Unbecoming Levity

Insider Executive from Insurance Company Tells the TRUTH

Abacquer — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:42:00 -0400

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QwX_soZ1GI

Attention Wal*Mart Shoppers: You Make Me Sick

Abacquer — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 09:54:00 -0500

I'd like to take this opportunity to express my utter disgust at the crowd of shoppers who mobbed the doors of a Wal*Mart in Long Island yesterday morning, broke through the doors, and trampled a 34-year old employee to death. There is NOTHING that can be found in Wal*Mart that is worth crushing a human being for--none of you were in desperate need of food or medicines that could only be had in that store and nowhere else on the planet. Believe it or not, your kids will survive if they don't get Guitar Hero for Christmas.

Wal-Mart Employee Trampled to Death (The New York Times):
...Detective Lt. Michael Fleming, who is in charge of the investigation for the Nassau police, said the store lacked adequate security. He called the scene "utter chaos" and said the "crowd was out of control." As for those who had run over the victim, criminal charges were possible, the lieutenant said. "I’ve heard other people call this an accident, but it is not," he said. "Certainly it was a foreseeable act."...

I strongly urge the detective and the county DA to pursue criminal charges against these people. There is security video from the store, so there should be no problem identifying them and providing evidence of their guilt. Nobody "accidentally" breaks a door down and kills a man. The Damour family will have an empty seat at the dinner table for the rest of their lives because of a bunch of stupid assholes wanted to save a buck.

It's 2008 folks, you don't get to be cattle anymore. Whoever went to that Wal*Mart yesterday morning and forgot to bring their humanity? I hope you rot in prison.

Election: We've Come So Far That Some Young People are Not Amazed

Abacquer — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 18:57:00 -0500

My dear friend Maggie of terrific blog Pandora's Tea Room has posted a thoughtful article about trying to communicate with her students about how historic this election is. She comes to the conclusion that we have moved so far from the days of institutionalized repression that many of her students don't see the idea of an African-American President as a very big deal...

On campus this historic election day (Pandora's Tea Room):
…I'm amazed that these young people are growing up without understanding the possibility of social change that has been (nearly) realized in the last fifty years. In fact, one student started comparing us to his more enlightened friends in Germany, saying "we're horrible and we're never going to change," and that at least did allow me to make my point.

...In a way it's good they don't see how amazing this is, because it means that it feels completely natural and reasonable to them. I just want them to understand that we can keep improving…

Election: Desperate Republicans in PA -- Hello Again Reverend Wright

Abacquer — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 07:43:00 -0500

Well, we knew it was coming. The Republican Federal Committee of Pennsylvania has seen fit to launch a last minute Reverend Wright ad to try and scare white people away from Barack Obama. Once again the naked desperation of the Republican party is evident and the depths to which they will sink boundless.

I'm going to boil this down to quick bullet points:

Reverend Wright preached at the Trinity United Church of Christ for 36 years and yet all we seem to see in the attack ads is the same few seconds of a couple sermons. While I'm sure he was full of fire and energy as a preacher, I'm also quite sure it wasn't 36 years of nothing but these few excerpted seconds.
Barack Obama has stated that he was not at the Church when these few seconds of vitriolic sermonizing took place.
Barack Obama has condemned the statements made by Wright, and has subsequently left the church.
Most importantly, Barack Obama is not Reverend Wright -- it's a little ridiculous how Obama is consistently attacked by the Republicans for things other people did or said.

There is more to Barack Obama than who his pastor was, and there is more to Reverend Wright than a few seconds of criticizing the USA. As far as I am concerned Barack addressed this issue admirably in his speech A More Perfect Union where he discussed how there is fear and distrust on both sides of the racial divide--a divide we need to reach across if we want to progress as a nation.

...The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through - a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American...

Joe Biden, known for stumbling over his own words, aptly summed up my feelings on this particular issue of division while speaking at an event in Tallahassee, FL on Sunday:

...We've got to reach out, we've got to end this. Somebody's got to be big enough to stand up and end this...

As far as I'm concerned, Barack Obama has shown he's big enough to stand up and end this. And this is why we hear about Reverend Wright, but not Pastor Hagee. It's why we hear about Bill Ayres, but not the Keating Five.

The Obama campaign has been largely a positive one, and I think it is a prelude to a positive presidency--something we sorely need in these times.

Election: Palin in Favor of Federal Gay Marriage Ban

Abacquer — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 02:08:00 -0500

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised given what a wackaloon theist McCain's screwhead VP pick is, but just in case it wasn't obvious... Sarah Palin supports a federal Gay Marriage ban--because her religion frowns upon it, it should be illegal for people who don't share her religion. Basically, because she is arrogant.

...in my own, state, I have voted along with the vast majority of Alaskans who had the opportunity to vote to amend our Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish on a federal level that that's where we would go because I don't support gay marriage. I'm not going to be out there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment telling what they can and can't do, should and should not do, but I certainly can express my own opinion here and take actions that I believe would be best for traditional marriage and that's casting my votes and speaking up for traditional marriage that, that instrument that it's the foundation of our society is that strong family and that's based on that traditional definition of marriage...

Knuckledraggers love this witch. If McCain doesn't win, I expect we will be hearing from her again in 2012. Crooks and liars has the video and transcript of Palin's statement to CBN's David Brody.

Election: Obama Assassination Plot?

Abacquer — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:28:00 -0400

Reuters: Obama assassination plot thwarted

Sick people in this world, man. Sick people.

DRM, Electronic Arts, and Censorship

Abacquer — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:52:00 -0400

So, the creators of Spore, Electronic Arts, created an online discussion forum where people could talk about Spore. Unfortunately they made the mistake of offering a feedback forum where people could post feedback about the game, and the reviews are positively ghastly. So many people are irate about how shallow the game is and the various bugs in it that last week EA released a patch for the game, only a week after the game went to market. Anybody in software development knows what happens when you rush a patch out the door. And it happened big time... the patch made the game experience WORSE for a lot of users, fixing some bugs but creating a whole host of new ones. Interest in the game is visibly on the wane, online Spore traffic has been pretty much falling since day one and people are already clamoring for "expansion packs". It's generally not a good sign if you are looking for game expansions after owning the game for one week. By comparison I've owned Oblivion IV for over a year now and I only purchased one of the available expansions. I haven't needed to buy any more because there is plenty of content there to keep I (and my family) entertained. But I digress..

The interesting thing is (as you might expect) a number of EA's customers are not at all pleased that they are limited to 3 installs of their game before it won't install anymore, and some are unhappy with SecuRom being installed on their machines without their consent. So along with feedback about various other flaws in the game, EA gets plenty of feedback about DRM and the headaches it is causing their customers.

Which they delete.

Yeah, you heard that right. If you post feedback about the DRM in Spore, they simply delete your feedback. They don't want customers discussing DRM or complaining about DRM. And the reason is quite simply this:

DRM does not stop pirates. It never did. The day Spore was released, there was already a DRM-free hacked version available for download from the various piracy sites. ANYBODY who did not have an ethical problem with stealing the game, could simply download a fully functional pirate version. Personally, I think game makers should be paid for their efforts, so this is not an option for me.

Electronic Arts isn't staffed by morons--they have tech savvy engineers working there who know full well that DRM will not stop pirates. So why do they keep claiming they put it in there to prevent pirates from stealing their game? Why is it really there?

