St. Vic's Home for Unclean Ramblings

Awake at 4AM this morning, I ventured out hoping to find gas and did. I also wasn't the only one doing this. Filled up the Accord and the Land Cruiser both -- luckily the gas station is just down the road.

4AM... no one should have to think of looking for gas at 4AM in this country in this day and age.

Two more weeks of gas chaos, official says | ajc.com

*epic sigh*

"Perdue says gas panic is ‘self-induced’"
http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/stories/2008/09/24/atlanta_gas_governor.html

Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue said Wednesday that there were shortages
of gasoline in parts of metro Atlanta, and he called some of the panic
“self-induced.”

“There is ample fuel in the city,” he said. “It’s not everywhere it
needs to be, but we do not have a crisis in the sense that we don’t
have fuel coming in.”

Errrm... methinks Sonny needs to come out of his ivory tower and drive around the city looking for gas. I can't speak for the westside of the metro area, but the east side is pretty much bone dry. Station after station along 85 and the main side roads are without fuel. When fuel does arrive, it's a feeding frenzy of long lines (burning gas idling) and traffic jams as people wait to get into the station before it runs dry again.

To be honest, I'm surprised so far that this hasn't blown up socially more than it has. People do seem to be patient and at least civil while waiting.

But back to the main point here: Sonny and his finger-pointing back at the populace. He seems to be ignorant or conveniently forgetting the fact that ATL has one of the highest commute rates not just in the country but the world. We're a driving city -- we don't have the mass transit system of NYC or Boston, nor do we have a walkable footprint of mixed use and nearby conveniences. We have The Sprawl. Not only have our gas rates rocketed up over the last couple years, but now our drivers are vying for fuel when it's even available for a short window. It's *our* fault that there's a shortage? Of course people are going to [over-]react to the threat that gas supplies may be threatened. Of course our commuter city is going to pounce on what stations receive fuel. Of course there will be frustration.

But Sonny, sir, what have *you* done to mitigate those fears and concerns up to this point? Where were you, sir, telling the city to calm down and be more frugal with fuel before and after the hurricanes affecting our supply? Where were you, sir, when the supplies began dropping and people reacted by queuing and "hording?" Where have you been, sir, to think that this is all *our* fault? I've not heard anything from you until now. You've not shown up at any gas stations or made any previous efforts (nor speeches, tho those have zilch value right now) to soften this and assuage the popular fear. It's like you just ignored the thoughts that this would happen. It's like you denied that people would react and act like this. With lip service to lower-grade gas on it's way, where the hell is it? What's the timetable? Which suppliers and stations will get it first?

And you know what? I only see how this is affecting metro ATL. I feel and worry about what it must be doing to the people in the exurbs and beyond. Macon... Rome... Tifton... Helen... what are they experiencing? And the smaller towns... good god, I'll be surprised if more people don't call for Perdue's impeachment. He hasn't done ANYTHING visible except pass the blame on this "crisis" -- yes it is a crisis.

So whatcha gonna do, Sonny? 5 million Atlantans would really like to know.

“The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held,
but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are
held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any
moment lead to their abandonment.” -- Bertrand Russell

[Found at http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2008/09/cognitive_dissonance_and_polit.php#comment-1109628 -- thanks to Jope for the link to the original article re: my previous post on Palin]

Pretty much describes my personal perspective on politics and opinions in general.

What is it about Sarah Palin that seems so alluring to potential voters?

Is it because she's a woman?
Is it because she's white?
Is it because she's a white woman?
Is it the MILF factor?
Should the fact that she's a woman play any part in what is a basic political decision?
Is it because there's some impression or thought that she's "one of us?" (Who's this "us" anyway?)
Is she really "one of us?" Is that the type of person that should be involved in running the country, let alone in taking part in the greater global diplomacy?
Is it because there's some impression that she's closer to Middle America?
Are people grasping for some sort of Mrs. Smith going to Washington?
Are people stuck in some sort of daydream/fantasy that by having a so-called "hockey mom" in office that everything will be better as she pats your head and offers you cookies and milk before bedtime?
How the hell does being a "hockey mom" make you a good national VP?
Don't her evangelical religious views and statements, mixing religion with economics and politics, concern and scare anyone?
Is it the fact that she's a Christian? That's a broad classification... Is she the same kind of Christian as you? By the way, we're no more Christian nation than a Jewish or Buddhist one. And we have explicit Constitutional orders to separate faith from government.

