…I’d like to propose another law that will uphold the respect for the law, and prevent much harm to befall an innocent, law-abiding populace.

The police will have the right to enter and investigate any house they suspect of having a party where alcohol is available to people under the age of 21. (“Reasonable suspicion,” of course, should suffice.)

There are many reasons why I think politicians—especially Arizona governor Jan “Chosen by God” Brewer—should support this:

• the law simply enforces a law that prohibits adults, even a child’s parents, from allowing a child access to alcohol
• if a parent doesn’t break the law, s/he has nothing to worry about; only those who would violate the law should feel put out as policemen storm their house looking for underage drinking
• in a recent survey, 28% of teens had been to a party where alcohol was served to minors and parents/adults were present
• teens who start drinking at age 15 are 5 times as likely as those who start after 20 to end up abusing or becoming dependent on alcohol
• 23% of the teenage drivers involved in deadly car accidents had a blood alcohol level of above 0.08%, about 1,100 per year, and with the economic equivalent cost of over $9 billion annually, nationally

Obviously, parents turning a blind eye to—or even encouraging—drinking among children under their care are responsible for an enormous cost financially and in terms of lives. Should innocent, law-abiding taxpayers have to pay the price for other people breaking the law?

Parents who are found providing alcohol to children under the age of 21, even a glass of champagne on New Year’s, should:

• be imprisoned
• have their children put in foster care
  (I mean, we can’t deport them, right?)

Much like the illegal immigrants knowingly violating our nation’s laws, and, in many cases, breaking other laws and causing crime, these parents who ply their children with booze are violating our nation’s laws, leading to their children breaking other laws and causing crime, death and destruction.

SO…when can we expect the law-abiding, proudly conservative folks who supported Arizona SB 1070, to support this as well? Unless they’re utter hypocrites, they certainly should!

1 Comment » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on May 17th, 2010 by JM

The world’s most famous living physicist, Stephen Hawking, sounded a bit of a sci-fi warning recently, suggesting that life beyond our solar system is probably likely, and wouldn’t necessarily be friendly to humans if we were to make contact with it. Since when did Hawking become such a paranoid? you might say. Well. Think about it. Even our own evolutionary history on earth–I’m talking about every living thing, not just homo sapiens–has been more marked by aggression towards other species, not peacefulness. Eat or be eaten, kill or be killed. Brutal, but such is the fascist temperament of Mother Nature.

This reminded me of a very short episode of The Twilight Zone, one bereft of dazzling special effects, but laden with a thought-provoking twist (A Small Talent for War – SPOILER). In it, an alien arrives at the United Nations and announces to the world’s representatives that they had created mankind millions of years ago, and that he was sent to see how the species was coming along. He states disdainfully that humanity has “a small talent for war” and that it would have 24 hours to show more promise, or else it would be destroyed. The UN urgently spends the next day furiously arguing to hammer out a worldwide peace deal, to impress the aliens and allow man to continue to exist. When the alien reappears and looks at the peace deal, he laughs and intimates that he seems to have been misunderstood; the aliens are in the business of creating warriors, and this latest attempt at peace proves that mankind is definitely not up to snuff, and will be promptly vaporized as an experiment gone awry. (Don’t know how much longer it’ll be available, but it’s here at Vimeo)

So this had me thinking: will mankind’s propensity for violence eventually vindicate us? Will our nuclear, biological and other weapons of mass destruction eventually be useful when we’re locked in mortal battle with another life form? Maybe the continued tensions around the world and the military-industrial complex that have grown to coddle them are all part of a master plan that will ensure our eventual survival. Maybe we need togive war a chance.

Or will our violent nature end up encouraging us to do to other extraterrestrial species what Hawking suggests might happen to us? Having outgrown the space on our planet, we’ll be turned outward in search of lebensraum and resources in order to survive, and will end up obliterating the life forms that have sprouted up in the universe’s oases.

Or maybe we’ll need those weapons when manmade robots rebel against us and attempt to destroy us? Hey, if I, Robot, Terminator and Battlestar Galactica have all seized on this theme, maybe there’s a nugget of truth to it. Maybe.

Impossible to know, but it makes you wonder if Mother Nature, in all of her awesome yet cruel power, continues to favor long-term survival over compassion.

No Comments » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on May 7th, 2010 by JM

This is an extension of an earlier post: What Europeans think of each other. I’m sure this will get as many attacks as that one did.

