Debunking the Demonstrably False

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

It's pretty sad that the erroneous claims these Republicans are making aren't being more widely ridiculed. It's not the norm for such political attacks to be so easily demonstrably false, but when they are I'd like to think that the arbiters of news could show everyone that they're not just asleep at the wheel. It would be nice if they could do the most basic fact checking and report on those facts, not the controversy. They're smart, right? They know the difference between journalism and vacuous bullsh... Oh my god! Someone went to a state dinner and they weren't on the guest list! HOLY FUCKING SHIT! Where's my pen and notepad?! The PEOPLE MUST KNOW!!!!

The Decade That Was

Oh man, I took so many self-portraits in 2005. It was like, the year of self-portraits. Ahh, self-portraits.

(made by Phillip Niemeyer)

Down Is The New Up

Best quote: "Lowering the minimum wage, so that low skilled workers can earn more money."

It's just that easy. If you want to help someone make more money, give them a pay cut. And if you want to feed a child, eat their lunch. And if you want to help someone breath easier, choke them to death.

As Thom Yorke once said,

Oh, Chimpanzee That!

Someone please inform Karl Pilkington of the most adorable monkey news of all time.



And while we're at it. Let's get his Mancunian opinion on this one as well. Is hiding under coconut shells preferable to getting into jars?

Not a Sunrise, but a Galaxyrise

Play the Skeptic

These articles shows a lot of why I like Joe Biden.

They display just how undogmatic he is when it comes to policy. And he isn't placated by easy answers.

Favorite line: "He has long seen his role, and the president values it, to play the skeptic,' says one senior White House aide."

Space Is One Cold Motherfucker

An important history lesson.

World's Collide

Get me Ricky Gervais and a muppet, right now!



Thank you, Internet.

(another Sullivan steal)

Why Would I Save A World I No Longer Have Any Stake In?

I saw Watchmen over the weekend. All things considered, I thought it was great. It's fantastic that a major studio released such a dense, challenging piece of work. While the cinematography and special effects were impressive, I was more engaged by the film's philosophical themes (which are undoubtedly carried-over from the source material).


Dr. Manhattan is especially fascinating. He's practically a god and illustrates just how problematic that proposition is (see title of post). He serves as a counterbalance to the other costumed "heroes" who are driven to crime fighting by emotional needs. Silk Spectre II is trying to live up to her mother's expectations. Nite Owl II can't get it up without a little caped crusading first. The most extreme is Rorschach, who's so dependant on his mask for a sense of identity that he calls it his face. Dr. Manhattan, meanwhile, doesn't seem to have any desires at all. He is a wholly logical being whose humanity has all but vanished.

This paradigm reminded me of a book I've been reading called "How We Decide." Jonah Lehrer, the author, details the neurological process of decision making. He explains that the brain is in a constant argument with itself. This is simplifying it a bit, but there are basically two parties in the debate, the emotional brain and the rational brain. The emotional brain is the sum of a person's experiences. Through the regulation of dopamine, it learns patterns and behaviors that inform our visceral reactions. The rational brain is what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. It's our consciousness.


Rorschach personifies the emotional brain. He reacts to everything on a gut level. His experiences have ingrained in him a moral code that he can't bear to deviate from. This leads him to commit acts of horrible violence, but to him it's all about justice. On the other end of the spectrum, we have Dr. Manhattan. His power-endowing accident removes his emotional brain almost entirely. As a result, he is coldly calculated. This also leads him to unspeakable violence (we win Vietnam), but not because of a moral imperative. Instead, it is out of apathy for suffering. He has lost the ability to empathize with others (a problem also associated with autism).

Typically, we think of acting only out of rationality as a good thing. But the film's end takes this idea to a conclusion that's difficult to swallow. I won't go into details, but the trade-off our "heroes" face is similar to one of Lehrer's thought experiments (paraphrased):

Imagine you are in the driver's seat of a runaway train that's approaching a switch track. On it's present course, the train will hit five railway workers on the track ahead. If you activate the switch, the train will be diverted to the side track where it will hit one railway worker. Do you hit the switch?

Now consider this same senario but slightly altered. Instead of sitting in the driver's seat, you are on a bridge above the tracks in between the runaway train and the five workers. Standing next to you is a man with enough girth to halt the train if it struck him. Do you push him onto the tracks?

Bollocks for Amunition

A poem by Australian comedian Tim Minchin.

Beatlesque: The Invasion

***THIS POST IS PART OF MY BEATLESQUE SERIES, IN WHICH I DISCUSS MUSIC THAT WEARS IT'S BEATLES INFLUENCE SO WELL YOU COULD ALMOST MISTAKE IT FOR THE LADS THEMSELVES***


In 1962, Decca Records declined to sign a young group of rock n'roll playing, long-haired Liverpudlians. The executive A&R man, Dick Rowe, told their manager that "guitar groups are on the way out." He is now famous as "the man who turned down The Beatles" and his prediction concerning music trends of the 1960's couldn't have been more boneheaded.