Have people forgotten what the hell has happened over the last 8 years? ...What it's like having a failed cowboy who people thought was "one of us?" What he's done to our standing in the world, let alone our economy? Questionable wars? Hypocritical statements about invasions? Anyone? Anyone?

And where the hell is Joe Biden? Why isn't he stepping into the spotlight as the other VP candidate? Why isn't he making himself known and bolstering Obama's position?

Inspiring... eloquent... well-spoken... well-written... well-delivered... emotionally engaging... politically and procedurally agreeable... All things I would use to describe Obama's speech tonight at the DNC.

I literally sat, hands clasped, enthralled, at the edge of my sofa and at the edge of happy tears during the speech. So much of it I agree with and believe in. So much I heard him say that went to key issues addressing complaints about the party and its platform. So much said that tackled both personal AND social responsibilities for the populace. I had not heard a speech in American politics, especially from a presidential candidate, so well-written and so well-delivered in far too long... Our speech-making and public-speaking has stagnated, and often recently I've pined for something moving, something articulate, something legendary like those speeches given in the historical hey-days of our country.

I can't say that I was 100% with the speech though. There were often times where I thought that Obama was almost there with his points... where I found myself editing him, rewording him, rephrasing him so that his words DID address some of my own philosophies and political issues I think are important. I wanted him to make that last step of confronting the conservative critics and clueless curmudgeons. I wanted him to commit to those wronged ideologies and explanations of what it means to be a Democrat, and I dare say a social liberal. But I'm happy that he at least made some dialog towards them, even if he didn't seal the deal. The most important thing to me was hearing him tie in personal responsibility to social responsibility. Perhaps some will consider it to be a moderate approach, but I believe that it's a clear statement that has been overlooked and understated for far too long. It's time to review and reiterate the fundamentals of what it means to be a Democrat, a "liberal."

It is indeed time for Change. Senator Obama, you have my support. Well-said tonight, sir, well-said.

How many people have a doctor who spontaneously hugs them goodbye after a regular checkup visit? Thanks, Dr. B. -- I needed that.

It's going to be a good week this week.

I have to admit: I don't get it -- "it" being model or glamour photography. And I don't get what makes a good model shot versus a mediocre or bad one. They all seem like glorified GWC (guy with camera) snapshots to me of lowcore erotica.

Is it my perspective as a gay man not seeing the same thing in the models that a straight man would? No erotic intrigue, only form and pose? Or could it be my perspective on photography as a medium and art form -- where I diminish the importance and my interest of model photography compared to "fine art," street, and fashion photography? Hell, I even find active family snapshots more intriguing than model photography for the most part.

There are a number of photographers in a local flickr group that make model shots others in the group think are the bee's knees. I look at them and see them as flat, simply-posed shots, almost snapshotty but without the passion and "moment." Simple portfolio fodder -- for the model. Or the photog processes the hell out of them. They don't speak to me or prompt my interest. What am I missing? Honestly, I want to understand.

Please explain Helmut Newton to me. I'm an Irving Penn man myself.

So, Bennigans has something called the "Lepregram" in the footer of their website. The name alone conjures things not fit for a restaurant chain, at least outside of impoverished sections of India served by Mother Theresa. It then shuttles you off to a disjointedly surreal and equally disturbing subsite to "Feed [Your] Inner Leprechaun."

Is there any wonder why they've apparently filed for bankruptcy? They left Atlanta a while ago, I'm surprised they still exist elsewhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji5_MqicxSo

From abcnews.com:
"The brick walls are there for a reason," [Dr. Pausch] said during his lecture.
"The brick walls are not there to keep us out. The brick walls are
there to give us a chance to show how badly we want something."

"New legal threat to teaching evolution in the US"
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926643.300

Let's get our concepts and terminology correct here: Intelligent design is not science -- as a most generous definition, it is philosophy, and therefore it is not appropriate to be placed in the same educational context as science, and in this specific case with evolution. ID does not follow the rigors of the scientific method, does not produce scientific research and results, and cannot be consistently verified through controlled experiments. Its reliance on the notion of a supernatural agent (i.e. god(s)) is not scientific -- by its very nature, that agent is erratic and unverifiable. The bible and any other religious documents are not a scientific documents. Faith and belief are not scientific principles. The word "theory" does not mean unproven or philosophically posited, as it is often erroneously used by the public where they would be more correct using "hypothetical."

