit.

The other issue I have with the law is that it doesn't address the many other bad behaviors that cause accidents. Applying make-up, eating, reading the newspaper. Yeah, the speeding law as it exists is sort of a catch all. But again, maybe this new law just wasn't comprehensive enough.

Maybe it was just about selling headsets. Maybe it was the phone lobby.