When The Beatles burst into national (and quickly international) popularity, it didn't take long for Dick Rowe's colleagues to realize that there were gobs of money to be made. And luckily for producers and promoters, young men with guitars were roaming the countryside in groups of four or five just waiting to be crowned the new hitmakers! The result was a tidal wave of Beatlesque music, to use the term more generously. Most of these groups are long forgotten. And after listening to many, many of their songs, I'm sorry to report that the vast majority do not fit my definition of Beatlesque. Some are still great tracks; they just don't capture that distinctive sound. For instance...



That's the Knickerbockers with "Lies." While many considered this at the time to be a dead-on Beatles knock-off, I don't think I'd ever be fooled by it. That weird guitar bend is rather unsophisticated. Overall, it's just too choppy. The songs various parts (verse, chorus, bridge) don't really fit with one another. One thing the Beatles were masters of was song structure. Their songs sometimes went in unexpected directions, but it always came off sounding like the next logical step. Even when they changed time signatures during a song, it flowed naturally. I'll admit the voice is a great Lennon impersonation. But for me, the craft just isn't there.

Now, on to two tracks from this era that DO make the cut.

Track title: Promise You'll Tell Her
Could Have Been On: Please Please Me


This song, from The Swinging Blue Jeans, sounds a lot like an early Lennon/McCartney composition. Stylistically, it reminds me of "There's a Place." Indeed, the plodding bass line and tight harmonies make it a perfect fit for Please Please Me (The Beatles' first album). The lead vocal sounds like George, as does the clean guiatar solo. It wouldn't have been their next single, but then most of these band's best songs were comparable to a solid Beatles album cut.

Track Title: Because
Could Have Been On: Please Please Me


"Because," by The Dave Clark Five, is another great example of tight Beatlesque harmonies. It's got a great melody. If I had to compare it to a specific song, it would probably be "P.S. I Love You." The chord progression is simple but engaging, lots of augmented fifths. Ending on a major 6th is very Beatley as well. I definitely see it as the B-Side of some uptempo single like "I Wanna Hold Your Hand."

An Inbound Train Toward the Loop Will Be Arriving Shortly

The Chicago Transit Authority as a new voice, Carolyn Hopkins. I haven't noticed the change yet. According to the Chicago Tribune, her announcements began airing at certain stations in mid-February.

"I love Chicago," said Hopkins, who traces her affection for the city to a mid-1960s Beatles concert she attended at the old Comiskey Park...

I like her already! She can only be an improvement over the vaguely Midwestern accented women who over-enunciates the phrase "an inbound train... tWARD the loop... will be arriving shortly."

ALSO, this article answered a mystery I've pondered on many an "L" ride.

The sound bites played on CTA buses and trains are still rendered by a male voice-over announcer from Milwaukee who insists on remaining anonymous for fear of being typecast as a performer incapable of handling a script more demanding than "Doors closing."

I've often wondered if the dude who's told me countless times that "the next stop is... Damen" lived in Chicago. Can you imagine listening to yourself everyday during your commute? I suppose for an incredibly narcissistic person it would be great.

His friends that live in Chicago have probably learned to hate him over the years. He's constantly ruining their day with delay announcements. And then he has the nerve to say "We expect to be moving shortly." LIAR!

"Your attention, please. We are standing momentarily, waiting for signal clearance."

"Shut up, Ted."

No wonder he wants to remain anonymous.

Every 72 Years (or so...)

I've been obsessed lately with a wikipedia page titled Historical Rankings of United States Presidents. It compiles 13 surveys (ranging from 1948 to 2009) that rank US Presidents from best to worst. What's interesting is that all the surveys more or less agree with one another. While the names in the middle tend to shift around (true to character, Nixon is particularly shifty), the edges of the list don't change much. James Buchanan and Andrew Johnson have staked their claims as our worst Presidents so far.

Mr. Bushmore (made by me)

Conversely, there is a strong consensus that Abraham Lincoln, George Washington and Franklin Roosevelt are our desert island, top three favorite Presidents of all time. I like them as a trio because they each represent a different century. How balanced! More importantly, each of their presidencies served as a fulcrum in American history. No doubt this is why they are considered so great. Each took office in a time of great unrest and doubt. But the times didn't just define their presidencies. They became the stewards of these shifts in our country's narrative. They facilitated change.

There are some obvious parallels to the current political climate. Obama has already been compared to Lincoln ad nauseum (FDR to a lesser extent). What's interesting is the timing. If we look at when these Presidents took office...

1788- George Washington

72 years later...

1860- Abraham Lincoln

72 years later...

1932- Franklin Roosevelt

72 years later...

2004- George W Bu... Wait! WHAT?!? (record needle scratching)

make that 76 years later...