Let me start off by saying that, because the US is a young country, and people move around a lot, and we share a common language, nationality and (federal) legal system, the differences between an Alabaman and a Georgian are not going to be as great as those between an Albanian and, well, a Georgian (the Caucasian version).

Because I was raised in southern California, New Jersey and North Carolina, but have spent most of my adult years in northern California, I have a more objective perspective than your average American. (I probably spent most of my formative years in NJ and think mostly like a New Jerseyan, but still consider myself a Californian, strangely). Take this for what it’s worth (i.e. not much).

Californians – Northern: Considered “the land of fruits and nuts” by most of the rest of the country, especially by midwesterners who are afraid of anything that isn’t beef jerky. There’s some unsaid envy of the state’s technological and entertainment prowess, and its weather and beaches, as evidenced by plenty of schadenfreude at its current budgetary woes (not anything unusual for those who have lived here for a while). Northern Californians are said to think Southern Californians are a bunch of fake-and-baked bleached bimbos. Maybe that’s the case. Maybe Northern Californians (San Franciscans, in particular) are just jealous of the truly warm weather of the South. Some will tell you it has to do with water rights. They’re lying.

Californian – Southern: This is the land of Hollywood and Baywatch. There is a certain glamour and joie de vivre that Northern Californians lack, although other Americans are pretty safe when they say SoCal folks are preoccupied with appearances. Dressing well and being in shape are of paramount importance; living a healthy lifestyle is more popular here than anywhere else in the States. Megachurches dominate, especially in conservative Orange County, a dubious challenge to the hedonism of the area (the religious are just as shallow, if not more, than the non-religious). Southern Californians are proud of the fact that they don’t take things too seriously. They’re lying.

Pacific Northwest: I’m putting Washington and Oregon together here, and Seattle and Portland dominate the impression we get of this rugged, cold region of the country. Oregon’s said to be a blend of rednecks and hippies; I heard a comic say once that it’s the only place you’ll see a hybrid car on blocks. Both have the cool intellectual heritage of Northern Europe, in contrast to the Latin feel of Los Angeles and the Southwest. It rains often, and people don’t mind getting wet. Getting outdoors and hiking, biking and skiing (in Canada) are popular. People are relatively quiet.

Southwest: This area includes Arizona, Nevada (parts), New Mexico, and western Texas (at least to me). Think dry, arid, lots of cactus and tumbleweeds, the stuff of movie roadtrips and Spaghetti Westerns. Everything either has an Indian (Native) or Spanish name, and even though the old white people here are conservative, they don’t mind it. Lots of space, weird insects, arachnids (including scorpions and black widow spiders) and snakes. Old people wear cowboy hats and bolo ties. It gets absurdly hot in the summer, and freezing cold at night.

Upper Midwest: This includes the Dakotas, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa and maybe Nebraska and Kansas (the Great Plains). People I know here are almost always of German or Swedish stock, or Norwegian if they’re from North Dakota. Cold, cold, cold and boring, boring, boring. It’s relatively progressive (proximity to Canada?) and Minnesota, at least, is relatively well-to-do. Wisconsin is famous for cheese, and both Minnesotans and Wisconsonians hate being confused with each other; neither has an issue with Iowans or Canadians. Dakotans are considered idiots (it’s claimed it’s their Norwegian blood). The Great Plains states – Nebraska, Iowa and Kansas – are considered 100% rural and agricultural: mile after mile of corn fields.

The Rockies: This is Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado, with a bit of special case for Utah. Majestic red rock, crisp air and a bit of the pioneer spirit. Lots of skiing, and a general love of the outdoors. Utah, with its heavy Mormon population, is a bit different – relatively poor, religious, no alcohol, no working on Sundays, “family friendly”, etc.

Midwest: I’m including Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan here (maybe western Pennsylvania, too). These are considered the Rust Belt of the country. A bit cold and flat, a lot of erstwhile industry that might have not adapted well to changing times. I lived in Ohio for a couple of years and found it boring. Chicago is a nice exception, but the rest is the pits: it feels like everyone lives in the suburbs and there is no civic life whatsoever.

Southern Midwest: I don’t know what you would call this region, but I’m including Arkansas, Oklahoma, northern Texas, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee. These are a hybrid of Southern (they speak with a Southernish accent) and the Midwest. Very conservative but without the polarized racial dynamics of the South (at least it seems that way to me). Known for being a bit rednecky, especially in the areas near Appalachia.