My theory (and a lot of other people think so too) is they want to control (or basically kill) the resale market. If you want to play Spore and figure you'll buy a used copy in a year or so, think again. By putting the install limit on the game, EA prevents you from selling your property to a third party when you tire of it. Why would anyone buy Spore if it had only 1 install left, or less? So if someone wants Spore six months from now, they're going to have to buy it from EA--or they will get stiffed on reinstalls if one is ever needed.

That's fairly evil and a number of people (including myself) have posted threads to that effect on EA's feedback forum only to have them quietly disappear.

Which is also evil.

Watching Ants

Abacquer — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:04:00 -0400

Yes I know, first I'm writing about the likelihood of contacting alien civilizations, then I'm talking about immortal humans who have sex for three days straight and write books in their sleep, and then about creepy flickrites, and now I am writing about watching ants. You don't come here for consistency.

I was leaving my office around lunchtime the other day for a brief walk. The front of the building has a raised garden with some azaleas and a really nice looking stone wall bordering it. As I walked out I noticed the wall was swimming in tiny black ants. Not the big ones you see wondering solo, but hordes of teensy ones. Usually that means that a tasty food item has been discovered and the colony is out to disassemble it and carry it back. I could see where the ants were clumped up, but didn't notice anything there that I recognized as anything ants would want to eat. But I figured maybe somebody had spilled a soda and they were gobbling up dried sugars right off the rockface. I went off to my walk and didn't think any more about it.

Later that night when I left work, I glanced at the wall and noticed the big cluster of ants was still there, but it had moved a few feet to the right. Again no food was evident. Just ants in a big tangled mass. So I leaned close to peer at them and noticed that ants were bunching up around other ants, and apparently biting each other. Other ants seemed to be carrying away dead (or dying ants). I leaned back and noticed that unlike a typical feeding situation where you see a river of ants leading from the colony to the food and back, this was the meeting place of two rivers of ants. One from one crevice about 5 feet to the left, and another from a crevice about 4 feet to the right.

That's when I realized I wasn't watching a feeding frenzy. I was watching a war. It was an epic battle between two colonies of ants that had both claimed this rock wall as their territory. Thousands upon thousands of ants continually poured from both crevices, and converged in the center to engage in a massive melee. It was mesmerizing to watch the supply lines bringing in fresh ants as the wounded or the dead were hauled away (presumably as food). They moved in tides and complex whorling patterns as they made war... it was so intricate it was actually mesmerizing. I checked my camera bag but I had neglected to bring ANY macro lenses with me that day, or I would have had pictures of all-out insect warfare and abject carnage to upload to my photostream.

It made me a little sad to think of these ants fighting for hours over a few feet of turf. After 15 minutes I suddenly realized the time and made a mental note to bring my macro lens to work today.

But when I arrived this morning, the battle was over, and the battlefield had been swept clean. Had I not noticed it, the day before, I never would have known it had happened. In my inner thoughts I could not help but make the connection between the affairs of the ants and the affairs of humanity. In 100,000 years, if humans are still here, what great battles and wretched suffering of ours will have passed into the unknown? Will we forget World War 2? Will we forget the Holocaust? Will we repeat it? Big thoughts from the tragic ant war of June 25, 2008.

Creepy

Abacquer — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:02:00 -0400

What is it that prevents some people from realizing when they are being creepy? I recently uploaded some photos to my flickr photostream from a birthday party I attended. Then later I was tooling around in the Fitchburg Photo Pool and saw some cool architectural photos, so I left a comment telling the photographer I thought the shots were nice.

Within minutes I had three e-mails. The first was flickr informing me that the photographer had added me as a contact. The second seemed nice enough, the photographer wanted to talk about other landmarks that were good to shoot. The third seemed a little peculiar and forward for someone who doesn't know me from dirt:

"Hey how do you know that girl XXXXX in your photostream? She's a real knockout!"

So I responded about Fitchburg landmarks, and on the second item, remarked just that she was a friend of a friend, and that she was very photogenic.

Within minutes, two more e-mails. More chatting about landmarks and camera gear as well, and the second:

"Man is she cute. Hmm."

So I'm getting a little weirded out by this dude. I mean, if you are friends with someone it's one thing to compliment someone they know once, but if you barely know a person it's kind of creepy to do it repeatedly. So I decided I didn't really want to keep talking to this guy, and chose not to respond.

A few minutes later, another e-mail comes along:

"Do you think she would let me take some shots of her sometime?"

Yeah. That will happen. She's going to pose for some stranger on the internet because a friend of a friend photographed her at a party. Who asks a question like this of someone they barely know? I have a terrible time just asking people I do know if they will pose for me.

Any way, I really didn't want to talk to creepy dude any more, I knew if I called him on it I'd get assured up and down that his request was completely innocent in nature. As if it is quite normal to ask strangers on the internet if you can photograph their friends. I mean seriously, if you are THAT desperate for models, there are places to go (http://www.modelmayhem.com/). So I just blocked him... that will be the end of that, thanks.

I generally think it wise, when someone adds you as a contact on flickr, or favorites one of your photos, to check their profile and see what groups they subscribe to, and to also check their favorites. It's usually quite clear when they are using flickr for something other than an appreciation of great (or even mediocre) photography. If you see anything that looks creepy, it's probably a good idea to block them.

Creepy dude didn't have any bizarre group subscriptions or prurient favorites that I could see, but his behavior was enough to warrant the block IMHO. The only thing his profile had to say about him other than a laundry list of his gear was that he was "Male and single".

Call me "Male and unsurprised".

Watching Street Photographers at Work

Abacquer — Thu, 22 May 2008 18:39:00 -0400

Street photography isn't really my thing, but I try to do it from time to time. The problem I have is that I am very shy about taking pictures of people without their permission, even though by and in large, I have a right to do so in public. I find if you get permission, the subject changes and loses the look that drew you to the photo in the first place.

This is why I am always amazed (or cringing) when I see real street photographers at work. I am just not as brave as these guys:

(video) Joel Meyerowitz On Street Photography

(video) WNYC Streetshots: Bruce Gilden

Comment Moderation is now On - Thank the Asshole

Abacquer — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:06:00 -0400

Friends and readers, ULev has acquired its own troll. I should feel flattered I guess, but this coward is such a scumbag he's not above leaving anonymous comments insulting my daughter. What does this mean for everyone else? From now on once you post a comment it will be sent to me for moderation. This means it will not appear on the blog until I approve it. I apologize for the delay. Thank the asshole.

Red States and Republicans Do Not Have a Monopoly on Knuckledraggers

Abacquer — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:51:00 -0400

"What you have to spew and spread is extremely dangerous ... it's dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists! This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in God. Get out of that seat ... You have no right to be here! We believe in something. You believe in destroying! You believe in destroying what this state was built upon."

-- Rep. Monique Davis (D-Chicago), speaking to atheist Rob Sherman

If Rob Sherman was a Jew or a Muslim or a Methodist or anything but an atheist, Representative Monique Davis would be openly castigated from every direction (and deservedly so). But it's okay to hate atheists here. Welcome to my country.