I'm sorry, Mr and Mrs Religious Public, if you don't like the ideas of evolution, but that's too bad. Your beliefs are different from fact. At one time people thought the sun revolved around the earth because that's what the bible inferred. People thought that women were unclean during menstruation, and that demons lived in our bodies. Science is not always obvious or the same as "common sense," and that's okay. But democracy and discussion doesn't invalidate scientific fact. Specialists and experts exist to answer questions and ask more so that we further our knowledge. Your preacher most likely is not a scientist or an expert in biology. What's next? Someone challenging mathematics? Does your god say that 1 + 1 doesn't equate to 2? Or you find some particular personal affront in the integral of e to the x?

Get over it. The rest of the larger world is laughing at us because of your blind and misguided views. We're all missing the wonders of life and the universe because you disagree with facts. Shame on you.

i never cease to be amazed at how large organizations can be fundamentally inefficient and misdirected, yet still find success through their gargantuan momentum and mere presence in the market.

i left my last job because of how the ineptitude of my boss affected my job and my ability to grow and advance in my career with the company and in my field. i found him to be neither creative nor a director, both essential parts to his two-word title. being critiqued in my job performance by him was like having a customer who's only seen a wrench tell a trained head mechanic how to overhaul a modern engine. when i was knocked for being a poor manager and promised professional development and external coaching, he didn't follow through with it and let the offer die (essentially invalidating the issue, in my opinion). his knack for being short-sighted and more a glad-hand friend of consumer sales rather than a leader of our creative team and its responsibilities meant that i and the other senior managers on the team often had to manage and direct our boss like he was a junior member of staff. it finally came down to him beginning to remove me from my management and leadership roles when i decided to leave what should have been a great career opportunity.

when i left i thought the writing would be on the wall for him. it seemed that his boss and others in our ecommerce department were aware of his shortcomings and his deflection of responsibility for failures to his own reportees. i dreamt of hearing the pending word that he was canned or that he left for greener pastures elsewhere in companies that didn't know how professionally immature and devoid of web and business experience he was. chats with friends and colleagues still at my old company gave me hope that things were in the works for my old bosses departure. nobody respected him, everyone thought he was a liability to the department's success, so why would he continue to be on staff?

but that never happened. instead, it seems like he's escalated in ranks somehow, and others whom i thought would lead the charge to better business models in the company left or were forced out. i don't know how he does it, but apparently he exudes an air of success to those above him, most likely based on the strength and success of those who report to him. their ideas and talents i'm sure are absorbed into him and belched forth unacknowledged, names only mentioned when he needs a shield for fucking up what usually is a solid plan that he himself has probably tripped over instead of understanding and supporting it fully.

how do large companies get away with this? how do they find ways to keep the bad seeds around, poisoning the crop? how do these inefficient, politically astute but talentless distractions find ways to rise in the ranks and continue to affect team and company performance and morale negatively? i'd say it was shakespearean but it's nowhere near as elegant or eloquent as his work... it's mere reduction of his tragedies, but a tragedy none the less. is this one of those situations where the grand conservatism of a large company clashes with my sense of progressivism? i've never thought a job with execs in suits symbolized so much.

From "McCain hammers Obama on national security" (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080520/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_3):

For a second day, McCain criticized Obama for saying, in a debate last year, that as president he would meet with the leaders of Cuba, Iran and Venezuela without preconditions.

McCain insisted such a meeting could endanger national security, sounding a theme that is likely to persist until the November general election.

In what ways would holding such a meeting “endanger national security?” Please provide some sort of hypotheses and “rationale” for this statement, because all it is is an opinion until some sort of speculation or proof is provided. And by the way, I don't agree with that opinion, and I see no definitive ways that holding true diplomatic dialog with these leaders would endanger national security. All his statement is is pure fear-mongering. Bush has been doing it for years -- aren't we as a populace finished with that irrational line of thought yet? I'm pretty fed up with simple statements without follow-through logic and explanation -- all it does it continue the last 7 years of FUD we've been under.

“Carter went over and kissed Brezhnev, remember?“ McCain said Tuesday in Miami. “So it's dangerous; it's dangerous to American national security if you sit down and give respect and prestige to leaders of countries that are bent on your destruction or the destruction of other countries. I won't do it, my friends.“

Carter kissed Brezhnev, SO it's dangerous. What kind of logic is that? How does one world leader offering a warm recognition to another world leader equate to danger? Is it that one man kissed another? What does that have to do with politics? In this case it was cultural -- men in other parts of the world are fine with kissing and hugging each other... we here in the US are the oddballs for the most part.