South: Includes Louisiana (except the Creole New Orleans), Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, northern Florida, and South Carolina (arguably North Carolina and Virginia, since they were part of the Confederacy, but they seem a bit different). Considered lazy, fat, uneducated, racist and stupid by most other Americans–or, what Europeans think of Americans, in general–although there is a vestige of respect for their literature and plantation-like elegance. Of course, there are some incredibly intelligent and open-minded people here, but they are outnumbered. Atlanta is an exception in many ways.

East Coast/Eastern Seaboard: I’m subtracting out New England and putting that in a different category, so this includes New York, New Jersey, eastern Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Washington DC, and arguably Virginia and North Carolina. Former engine of the Industrial Revolution in the US (along with New England) and still very progressive, wealthy and technologically-advanced. One of the “coastal elites” that the flyover states dislike but still depend on for government handouts. Heavy Italian, Jewish, Irish and Eastern European influence to the culture.

New England: Includes everything from Maine down to Connecticut. They have their own accent, and a brusque coldness to their demeanor. “Live Free or Die” New Hampshire has a defiant libertarianism, while its neighbor Vermont has a hippie-like relaxed nature. Connecticut is wealthy, Rhode Island is tiny, and western Massachusetts and Maine are considered the boondocks. All have architecture reminiscent of their namesake, and I personally can’t help thinking of witch burning and the Scarlet Letter – a severe form of Protestantism that’s mellowed out in recent times.

Outliers: There are 3 that come to mind: southern Florida, Alaska and Hawai’i. Perceptions of each: Southern Florida is Cuban-dominated, sunny and festive. Alaska is remote with tons of lumberjacks and breathtaking scenery. Hawai’i is tropical and full of surfers. These are all no-brainers, and plenty of non-Americans might have similar perceptions.

Anything I missed or I was wrong on? Please share below in the comments.

2 Comments » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on April 20th, 2010 by JM

I work at a very small company, and a while back I was in charge of handling the customer service emails. For the most part, this is pretty routine, brainless work – perfect for the late afternoon when the sun is roasting me and my mind isn’t working all that well anyway.

Most of the emails I get are either polite, or curt (because, I’m guessing, they think a machine is at the other end, so there is little point in adding niceties). I don’t care either way and I respond in kind – politely.

Occasionally, you get a real dipshit that, completely unprovoked, lashes out in an email. In every single case I can think of, we have done absolutely nothing wrong–these people just have an axe to grind against the world and we’re just the most accessible target.

I don’t really lower myself to engage in a flame war with these people – but I will amuse myself at their expense. Talking down to these people is a lot of fun and pisses them off more than anything else.

Here’s an example.

In response to an automated signup confirmation email, one person wrote a pithy–and completely pointless–reply:

Your gay.

To which I replied:

Thank you for being our gay.

Funny, right? This guy didn’t think so. His response:

i am talking about you d i p s h i t

How dare he insult our automated email sender! I had to defend its honor. My riposte:

I suggest you take a class in b a s i c  E n g l i s h then. Terribly sorry about the confusion.

Heh.

Then we had “the doctor.” I got this guy’s email apparently the first day of a two-week vacation.

There is some personal information about me on your site that you must remove immediately. If you don’t remove it within 1 hour, I will sue you! (I am a lawyer AND a doctor)

So, I got back a couple of weeks later to read this guy’s email, and thankfully (whew!) didn’t see any papers served to our company. So I responded exceedingly politely, basically asking the guy what the hell he was talking about.

The reply went along the lines of:

I am in a relationship with a very nice French woman who was disturbed to find a personals listing I had posted a long time ago on your site. Please remove it immediately or I will sue you within an hour!

Since our company is the furthest thing from a dating service, I was still completely in the dark. I asked him ever-so-politely for a URL. In addition to threatening to sue me within an hour (for the third time), he provided a link to a review of an online dating service where this jackass had posted a personal ad in the form of a comment.

Let’s be clear about this: this guy was so stupid as to think a blog post about a dating service was the dating service, and that publishing a comment in the blog post would share his personal ad with thousands of eligible young women.

What a dumbass.

So I patiently explained in an email that this was not Match.com, that he had just posted a comment, but that I had deleted it. I wished him and his nubile French girlfriend a happy life together.

I got another panicked reply from Dr. Jackass later, saying that it was not removed. After a few back-and-forths later, it turned out that his girlfriend was still seeing the comment in Google search results. That’s because–you guessed it!–Dr Jackass used his full, real name in posting the comment. I explained that it would take Google some time for that deleted comment to flush out of their search results, and that he should take it up with Google.