Mr. Sherman was testifying to the Illinois House State Government Administration Committee about a one million dollar grant slated to go to a Baptist church that was trying to rebuild from a fire. As you know churches already don't pay taxes, so it seems rather curious that anyone would think it okay for tax money to go to a church--especially in a country where church and state are supposed to be separate. The grant money story is pretty smelly all on its own, but I am not at all surprised that any outspoken atheist would have an opinion on the matter, and might choose to testify to government bodies on the matter.

But Monique Davis feels otherwise. She feels atheists have no right to testify to the American government. And for that matter we are destroyers, and dangerous to children. And it's okay to censor or silence us. Oh and the country was founded on Christian principles.

How does someone like this even get elected in the first place? Shame on you Monique Davis. You madam, are no Democrat.

Hat tip to the excellent science blog Pharyngula for the story. You won't be hearing about it on Fox.

Civic Duty, Done

Abacquer — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:02:00 -0500

Well I hit the polling station this morning on my way to work and did my civic duty. I stared at that ballot for a long hard time trying to decide what was most important to me.

I like both of these candidates, and I have an admiration for them both. In the end, in what was to my mind, a battle between practicality and idealism, practicality won, and Hillary Clinton got my vote.

But I think Barack will be the winner, and that's okay too. I'll be just as happy to vote for him on election day.

After voting I asked the election observer if I could photograph the polling station. She called her boss and checked and said that I could do so but only if I stood "behind the rail" which put me in an awkward position, leading to the overly wide crop you see above. But that's okay, I was still happy to take the shot. I think it came out pretty good considering I was rushing. Two different wards vote here, 2B and 2A. I'm in ward 2A. Turnout, according to the volunteers and staffers present, had been slow. When I put my ballot in the counting machine said it was number 67 for the day. One of the volunteers said the weather was contributing to the slow turnout and that she thought it would pick up later.

I would hope so!

I had heard on Save Fitchburg that someone would be present collecting signatures for a petition to revisit the charter of the City of Fitchburg for possible revision. The charter hasn't been updated since the early 1970's, but nobody was there doing that when I showed up. Hmm.

EDIT: I forgot to mention, I handed out a couple of my photography business cards while I was there! Hopefully something good will come of that.

Andrew Meyer's Shocking Performance

Abacquer — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:06:00 -0400

It's funny that James wrote about this today, because I wrote about it last night on a discussion forum. I'm pleased that James and I saw the same videos and came to the same conclusions. If you haven't heard, a young man (Andrew Meyer) caused a disruption at a John Kerry Q&A forum and finally was removed by the police. During his removal he became more combative and resisted the officers which ended up getting him arrested and finally tasered as it was the only way to get him to stop shouting and remove him from the hall. Predictably (I suppose) people have seen an editted version of the video that makes Mr. Meyer look like more of a victim than he actually was and the most outspoken conclusions I see on YouTube basically boil down to "he asked a question 'they' didn't like so he was tasered and arrested, wake up America, we are living in a dictatorship". *yawn*

Anyway, here's what I wrote on a discussion forum where someone had posted the editted version of the video under the heading "A Most Terrifying Video":

The video was editted to make the kid look more like a victim than he was. There is a more complete video with commentary that makes the kid's behavior easier to see through and makes the cops behavior more understandable:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1na1hcGQCHg

I'm a liberal and I believe in civil liberties. The kid was totally in control of that situation, he WANTED a big scene and he got it. He was totally playing to the cameras.

The cops were standing behind him because he had a reputation for causing trouble at public events. The moment he took the mic and began speaking one of the college officials went to the police and said "he's a troublemaker, watch out". This made the police suspicious of him. At one point a police officer told him to finish his question and let Kerry answer, he responded rudely (through the mic so everyone could hear) and continued. As Kerry tried to answer the boy's first question, he ignored Kerry and launched into his second question. It was clear at that point he was there to talk not to Kerry, but to the crowd.

Well it's cool if you want to talk to a crowd. You can put a video on YouTube, or you can schedule your own rally and see who shows up, but you can't just grab the mic, take the floor, and talk whatever crap you want as if it is your show. It's not your show and the organizers are going to eject you if you won't play nicely, which they attempted to do at the end of his THIRD question which is the part you got to see. No surprises there.

All this boy had to do is say "sorry officer, I'll cooperate" and in all likelihood they would explain to him why they were ejecting him the moment they got him out of the room. Which by the way, they did, except you don't get to see that because the video that was posted at the top of the thread doesn't include it. Heck, if he had cooperated they probably would have let him go at the door.

This video does show his detainment once they get him outside the room:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7NWukZhsiBw

Watch that video where he reveals by his own behavior just how much of a neurotic nut he is:
"They're going to give me to the government! They're going to kill me!"
Those of you who think its actually okay to scream HELP HELP and WHY WHY when a police officer has decided to detain you should take heed: when the police arrest you, they are allowed to hold you and don't have to charge you with ANYTHING for 48 hours. That is the law of this country. If you don't agree with it, please contact your representatives and work to get the law changed. If a police officer tries to escort you out of a building, you DO NOT have a right to know why. If a police officer chooses to arrest you, you do not have a right to be told immediately why you have been arrested. If a cop tells you "stop shouting, and stop resisting me or I am going to arrest you (or taser you)" and you choose to continue shouting and resisting, well duh, do the math.

The rights you do have upon arrest are read to you in long form, or in the abbreviated form:
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to be speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense."
Did you see "you have the right to know why you are being arrested" or "you have the right to scream loudly and resist arrest"? Me neither. That's because we don't have those rights.

It's a shame this boy provoked the police into tasering him by repeatedly refusing to cooperate. I'm sorry he got tasered, but freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom to disrupt a political rally. Watch the full video and pay attention to the commentary, and watch the second video that shows what happens outside, how he keeps craning his neck so he can shout to the cameras... because he's all about the cameras.

1. http://youtube.com/watch?v=1na1hcGQCHg

2. http://youtube.com/watch?v=7NWukZhsiBw

I'm trying not jump to conclusions (paranoia is unhealthy). As far as I can see, this boy orchestrated what happened to him through his own behavior and could have put a stop to it at any time.

There are a lot of affronts to free speech in this country, serious ones that we should be concerned about ("free speech zones" for example: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/04/hilden.freespeech/index.html), but this nut and his bad performance art does not qualify. He should have been ejected, and he was.

Mind What You Post on Flickr

Abacquer — Wed, 30 May 2007 10:02:00 -0400

(Or anywhere on the internet really.) People will find your images, copy them, and use them for their own purposes.

I mention this because I have just heard about Flickr user "Lara Jade" who recently discovered that a self portrait she photographed when she was 14 years old was used as the cover for a pornographic DVD without her knowledge. The responses she has received from the DVD company border on the bizarre and betray an extremely warped sense of morality and personal responsibility.

Sadly for Lara Jade, she cannot afford the legal fees necessary to pursue the matter, especially since she lives in the UK and the photo was misappropriated by a company operating in the USA.

Read her story here.

Those of you who post personal or family photos are advised to publish them as "private" photos -- viewable only by people you name as family or friends. This is not something I've ever worried about on my blog, but I am now wrestling with the idea of marking some of my photo albums as private. If that happens, anybody who wants to view those albums will need to create a reader account so I can add you as an approved reader. I haven't decided what I am going to do. This could be a good opportunity to just switch to Flickr. I'll have to think on it.