But let's not even consider our puritanical and misguided cultural misconceptions about sexuality in this particular regard. Let's look at this politically, historically, and diplomatically:
The US under Carter and the USSR under Brezhnev were on fairly good terms at the time, if I recall correctly. And let's not forget that, oh my god, he was having a meeting with the leader of a country that we didn't agree with, whose country was our sworn ideological enemy for the previous 30 years, and with which we had been holding global wars and skirmishes with other countries as our pawns and battlegrounds. We had dialog? And some sort of agreement? Doesn't that situation itself negate McCain's entire argument?

And, oh my god, during Reagan's presidencies we had further warming of relations with ourswornsovietenemytherussians under Gorbachov. We had further dialog and diplomacy. Yes, the soviet ideology was breaking down, but we still were holding dialogs. Is it just a matter that they were the only country in the world which could match us? Are we being that dismissive with smaller up-and-coming nations? Let's remember that some of them are on their paths to nuclear power and potentially weaponry. Based on the soviet dialog and its outcome, how does that precedent seem to exclude our dialog with current nations and governments adversarial to us? Heck, I'm a citizen and I'm feeling adversarial to my own country's administration right now -- please don't be dim and confuse dissent of opinion in a democracy with being unpatriotic either. Is the Nixon's reign as the king-president still that solid in conservatives' and moderates' minds yet?

Have we, citizens of the US, forgotten that our country is a democratic republic with elected officials and term limits for the executive branch for the express purpose that our country doesn't fall prey to autocracy and demagoguery? Are we that forgetful and apathetic towards our history, towards our founding fathers and their struggle for independence and a new style of government? Are we now that detached and slovenly comfortable in our place in the world to take our liberties (real and supposed) for granted until some critical mass of citizens realizes how much has been abnegated from us during our fat-naps? Where did we lose our democratic sense of involvement and dedication to our ideology? Was it when capitalism and democracy became erroneously synonymous? When did we all become such cynical and bitterly jaded teenagers about our system? When did we trend towards entitlement and away from involvement?

And most importantly, will we ever find the fire in our civil belly again? Or will be become the poster-children for a failed ideology that we made manifest 230+ years ago?

Yesterday, 2008-05-13, Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue signed a bill allowing Georgia residents the ability to purchase wine over the internet.

From the AJC: "Web wine sales OK'd, ..."
http://www.ajc.com/gwinnett/content/metro/stories/2008/05/14/bills.html?cxntlid=inform_artr

I think this is the GA House bill for it:
http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2007_08/search/hb1061.htm

And this is the GA Senate bill:
http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2007_08/search/sb357.htm

Not much information in the article about it, but I'm sure more details will follow. I've already contacted Ridge Vineyards out in CA to let them know.

One step closer to living in a state in the 20th century... ;)

coming home tonight from grocery runs, I had “vega-tables” by brian wilson/the beach boys (from their mythical magnum opus “smile) stuck in my head. I found myself singing it to myself in loud bursts in the car driving home, and inside the house while putting groceries away. that transformed into bits of “cabin essence,” breaking the stanzas apart, singing variations of the harmonies as melodies. I didn't mind hearing my own voice for once. after some chores I went into the home office and fired up brian wilson's official release of “smile” and listened to the tracks, then jumped around a bit. after “cabin essence” came “wonderful” which segued into “song for children.” its lyrics, the lilting lonely melancholy of the melody, and muted coronet seemed to grab me by the throat and I felt sentimental for the first time in a long time. I had forgotten how wonderful and powerful this album is, and how magical the official release of it is even if it is re-recorded versions of the original tracks from 1966.

“song for children”:
Maybe not one
Maybe you too
Wondering

Wondering who
Wonderful you
Wondering

Child, the child, the child, father of the sun

Where is the father (father of the sun)
Father of the child, where is the father, child, the child
Where is the wonderful me (father of the child)
Wonderful you

Though I know what you're wondering
If you are wonderful you
I can stop you wondering if you're my wonderful

Child, child, child
The child, the child
Father of the sun
Child, child, the child
Child, child, child
The child, the child
Father of the sun
Child, child, the child

this blended into “child is the father of the man” with its blake-isms, on its way to “surf's up.” one of my absolute favorite songs in general, and in the top 3 songs by the beach boys in all of the song's versions. the image of brian playing the song solo on the piano in dim light for CBS back in '66 immediately came to mind -- the loneliness, the isolation, the feeling of betrayal, the man still on the edge of being a boy struggling to make his pop masterpiece that wouldn't see the light of day for 40 years.