Thankfully that was the last I heard from him.

Another person who didn’t understand the difference between a review about email providers and the actual email provider was a lady I’ll call Dumbelina.

I got an email from her saying:

I can’t seem to log into my email account. It says it’s locked or something. Please help me. There’s important mail I have to read.

I wrote back, and having learned from the Dr Jackass experience, asked her which email account she was trying to access. She said Yahoo Mail.

I wrote back.

You have reached us in error. We are not Yahoo Mail, and we are not in any way affiliated with Yahoo Mail. We’re [Our Company]. We have no way of helping you access your Yahoo Mail account, but you might consider contacting Yahoo if you’re still having difficulties logging in.

Crystal clear, right? The response I got back from Dumbelina:

I don’t know about this [Our Company] business. I ‘m just trying to log into my Yahoo Mail account. I can’t get in, and it’s been ONE WEEK since I’ve been locked out. There are VERY important things in that account that I have to access, and you are not helping me. HELP HELP HELP HELP HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Um, delete?

I can laugh now. Back then, I was cursing these people for being born.

In other news, the Super Bowl is this coming Sunday. The kickoff time is about 6:20 Eastern.

No Comments » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on February 1st, 2010 by JM

D. is currently living in Copenhagen. She loves the Danes. “They are superior people…they eat lots of fruit.”

My generous employer gave us two options for breakfast this morning: apples and danishes. One high-fiber, one low-fiber. One rich in antioxidants, the other clotted with sugary frosting. One that Danes eat, and another only named after them.

I hungrily made my choice, polyphenols be damned. I apparently don’t have a drop of Danish blood in me.

No Comments » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on April 16th, 2009 by JM

Headed overseas recently for work, and wanted to do the sensible thing and sleep on the plane to avoid jetlag when I landed. At an SFO shop, I saw a “3-in-1″ pack of inflatable neck pillow, earplugs and sleeping eye mask for $7.99. When I paid, the sales clerk was delighted to tell me it was only $5.99. What. A. Bargain!

Opened it up on the plane, and there were no ear plugs. No matter—I had my own Etymotic noise-blocking earbuds and they’re 1000x more effective and comfortable anyway. The neck pillow? I hate those things—feels like something squeezing my throat. (I use those bendable “flaps” in the headrest commonplace on planes nowadays)

Wore the sleeping mask, though.  A little flimsy, a bit tight across the bridge of my nose. But whatever. Blocked out most of the light. Enjoyed some fitful sleep even though my Italian neighbor was yelling all night long, and my other neighbor kept his light on the whole time.

Arrived, enjoyed the day in Cologne. Woke up the next morning, showered and ate breakfast downstairs.

On the way back up, I looked at this reddish band on my nose bridge in the elevator mirror. It was bumpy. Like 13-year-old kid riddled with acne bumpy.

Ran to my hotel room, and to my horror noticed about 10 (TEN!) huge zits right where the eye mask was sitting. I squeezed all of them. Could’ve filled a wine glass with all the pus. (Sorry—it really, REALLY was that disgusting) Disinfected my nose with every alcoholic beverage I could find in the minibar.

Threw the mf away. I’m guessing my packet had to have been opened and my eyemask used by a 56-year-old hooker as a maxipad. That’s after she unsuccessfully tried to use the earplugs as tampons (mercifully she threw those away).

On the flight back home, I found a Samsonite eyemask in the Berlin airport (no neck pillow, no earplugs, and 8 euros, or about $11). Tested the package to make sure it hadn’t been tampered with. (Have never loved clamshell packaging so much)

My nose still looks OK. Lesson learned.

1 Comment » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on March 5th, 2009 by JM

Me and J. Flying back to the US from London. Translating some British rag’s personals.

“Curvy.” J. looks at me, rolls her eyes: “Fat.”

“Drinks socially.” I correct: “Alcoholic. Wake up in my own sick at least 3x per week.”

“Seeking long-term relationship.” J. snickers: “Meaningless fling. I don’t want to see you when I wake up in the morning.”

OHAC.

???? What? An acronym we’ve never seen before.

J. furrows her brow, taps her chin with her finger for a minute, stares up. She turns to me with a devious smile.

“One Huge ARRRRSE…and cunt.”

Man, that was the shortest trans-Atlantic flight I’d ever been on.

No Comments » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on February 12th, 2009 by JM

Me and D. Amsterdam. About 9pm. Headed to a party from Central Station.