Scumbag at Work

Abacquer — Wed, 16 May 2007 21:04:00 -0400

An Australian video game designer has caused a major uproar Down Under with his creation of a game based on the Virginia Tech massacre.

Called V-Tech Rampage, the game has several levels of "stealth and murder," reports The Sydney Morning Herald.

But what really is causing the kerfuffle--as if the game itself wasn't in bad enough taste--is that its designer, Ryan Lambourn, says he will take the game down from his Web site only if the public comes up with a $2,000 payoff.

For another grand, he'll apologize...

-- Game designer causes uproar with Virginia Tech game (Tech News Blog)

Hardesty, Oklahoma -- Home of the Ugly Christian

Abacquer — Sun, 13 May 2007 19:58:00 -0400

In another example of fundie Christian love and acceptance, a 13 year old girl in Hardesty, Oklahoma is now being homeschooled after having been basically run out of school by the local knuckledraggers. Please watch this video.

You're a brave girl Nicole. Sorry for what you went through. You should come live in Massachusetts. We have plenty of religious nuts here too, but the area is pretty liberal, and therefore most of the Christians I know actually behave like Christians.

One Lone Conservative Voice

Abacquer — Fri, 11 May 2007 04:26:00 -0400

From University panel says student parody "harassed" blacks (AP via Boston.com):
...The parody of "O Come All Ye Faithful" calls black people "boisterous" and proclaims, "Born into the ghetto. O Jesus! We need you now to fill our racial quotas."

The lyrics also say, "No matter what your grades are, F's, D's or G's, give them all privileged status."...

I can understand that someone who is a conservative might have issues with affirmative action, a system that attempts to correct for the effects of years of injustice and discrimination. But when you write "funny" songs called "Oh Come All Ye Black Folk" that indicate that black people come from the ghetto and have bad grades, you probably aren't doing your cause any favors.

But that's exactly what a Tufts University conservative campus newspaper "The Primary Source" did. You can imagine how well the idea was received, especially since it was only last month that the same paper garnered the ire of Muslim students by posting parodies of Islamic Awareness Week advertisements in which they discussed brutality in Muslim countries.

There is a value sometimes in being shocking. Sometimes it is necessary to shock someone into realizing that they are behaving in a manner they wouldn't tolerate from others. Maybe that's what this paper was doing. In order to be certain though, I'd need to see some shocking articles directed at white Christians, or something like that. Barring that, it sounds like the students who imagine themselves to be Tuft's University's "one lone conservative voice" are abusing that voice by saying things that no decent conservative I know would say.

What do you think?

Whitman's WWI Memorial Arch

Abacquer — Wed, 02 May 2007 07:39:00 -0400

In my childhood hometown (Whitman, Massachusetts) there is an arch which was erected in the latter 1920's to commemorate World War I soldiers. I've never really seen it up close for one unfortunate reason, it's in a very inaccessible spot. Here's a map which might get this across. The arch is the second map marker from the left.

The arch is located not far from Holy Ghost Church in Whitman center. It's on Temple Street (route 27). It's a very busy area. Route 27 feeds traffic headed to and from Brockton, the large city to the west of Whitman, and intersects with Washington Street in the center of Whitman, where it ends and South Ave begins, continuing past many businesses, the town hall and library, post office, and so forth.

It's not that the arch is completely inaccessible, I mean, you could walk to it if you wanted to, but there's no really convenient parking place unless you park at the church and walk to the arch, and the traffic is dense. And if you want to stand around and admire it, you are standing on an access road used by the ambulances for the town fire station which periodically come through the arch on their way to conduct rescues. It wouldn't be a great spot to say, bring a group of school children to teach them about the sacrifices of our forefathers. And with Whitman planning a new police station on Legion Parkway that would also use the same access road for police vehicles, it becomes an even less attractive spot.

I imagine that when the arch was built in the 20's the spot was probably in view of the church and was easily accessible to foot traffic. Putting it at the entrance of the road leading to the American Legion made a lot of sense. Now that the town has grown up around it, it's no longer such a great location.

The town is considering the possibility of disassembling the arch and moving it to a more prominent and accessible location for reassembly. At present, the proposal is to find a nice spot in the town park for it. As much as I have no recollection of ever visiting and contemplating this arch in my childhood (despite going to Holy Ghost church on Sundays), I have vivid memories of visiting the town park and contemplating the various structures there at length. Putting it in the park sounds like a great idea to me. It's a family gathering place, and it offers an accessible as well as beautiful spot for people to contemplate it, and the sacrifices of the soldiers it honors. I mean if someone wanted to hold say, a memorial service for those lost in WWI, wouldn't it be great to do it on the town green under this arch? As it is you certainly couldn't do it under the arch now...

There's an extremely vocal contingent of opponents to the proposed move who don't think so--veterans. I'm quite surprised by how vehemently they want the arch to remain where it is. The Patriot Ledger has an article about the proposal which is rife with (IMHO melodramatic) outcry from local vets:

..."To me, the town of Whitman doesn't care about veterans if they tear it down," said David Lloyd, 59, of Whitman, a Vietnam War veteran.

Lloyd, who said he has participated in Memorial Day and Veterans Day parades since he was a Cub Scout, said that if the arch is moved, he will stop marching in Whitman.

"Any person in the town should be ashamed if they tear it down," he said.

Town Administrator Frank Lynam said the project is necessary to safeguard emergency responders. He said relocation would also enhance the monument's appeal.

The memorial arch straddles an access road that passes a fire station ambulance garage. The road would also be the only entrance and exit for a police station that is proposed for the former National Guard armory on Legion Parkway, Lynam said.

"The arch obviously is in a precarious place in respect to the fire department's operations, because both ambulances come through the arch, and it's a tight fit," Lynam said. "It makes sense both for the safety of the monument and for people who appreciate it to move it to a more publicly accessible location, and we believe that to be the Town Park."

"It's in the best interest of the town as a whole," he said.

Buddy Aqusis of Whitman, commander of American Legion Post 22, promised fierce resistance to the proposal, which some veterans said would desecrate a landmark recognizing the war dead and those in harm's way from the past and present.

"If your father's name was on the memorial, would you want it torn down or moved?" said Aqusis.

"I'm dead set against it. It's a memorial arch. There's no way it should be moved. If they attempt it, every veteran in the state should oppose it," he said.

The memorial arch relocation is part of a special town meeting warrant article to transfer $170,000 from free cash for several capital projects.

Some Whitman veterans insisted the proposal would not come to pass.

"I'm sorry, Mr. Lynam. That arch is not going to move. Tell Mr. Lynam that if he wants to move it, I'll start a petition that will drive him nuts," said E. Richard Uzzell, 59, a Vietnam veteran.

Joe Cesarini, 44, a Navy veteran who served in Lebanon, said, "They ain't going to move the arch, because I'll lay down in front of it, with a flag on me."

In January, the selectmen awarded a bid to Durland Van Voorhis of New Bedford to study the use of the armory as a police station and to report back with building recommendations and estimated costs.

On Lynam's recommendation, the selectmen formed a committee to evaluate the town's capital building needs, including Town Hall, the Holt School and the council on aging, and present a capital building plan in the fall, with an interim report at the special town meeting in May.

"The police station there is a public hazard, not the arch," said John Downey, 54, of Whitman, a Vietnam veteran.