“surf's up”:
A diamond necklace played the pawn
Hand in hand some drummed along, oh
To a handsome man and baton
A blind class aristocracy
Back through the opera glass you see
The pit and the pendulum drawn
Columnated ruins domino

Canvass the town and brush the backdrop
Are you sleeping?

Hung velvet overtaken me
Dim chandelier awaken me
To a song dissolved in the dawn
The music hall a costly bow
The music all is lost for now
To a muted trumperter swan
Columnated ruins domino

Canvass the town and brush the backdrop
Are you sleeping, Brother John?

Dove nested towers the hour was
Strike the street quicksilver moon
Carriage across the fog
Two-Step to lamp lights cellar tune
The laughs come hard in Auld Lang Syne

The glass was raised, the fired rose
The fullness of the wine, the dim last toasting
While at port adieu or die

A choke of grief heart hardened I
Beyond belief a broken man too tough to cry

Surf's Up
Aboard a tidal wave
Come about hard and join
The young and often spring you gave
I heard the word
Wonderful thing
A children's song

and back to the wordless vocal ecstasy of “our prayer.” I had stayed away from this album and its songs for so long -- by the time brian had released it, I was burned out on it and disappointed in the modern versions of the tracks. but tonight, it was like a warm dream hug from a long-gone relative -- an imagined memory of a time before I existed but feel so connected to. i'm sorry i've been away so long, brian. thanks for welcoming me back.

questions for the peanut gallery regarding pet ownership:

why do people get pets?
what is true companionship? what's it all about?
does owning a pet (a dog, specifically for me) and having it as a companion fill an emotional or social niche that other humans can't offer?
does owning a dog and having it as a companion in any way stymy or improve one's relationships with other humans, specifically with romantic and intimate relationships?

fire away.

has the development of the atomic bomb put an end to large-scale/world wars as we've previously known them in history?
are we in a new era where terrorism and localized guerrilla warfare and insurgency will be the new MO for conflicts?
will conflicts merely simmer and smolder rather than be addressed in "resolving" waves of major combat?
will the threat of atom bombs in the hands of extremist groups and the potential for destruction/disruption of a major power begin a new wave/era of political evolution and power shifts?

[what a way to start a day with questions like this popping into one's mind... coffee must be kicking in...]

some things i hate about distributed web development in java, ant, and svn/cvs:

when there are large changes to the system (e.g. new DB scripts) there is no broadcast information about this, and there are no scripts or any automation to patch from one revision to the next...

for instance, i just pulled an update from svn that moved me from, say, revision 158 to 161 of the svn head code. in that update was a change to the DB scripts and to the DB itself (some DB scripts were removed or consolidated into the greater script). essentially the source code architecture changed. if i hadn't been checking to see what source files were updated and what their statuses were, i'd have overlooked it.

as the recipient i don't know what happened to the changes... all i know is that files were added, updated, or deleted. i have to infer what happened. and i have to put in work to track those things down.

it would be great if when a new revision happens, that a script or some piece of automation gets created that moves recipients from one head revision to the next instead of just affecting the source tree at the file level. in this case, run a DB patch that maybe cleans out the DB and runs the new DB script to get it up to version and speed for the current revision source.

doesn't rails do something like this? at least in a piecemeal gradual patching of the DB...

is this something that can (and should) be done thru a build script?

(thanks to Amy for linking to this quiz... I felt the need to give it a shot, being fascinated with such things)

What is Your World View? created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Existentialist Existentialism emphasizes human capability. There is no greater power interfering with life and thus it is up to us to make things happen. Sometimes considered a negative and depressing world view, your optimism towards human accomplishment is immense. Mankind is condemned to be free and must accept the responsibility. Materialist 81% Existentialist 81% Modernist 69% Postmodernist 63% Cultural Creative 44% Idealist 44% Romanticist 38% Fundamentalist 19%

ATL public access TV at its finest. Holla!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdGJxI6LrX4

Oh sweet jesus, this is poetry. Plain'n'simple. This woman just enjoys listening to herself talk so much that it becomes engrossing in its craziness. Girl gets on a roll!