We board a tram to Overtoom, punch our strippenkaarts, and take a seat. In the seat in front of us are two people.

To the left sits a Thai (maybe Malaysian or even Indonesian – I couldn’t say) tranny. Tall, thin, caked with makeup and flouncy, long hair. She has a colorful dress on, pretty sure it had sequins on it (maybe rhinestones). She smells more flowery than the fields of tulips we passed on our way up from Rotterdam. If she were any more an over-the-top Asian tranny, she’d be Lil’ Kim.

To her right, a short, stubby, exceedingly pale butch dyke, wearing full-body denim and a (naturally) denim cap covering her short blond hair. Little greasy glasses are perched at the end of her nose. She looks like a dyke friend of mine, who is allergic to the Y chromosome.

They start making out, messily and noisily, the tranny’s high-pitched titters barely drowning out the grunts by her dyke girlfriend. Not sure if I’ve ever seen such a passionate display of love in public before, least of all in staid Holland.

Yes, I’m serious.

D. turns to me. “What exactly are we looking at here?!”

1 Comment » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on February 10th, 2009 by JM

I’ll join the chorus of what is likely hundreds of thousands of bloggers who are commenting on Obama’s inauguration. I didn’t go to the event itself, but at least when I’m old, I’ll be able to say I blogged on it.

I’m probably too cynical to be moved to tears by his speech, but I was impressed by how pointed some of his points were. He made it clear that anyone who would “stop clenching their fists” would be welcome as part of his program. He also said that those abroad in the practice of blaming everything on the West (read: the US) will have to answer to their own people for their actions, not ours.

Obama’s presidency, obviously, means the world to African Americans (and black people everywhere, probably) for its historic significance, and the fact that the highest glass ceiling has been broken. It doesn’t mean that racism is gone; it just means that racism alone can’t prevent someone from achieving their dreams. Powerful. I felt my lip tremble seeing older African Americans in the audience watching with a mixture of pride and unexpected joy.

For many more people, those of us who are just a shade (or two) darker than the typical person in high office, and those of us who have funny, unpronounceable names, we feel a bit of a barrier broken, too. Remember, Obama’s first name is routinely misspelled…and he still won with a healthy margin in the election. For those of us with “foreign-sounding” names, that gives us hope, too.

I’m also struck by how louder the celebrations are this time around, compared to 2000 and 2004. But, then again, I’m in the Bay Area, most of my friends are college-educated and Left-leaning, and Hollywood and newsmakers tend to be, too. I’m sure there are thousands of Pentecostal churches across America (80 million Americans are Pentecostal, mind you) with millions of weeping, mourning congregants.

The honeymoon will eventually end, and the backlash by conservatives will eventually mount, but Obama has made it clear that he doesn’t plan a Rove-like war for its own sake. Reasonable pushback from the opposition is always healthy, if “reasonable” is still in the GOP dictionary. Let’s hope the Republicans can take the next 4-8 years to grow up.

Rich Lowry (National Review) was talking about Bush’s sincerity and honesty, as he leaves the White House, and I thought of what George Constanza said, when Jerry asked him how to lie: “It’s not a lie if you believe it’s true.”

12 Comments » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on January 20th, 2009 by JM

Let me say at the outset: I think Rick Warren is not a respectable human being. The fact that he has compared homosexuality to pedophilia and incest, and bars gays from entering his church, where he includes an “ex-gay” support group, suggests he is an immoral person. (He wouldn’t be the first evangelical to be immoral; in fact, are there any moral evangelical people?)

But I will say this: Obama is a moral person, he’s stuck pretty close to his word (with a few exceptions, >ahem!< FISA, federal matching campaign funds, >ahem!<), and he's extremely strategic in his thinking. I've said before that you shouldn't underestimate him, or judge him too early. I did so myself, and learned my lesson early on.

My guess? Obama’s going to make a big pro-gay announcement (either to repeal DADT, or, hopefully, give federal recognition to same-sex partnerships) soon afterwards, and he wants to make it very clear that he made a big, public concession to “the other side of the aisle” before he does that. The fact that the uproar among LGBTs and their supporters has warmed up evangelicals to their president-elect nemesis. That goodwill might be what he needs. He’s pissing off the Left now; hopefully he’s preparing to piss off the Right soon. Politics always involves pissing somebody off, right?

Let’s wait and see.

12 Comments » | Filed under: Uncategorized
Posted on December 20th, 2008 by JM