"We have our rights being trampled on because people in government believe that the government comes first, not people," said Downey...

I suppose those vets who congregate at post 22 probably like the arch where it is because if they take the rear entrance in they would drive under it. But the arch is a commemorative memorial, not a tombstone -- nobody is buried there, to my knowledge. I'm really quite shocked that these veterans would be opposed to the idea of moving it to a place where the public could gather and commemorate those who served in WWI. Honestly, I would have expected veterans most of all to back this proposal, and to want to be actively involved to make sure the structure is moved in a respectful manner, and to an appropriate location.

I'm mystified by the inflammatory language, the constant references to "tearing it down", the baffling assertion that the presence of the police station is a public hazard, and the equally baffling assertion that providing good access for emergency responders is somehow putting government first. I'm bemused that the arch's current location, choked with auto exhaust and the blaring of sirens as ambulances pass beneath it, is not itself considered denigrating to the people it commemorates. Isn't it the arch and those it stands in memorium of that matter, rather than where it stands?

I note that 3 of the veterans quoted in the article are listed as Officers of American Legion Post 22 on the post's website. Is the issue that the vets would like the arch to remain close to post 22 where they congregate? This I could understand. Is there fear that the structure would be irreparably damaged or shoddily reassembled? This I could also understand.

As for me, well, I'd really enjoy the opportunity to spend some time contemplating the arch, reading the names on it, and thinking about their service to our country. But that's pretty unlikely in its present location. I wonder if it will move, or if the vets will succeed in blocking the move. In response to Mr. Aqusis' rhetorical question, if my father's name was on this arch, yes, I would certainly want it moved, and right away, to a location that more befits its importance.

Sony Needs a Dope Slap

Abacquer — Tue, 01 May 2007 09:08:00 -0400

I really need to add a "WTF" category to this blog. I had heard about this peripherally and figured it was just an urban legend, but it's not. In the last few days Sony released its new adult-oriented video game God of War II for the PlayStation console. Recently they had a big "European launch party" in Greece for members of the press who write about video game news. They tried to theme the party to match the nature of the game, so the party featured an actor dressed up as the hero from the game (okay, you might expect this), games involving throwing knives and pulling live snakes from pits (?), topless women who hand fed grapes to the guests (WTF?), and as a centerpiece, the decapitated carcass of a freshly slaughtered goat (WTF!!?).

Now it's not the first time Sony has done something amazingly stupid to promote their wares, but, as you can imagine not everyone was cool with a slaughtered animal being used as a "prop" at a party. Guests were invited to reach into the goat's lacerated body, pull out entrails, and eat them. The entrails had in fact been replaced with some sort of Greek dish that resembled intestines. Yum.

If a goat had been killed and served as a dish which guests could eat, that probably would have been fine... I mean anyone who eats meat is eating a killed animal. But to morbidly lay out a dead animal at your dinner party with its head hanging off as a lurid decoration? That's just disgusting, cruel, morbid, and a waste of an animal. According to Sony the goat carcass was purchased from a loal butcher and then returned to the butcher after the party.

Apparently it has finally occurred to Sony that this whole party really wasn't such a great idea. Mostly because of the backlash from animal rights groups, Sony has issued an apology.

From Sony Apologizes For Decapitated Goat In 'God Of War' Launch (InformationWeek via Yahoo! News):
..."On this occasion we recognize that we fell short of our normal high standards of conduct and apologize for any offense caused," Sony said in a statement. "We are conducting an internal inquiry into the circumstances of the event in order to learn from the occurrence and put in place measures to ensure that this does not happen again."...

The article goes on and quotes animal rights activists decrying the use of the goat's carcass, and a professor of marketing who calls the party centerpiece "stupid".

Which is all expected of course, but what I find intriguing is that nobody quoted seems to have any complaints about topless women feeding grapes to the partygoers. Okay, of course they are performers, and they were paid to perform this service, but it hardly seems appropriate for a video game launch party. The use of "pretty girls" at product launches or other types of retail expositions is not a new thing, and includes some sort of compensation, typically money, but not always. But this goes beyond anything I've heard of before. I would expect something like this at say a strip joint* or something like that, but a video game launch party for the press? WTF were they thinking?

Here's an article from 1Up.com recapping the event and including a picture which is probably NSFW.

That's effed up, yo.

*: Which is not to say I've ever been to a strip joint. For the curious, no I haven't. I have no interest in watching ecdysiasts perform live. That would be way too embarrassing for me.

Now That Seems Like an Overreaction

Abacquer — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 19:14:00 -0400

Perhaps you've heard of Stacy Snyder. She was a 25 year old student pursuing a degree in education at Millersville University in Millersville Pennsylvania. Ms. Snyder has a MySpace page, and on it she had posted a picture of herself attending a Halloween costume party. She was wearing a T-shirt and a tiny pirate hat on her head, and drinking from a plastic cup. The caption under the picture said "Drunken Pirate." As inappropriate pictures go, this one was pretty tame. I've seen it myself, and if the caption hadn't said "Drunken" you wouldn't have any idea at all what she was drinking, since she didn't look drunk.

Nonetheless she was reprimanded by the Dean of Education at Millersville University based on this picture, and was informed that it was unprofessional and encouraged underage drinking (note that she was not under age at the time the picture was taken.) She apologized. But apparently that wasn't good enough. On the evening before her graduation, she was informed that she would not be receiving a degree in education, and instead received a degree in English.

Just so we're clear, this bright young woman had a perfectly innocent picture of herself drinking from a cup on her MySpace page, with the caption "Drunken Pirate" underneath it, and because of this, her years and expense in college are for nothing and she cannot teach, which is all she ever wanted to do. Sounds a little harsh to me. It's not like she was falling down drunk and flashing herself at the camera while a guy poured beer on her.

So now Ms. Snyder is suing the university for $75,000 and her degree in education. I find myself thinking she deserves both. Now.

With Virginia Tech Fresh in Our Memory

Abacquer — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:52:00 -0400

...So I had this dream last night where I went into a building, pulled out two P90s and started shooting everyone, then had sex with the dead bodies. Well, not really, but it would be funny if I did...

-- Allen Lee, Carly-Grove High School Student

Allen Lee wrote some seriously disturbed crap during a "Free Writing" assignment in his high school English class this week. Apparently the instructions on the assignment made clear that the students were not to censor themselves and should instead write whatever came to mind. The point was to keep writing and not to stop until the time ran out. Allen's essay begins "Blood sex and Booze. Drugs Drugs Drugs are fun. Stab, Stab, Stab, S…t…a…b…, poke." The end of the essay concludes with a message to his teacher: "No quarrel on you qualifications as a writer, but as a teacher, don't be surprised on inspiring the first cg shooting." The "cg" refers to "Carly-Grove", the name of Allen's school.

It is evident from his essay that he has an extremely low opinion of his teacher, and English in general. So I suppose it's possible he selected subject matter most calculated to upset the teacher. If so, the calculations were spot-on. Allen's teacher apparently called the police, and now he is charged with disorderly conduct according to the Chicago Tribune. You can read Allen's entire essay here.

I read the last sentence of Allen's essay as a threat, and therefore I am not at all surprised that some sort of discipline is in order, and I fail to see why Allen would be surprised. But apparently a lot of people are surprised because they seem to be leaping to his defense and claiming that the teacher/school are overreacting.

In the meantime Allen is planning to join the Marines.

The questions here are, are these the ravings of a deranged mind, or a normal high school student attempting to undertake a free writing assignment and making a poor choice of subject matter? Was arresting him an appropriate reaction or an overreaction?

What do you think?

I'm Gonna Be Rich, I Just Have to Send Money to Nigeria

Abacquer — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:55:00 -0400

If I said that to like... um... anyone who cared about me, they'd probably fall all over themselves to warn me that I was falling for an extremely well known scam. You get an e-mail from some nice person in Nigeria who says that he has millions in the bank, but he can't get at it due to government corruption and fees. If you will help him pay the fees and bribes so that he can get the money out, he in turn will pay you back and give you a share of his fortune. You transfer the money and Mbutu Ndunga disappears and never contacts you again, except to ask for more money.

It's sad when people (typically elderly people) fall for such a scam. It's even sadder when they invest other people's money in these scams. It's even sadder when they are a county treasurer that embezzles taxpayer money in an attempt to cash in on the big Nigerian payout that never comes.

Hard to believe a county treasurer, a person who handles money for a living, would fall for such a scam, particularly after being warned by a bank that what he was investing in is a commonly-known scam.

But that is exactly what happened to Thomas Katona, former County Treasurer for Alcona County, Michigan. Katona definitely embezzled and invested at least $186,500 in this scam, but Alcona's yearly budget is $4 million, and an audit has revealed that the county has a shortage of $1.2 million. Katona also apparently kicked $72,000 of his own money into this scam. Guess it's going to be a public defender for Mr. Katona. He has been arrested and charged with 8 counts of embezzlement, 1 count of attempted embezzlement, and 2 counts of forgery.

I heard the story mentioned on NPR today. I'm amazed that it happened at all. But then, I'm amazed this man was elected as a treasurer in the first place, as Salem News notes:

...Alcona County voters re-elected Katona twice even after he pleaded guilty in 1998 of defrauding clients of his private accounting practice...

References:

Former Alcona County Treasurer Charged with Embezzling Public Monies (Michigan Office of Attorney General Press Release)
Ex-Harrisville treasurer to stand trial on charges he bilked Alcona County to benefit Nigerian scam (The Detroit News)
E-mail scam nets unlikely victim (The Salem News)
Michigan County Falls Victim to Nigerian Scam (NPR -- Day to Day)

A Few Random Items

Abacquer — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:35:00 -0400

Continuing in the vein of yesterday's post, I have a few more random thoughts to share...

Survivorman
Perhaps you've never seen this show, it's on The Science Channel (not to be confused with Discovery Channel or The Learning Channel). I really enjoy it. The premise is simple. In each episode they take Les Stroud and dump him in the middle of nowhere with meagre supplies and about 50 pounds of camera equipment. His only mission is to survive for seven days before the crew returns to pick him up. He's not allowed to break down the camera equipment and use it for survival, and he does all the filming himself. I can only imagine what an incredible amount of effort is involved in shooting himself walking past the camera or trudging off into the distance, only to have to return and get the camera. This show strikes me as one James would enjoy. I've seen this poor guy dumped in the arctic tundra, the swamps of Georgia, some desert out west somewhere, even one episode where he had to survive in a life raft at sea for seven days. You can order season 1 of the show on DVD if you are interested. I discovered this show during my many days of bedrest over the last month or so.

North and West of the City...
I'm sick of this phrase. I hear it all the time during weather reports, as in "2 to 5 inches of snow are expected in the Boston area, while areas North and West of the city could receive as much as a foot." It's snowing today. Unlike those in and south of the city, there's no rain following the storm here... it's just piling up. Day before St. Patrick's day and the snow is just dumping down. *sigh*

Cosmos and Carl
I miss Carl Sagan, and I loved Cosmos when I was a kid. One of my best memories of childhood is sitting in the living room with my Dad watching Carl explain history, other dimensions, outer space, the doppler effect, and various other intriguing things. Pat and I both talked recently of trying to find the Cosmos series on DVD to watch with Lynnea (though it might be too slow paced for her.) Amazon has it, if you are interested. One of my favorite segments of that series was when Carl explained what it would be like for two dimensional creatures to encounter a three dimensional one, as a way of explaining what a fourth dimension might be like, as a mechanism for explaining the concept of a curved universe as it relates to the big bang. The two dimensional creatures were called "flatlanders" because they lived (appropriately enough) in Flatland. I finally found that segment on YouTube, but it is included in a larger 10 minute video. You can watch it here, the part about Flatland starts about 3 minutes in, after a discussion of Hubble's discovery that the universe was expanding. In the next segment, Carl ties in the curved universe and questions about the existence of God. It's slow paced but wonderfully done. I really should pick that series up and watch it again as an adult--I've no doubt I'd learn more this time.

Destroying a Career
As you probably know, Valerie Plame testified today before House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and finally had a chance to speak out on her cover being blown by an administration with hopelessly misplaced priorities. One of the saddest things about this, as far as I can see, is that her CIA career as a covert agent is basically over at this point. That's got to be infuriating for her. I can't imagine what that must be like. From her testimony today:

..."My name and identity were carelessly and recklessly abused by senior officials in the White House and State Department. [...] I could no longer perform the work for which I had been highly trained." [...] Under questioning, Plame recounted feeling "like I had been hit in the gut" on the July 2003 morning when she saw a newspaper story by syndicated columnist Robert Novak identifying her...

Pace and the Unbagged Cat
Smooth one General, really smooth. For those of you who haven't heard, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace, stepped in it on Tuesday by saying he supported the Pentagon's ban on gays serving openly in the military because homosexual acts are "immoral". Way to go, dickhead. There are thousands upon thousands of gay people serving in our great nation's military right now, many of them putting themselves in harm's way. Thanks for telling them that they're a bunch of immoral perverts. General Pace, for his part, has refused to apologize for the remarks, and has only gone as far as to say that he regrets making them. I'll bet he does, but only because it is inconvenient for him now that the cat is out of the bag. As far as offending the gay troops who've been valiantly serving over the last four years of this misguided war? It's clear what Pace thinks of them. I never understood the ban on gays in the military, and I understood don't-ask-don't-tell even less, except that it allows good soldiers to serve a country that needs them, regardless of their sexual orientation. And the same people that screeched in 1993 that we couldn't let gays in are screeching today that we can't let gays serve openly, for the same stupid reasons--because it would cause a breakdown in unit cohesion on the battlefield. What a bunch of bullshit. I'm sorry but a guy brave enough to crawl across a battlefield under fire while trying to avoid landmines isn't going to be worrying if the guy behind him is checking out his ass. Give me a goddamned break, PLEASE. Here's a thought, I won't ask then next time something as stupid as that enters your mind, and you don't tell, okay? (As a sad but not unexpected sidenote, conservatives are leaping to the General's defense.)

Too Much To Talk About

Abacquer — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:36:00 -0400

I'm sorry I haven't been able to blog in awhile... there's just been so much going on my life. I've got a lot of things I'd like to talk about, but any one of them would be a full blog article I don't have time to write. So here's the "Cliff Notes"...

My Health
I visited the doctor about 2 weeks ago. My TB test came back negative, as expected. I woke up with the area around the injection on my arm completely flat and showing no reaction other than a slight redness. I could tell it was a negative result, but still I had to get to the doctor and have a nurse stare at my arm for two seconds and say "yep, negative." Did I mention it was snowing? A lot? The doc informed me that the plan at that point was to let the antibiotics run out, and then monitor myself very carefully, watching for fevers. I was to take it easy and not exert myself once off the antibiotics. I took my last pill the day my Dad had his aneurism. So I was getting almost no sleep, no regular intake of food, a high amount of exertion and stress, exactly at the time we were hoping my body would be able to cope with the remaining infection. By March 7th I was having fevers and my doctor extended the antibiotic. By March 8th the fevers had reached 102, and I was having painful chills in the night. On March 9th the fevers subsided and I haven't had any since. I had another visit with the doc today and she began to speak very frankly about having a surgeon go in and "break up" the scar tissue, or using a needle to drain out the infected area so it could heal. I spoke very frankly about how disturbing those prospects were to me, and if sixty days of antibiotics would solve the problem, I'd rather go that route. For now, we are on a middle ground. The doc has given me a script for 10 more days of the antibiotic, but I am to repeat the "wait and see" experiment when the current batch runs out (Sunday). If the fevers return I can start the next script. Next week I will have another CAT Scan, and then based on the results we will make a decision. The doctor said I could come in and speak with the pulmonologist at that time if I liked. At this point I'm beginning to feel resigned that a surgical solution is going to be necessary.

Mr. Deity
If you haven't seen the "Mr. Deity" videos yet, check them out, they are hilarious. A warning to my theist readers, these movies are created by humanists, and are therefore pretty irreverent. Don't check them out if that is going to bug you.

RSS & YouTube
Why doesn't YouTube support RSS in any obvious fashion that I can detect? Why do I have to go to my subscription page on YouTube to see what is new. If they are tracking what is new, then they have the information necessary to provide an RSS feed. Bloglines tries to "fake it" for you, building an RSS feed out of a YouTube search, but that doesn't work well. Partly because old videos keep popping up on it, and because jerks post movies on YouTube with the usernames of popular YouTubers in their keywords simply to bring in viewers. The only YouTubers I subscribe to are ImpyTheRap (i.e. Nobody's Watching) and SuttSteve. Yet my Bloglines is constantly telling me they have new videos when they don't, simply because the RSS feed is built from a keyword search, and some people are not capable of getting viewers on their own talent. Does anyone have a good way to get a YouTube subscription as an RSS feed? It's really bugging me. I had to discontinue my YouTube "feeds" in Bloglines because it was a waste of time.

Texas and the HPV Vaccine
The Republican Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, has mandated that all girls entering the sixth grade in Texas schools must receive the HPV vaccine Gardasil, produced by Merck. HPV, or Human papillomavirus, is a virus that can be carried by both men and women, but some strains of which are shown to cause cervical cancer in some women. It is primarily transmitted sexually, but can be contracted in other ways (skin on skin contact, or being born from an infected mother). Under Perry's plan, parents could choose to refuse the vaccine for their child, but it is not clear if the child would then be allowed to enter the public school system (any more than they would be allowed to refuse, say, Mumps and Rubella vaccines and still put their kids in school.) The Texas legislature voted 118-23 to basically overturn this order. The primary complaints were that (a) there are questionable connections between Perry and Merck, (b) parents should have the right to choose whether their daughters will be vaccinated, (c) the drug is new and needs to be further tested, and (d) Perry circumvented the legislative process. On (a) and (d) I can't really comment, on (c)... well the FDA has approved it, so it has to have undergone some testing at this point, and on (b) I'm just mystified. The mandate clearly has an opt-out clause... so what's the diff? The thing I can't shake is that the early complaints about the possibility of making this drug mandatory that came out of Fundie USA was that it would encourage young women to have sex. Which is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. But I can't help feeling that because those who said it are realizing how stupid that sounds, we are now getting other excuses like a through d above. I find myself wondering if HPV was transmitted in a nonsexual manner, would there be any outcry at all?

These are the Same People Who Said...
Tell me you haven't heard this one before: confronted with the latest news from climate scientists about global warming, a politically motivated skeptic will claim "These are the same people who said the world was headed for another ice age back in the 1970's... why should we believe them now?" Like so much politically motivated rhetoric, there's little merit in it. Between the 40's and the 70's a cooling trend was noted in the data available at that time. Scientific journals noted that although such a trend could be the precursor of the cyclic ice ages that our planet goes through, there was not enough data or understanding of the climate to accurately predict when the next ice age would come. The popular press on the other hand (i.e. those journals which are not peer reviewed) took the story and made a sensation out of it. The scientific community never said another ice age was imminent, period. Needless to say I hate hearing this stupid argument, especially when it is delivered by people who unfortunately are accorded undue credibility... like Michael Crichton for instance. But if you want details refuting this particular bit of rhetoric, check "The Global Cooling Myth" on Real Climate.

Guess that's all I have for now. Hope everyone else is well and happy...

The Hounddog Hullabaloo

Abacquer — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 10:14:00 -0500

Wow. You've probably heard about this since it is all over the internet, but people are just going nuts about the movie "Hounddog" which premiered at the Sundance Film Festival. I've heard both good and bad reviews about the quality of the picture itself, but there is an explosion of outrage over the fact that the film portrays the child-star, Dakota Fanning, being raped.

On multiple occasions financial backers have pulled out of the production, and the film has no buyer presently. What it does have is hordes of people calling for the head's of the director Deborah Kampmeier, Fanning's agent Cindy Osbrook, and her mother Joy. There's even online petition demanding their arrest and some are going further than that, as this excerpt from a CNN article notes:

...Even before the first screening of "Hounddog" at the Sundance Film Festival this week, a Christian film critic, citing Fanning's age, decried the movie as child abuse, and Roman Catholic activist Bill Donohue called for a federal investigation...

...Ted Baehr, chairman of the Christian Film and Television Commission and publisher of the Web site movieguide.org, claims "Hounddog" breaks federal child-pornography law. He said the law covers material that "appears" to show minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct.

"Even if they're not actually performing the explicit act, we are dealing with a legal issue here," he said.

Baehr said Fanning is being exploited in the film, and that it should be considered an outrage.

"Children at 12 do not have the ability to make the types of decisions that we're talking about here," he said. "If we're offended by some comedian's racial slur, why aren't we offended by somebody taking advantage of a 12-year-old child?"

Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said he has asked the U.S. Justice Department to investigate whether anti-pornography laws have been broken...

It's not hard to understand why people would be upset by a film showing a 12 year old girl being raped, even if it isn't real. It's an upsetting concept. That it happens in the real world is tragic and brutal and awful. If it did not happen in the real world, a film like this would likely never have been made.

And there is the fear (which Bill Donahue mentioned in an interview) that sick perverts will see the film and be inspired to act out their twisted fantasies.

Count bastion of Bill-O'Reilly-Wannabeism Sean Hannity among the offended, who interviewed a conservative child advocate who had seen the film, and was sadly shocked when she informed him that the various claims about the rape scene were not factual.

As for what I think about Hounddog? Well, I don't like the idea, and I have no desire to see the film. I don't think I could watch that. Especially since Dakota Fanning is such an amazing actress, doubtless she would be able to convince me that it was really happening and I don't think I could bear it.

But then, not having seen the film, I'm not about to make a snap judgement as many others seem prepared to do. If you haven't seen the film, then you really can't comment on whether or not Dakota was in some way injured during the production.

As far as what I have heard from people who have actually seen the film, the scene is disturbing but tastefully done (inasmuch as it is possible to do so). There's no nudity or skin-on-skin contact. Basically the rape is implied by carefully editting together various disparate clips shot at different times. You see Dakota shout "No!", you see a man unzip his fly, you see a hand hit a wooden floor, etc. Each individual component is shot separately, nobody is unzipping their pants in front of Dakota, nobody is touching her inappropriately. The rape takes place in the mind of the viewer.

Add to this the fact that Dakota's mother and a child welfare worker were present on set during the shooting of this scene, and that really ought to allay fears, but apparently it does not.

It is disturbing to me that this level of outcry doesn't surface over movies where children are enduring violence, or abject suffering of any other sort. Only when the subject matter is sex do folks go nuts.

I would hope that the primary reason one would be offended is if one thought Dakota was being exploited, or worse yet emotionally injured by performing in this production. All other concerns really ought to be secondary. But from the criticisms I'm hearing, it sounds more like people using Dakota's fame to add oomph to their particular platforms while using inflammatory terms like 'kiddie porn' to describe the film. I find that disturbing for sure. That is also exploitation.

Although Fanning says she has no career plan in mind other than to keep acting, I have to assume she is trying to break out of kid roles and break into more mature roles. She will be 13 in February, and can't realistically do "Charlotte's Web" and "Cat in the Hat" films forever. This is a trail blazed by many actresses before her who transitioned into adult roles by portraying an abused youngster, Jodie Foster in Taxi Driver, Brooke Shields in Pretty Baby, Jena Malone in Bastard Out of Carolina, Dominique Swain in Lolita (1997), Linda Blair in Born Innocent, etc.

These break-out roles are very common. The last big one to make the news was probably the announcement that Daniel Radcliffe of Harry Potter fame will be appearing nude onstage in a production of Equus, a story about a young man who is carnally obsessed with horses. Granted, Radcliffe is 17, but the motivation is probably the same.

Some might wonder why such a film has to be made at all, even if Fanning is in no way harmed during filming. Personally, since I will never see it because of the subject matter, I can understand that sentiment as well. This is the second movie this director has made about a young girl who is raped, and I suspect it's because she wants to raise awareness of child abuse. From a Reuter's article:

..."Hounddog" is based on director Deborah Kampmeier's personal history, and she called the criticism of Fanning's decision to take the role an insult to the young actress.

"She should be applauded [for] the voice she has given to so many silenced women," Kampmeier said...

Okay, I'll applaud her, but I still don't like it. But then, I guess I'm not supposed to. I'll close with various quotes from the precocious Dakota Fanning herself who is angry about the criticism that has erupted over Hounddog.

From Fanning tells "Hounddog" critics she is mad (Reuters):
..."When it gets to the point of attacking my mother, my agent ... my teacher, who were all on the set that day, that started to make me mad," [...] "I can let other things go, but when people start to talk about my mother, like, that's really bad in my opinion ... that's an attack, and that's not fair. They hadn't seen the movie,"...

..."I loved the Elvis Presley story line. I loved the fact she's born of hard circumstances and is trying to survive those," Fanning said. "I like so many things about it that had nothing to do with being abused, or sexually abused."...

..."I'm going to be a freshman in high school in September, and I think it would be irresponsible of my parents not to let me know of things that happen and to try not to get yourself in uncomfortable situations," [...] "It's educational."...

From Online Petition Demands Arrest of Dakota Fanning's Mother and Agent (Cinematical.com):
..."You have to prepare your children for things that happen in the world. Everything isn't rosy."...

From Dakota Fanning: 'It's called acting' (CNN):
..."It's not a rape movie," [...] "That's not even the point of the film."...

..."It's not really happening," [...] "It's a movie, and it's called acting. I'm not going through anything. Cody and Isabelle aren't going through anything, their characters are." [...] "And for me, when it's done it's done," [...] "I don't even think about it anymore."...

What do you think?

Laughing at Pain

Abacquer — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 00:52:00 -0500

You know what I don't understand? The attraction of videos featuring people having accidents. Videos of people falling off their bicycles, trampolines, horses, and what have you are posted on YouTube as humor, usually with a dubbed laugh track and moronic music. And people post comments saying how funny these videos are. Clearly I have no sense of humor because all I feel when I watch these videos is sympathy and horror for the person who suffered the injury. That and revulsion at people who think someone flipping off a trampoline and landing on their head and neck is fricking hilarious. It would be one thing if it was a stunt being performed by a trained stunt man, most of these are home videos and portray real events.

A little old lady with osteoporosis getting dragged across a lawn by a rambunctious great dane is funny right up until it's your mom.

Jesus.

Circuit City -- Eternal Assholes

Abacquer — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 23:39:00 -0500

Sorry for the inflammatory nature of that title, but I want to make sure this is noted. I was walking through a Circuit City store today as was appalled to see this abomination on the shelf:

Just in time for Christmas! A good wholesome game to teach your kid about the end times in which you either get Jews, Catholics, Atheists, Muslims, and other folks to convert to your Dominionist Christian ideology, or you murder them in cold blood on the streets of Manhattan. What fun!

You may recall I wrote about this repugnant abortion of a game some time ago. I reiterate that there is nothing remotely Christlike in its message.

The Circuit City in Leominster, MA just lost my Christmas dollars. I urge you to also take your holiday spending elsewhere.

MSNBC Calls Virginia for Webb -- Democrats Win Senate

Abacquer — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:04:00 -0500

(Assuming there's no challenge and there may yet be.) Both Allen of Virginia and Burns of Montana have not yet conceded. Here's the MSNBC story calling it for the Democrats. As for me, having written 24 articles over the last 36 hours, I'm beat. Going to take a break from the blog for a few days unless something momentous happens.

Congratulations Democrats, now let's not screw this up. Do not try to turn our newfound majority into an "impeachment" party. We saw what happened to the Pubs when they did it back in the 90's and it didn't go so well for them. Let's take this opportunity to find working compromises with the other party and get some good legislation passed.

Thanks everyone who read ULev for election information over the last day and a half. Peace.

Things I'm Looking Forward To

Abacquer — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 05:21:00 -0500

Saying hello to my Republican friend at the office, a New Hampshire resident, who was telling me not 12 hours ago that the election wasn't going to amount to anything and that the Democrats were unlikely to win anything but a few seats in the House. His reasoning? The economy is going swimmingly, and that's really all that matters to people.
Listening to Bush's press conference later today at 1 PM. What's he gonna say? If FOX news was any indicator tonight, he'll probably downplay the good showing by the Democrats and call the elections a victory for Republicans. But who knows? Maybe he'll surprise us all...
Seeing the final election results from Montana and Virginia. Even if Burns feels he is going to win Montana, I've got a good feeling about Virginia. I think Webb may just pull it off, and that would be good news.
Not feeling powerless in the face of insanity for the first time in 6 years.
Sleeping.

I'm beat and I am going to catch some sleep now. Nitey nite folks, and thanks for reading (and voting!)