2008- Barack Obama

Okay, so the years between FDR and Obama aren't exactly the same as Lincoln-FDR and Washington-Lincoln. Admittedly, my point is a little less sexy as a result. But I still think it's an interesting idea that every 72 years (or so) our country is ripe for a sea change. I imagine you can feel it in the air much like people said they could this past November. In those moments, we elect someone who both shapes this transformation and has their image shaped by it. They become the symbol.

And how do we comemorate the symbols of change? We make them the symbols... of change...

The Superman Exists, And He's American

Very much looking forward to this.

The Obama Code

FiveThirtyEight has a great post today by George Lakoff, a linguistics and cognitive science professor, called The Obama Code. No, it's not a two-thousand year old conspiracy that ends in a shitty Ron Howard movie. The word "code" is meant more in a Hammurabi sense. The piece has seven parts and is worth reading in its entirety. But one section in particular caught my interest.

"2.Progressive Values are American Values

President Obama’s second intellectual move concerns what the fundamental American values are. In Moral Politics, I described what I found to be the implicit, often unconscious, value systems behind progressive and conservative thought. Progressive thought rests, first, on the value of empathy —- putting oneself in other people’s shoes, seeing the world through their eyes, and therefore caring about them. The second principle is acting on that care, taking responsibility both for oneself and others, social as well as individual responsibility. The third is acting to make oneself, the country, and the world better—what Obama has called an “ethic of excellence” toward creating “a more perfect union” politically."

and a little farther down...

"Those empathy-based moral values are the opposite of the conservative focus on individual responsibility without social responsibility. They make it intolerable to tolerate a president who is The Decider—who gets to decide without caring about or listening to anybody. Empathy-based values are opposed to the pure self-interest of a laissez-faire “free market,” which assumes that greed is good and that seeking self-interest will magically maximize everyone’s interests. They oppose a purely self-interested view of America in foreign policy. Obama’s foreign policy is empathy-based, concerned with people as well as states—with poverty, education, disease, water, the rights of women and children, ethnic cleansing, and so on around the world.

How are such values expressed? Take a look at the inaugural speech. Empathy: “the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job, the firefighter’s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent’s willingness to nurture a child…” Responsibility to ourselves and others: “We have duties to ourselves, the nation, and the world.” The ethic of excellence: “there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of character, than giving our all to a difficult task.” They define our democracy: “This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed.”

I volunteered at Obama's campaign headquarters during the election, specifically answering kid mail. It was an amazing experience, and often hilarious (one little boy wrote in asking for $15 to buy some Star Wars legos).

Here's part of the response letter that most of the kids received:

"Creating change and making the world better is not always easy, and you will probably find in your life that it is more comfortable to ignore injustices that don't affect you directly. Don't take that comfortable road. Challenge yourself to make a difference.

If you don't already know what it means, I want you to look up the word "empathy" in the dictionary. I believe we don't have enough empathy in our world today, and it is up to your generation to change that.

I leave you with three bits of advice that will make your life more fulfilling: Look out for other people, even when it does not directly benefit you; strive to make a difference everywhere you go; and get back up every time you are knocked down."

I'd say Lakoff is right on the money.

You Commie Homo-Loving Sons of Guns

Temperature in Chicago last night: 14 degrees with -10 windchill

Academy Awards viewership in my apartment: 100%

Coincidence? Hardly.

I was mildly interesting in watching the proceedings anyway. And wouldn't you know it? We tuned in just after the most entertaining part of the show.



I probably wouldn't have been as harsh on Jackman's leaden jokes, if I had seen him deposit some goodwill with that opening number first. The movie-musical-medley half time show, on the other hand, is best summarized by the words ultra lame.

We did tune in just in time to be seriously creeped out by Tilda Swinton. It was probably her automaton voice and cult leader outfit, but I was worried they might sacrifice Amy Adams.

Creepy!

Other highlights included Dustin Lance Black winning best original screenplay for Milk. He and Sean Penn both gave great speeches. While it's not exactly a hard sell to tell the audience at the Oscars that gay marriage should be legal, there's no doubt that this fight is still not won.

"I think that it is a good time for those who voted for the ban against gay marriage to sit and reflect. And anticipate their great shame, and the shame in their grand children's eyes if they continue that way of support. We've got to have equal rights for everyone."

Well said.

New from Parker Brothers: Credit Crisis!

I try not to steal too many of Andrew Sullivan's links, but this seemed worthy of passing along. It sort of looks like video instructions for a board game that combines Life and Monopoly.


The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

Beatlesque: The Second Coming

***THIS POST IS PART OF MY BEATLESQUE SERIES, IN WHICH I DISCUSS MUSIC THAT WEARS IT'S BEATLES INFLUENCE SO WELL YOU COULD ALMOST MISTAKE IT FOR THE LADS THEMSELVES***

In 1976, an album was released by Capitol records. There were no liner notes or songwriting credits. It simply said Klaatu. Soon after, a Rhode Island journalist speculated that this mysterious album was actually the Beatles reunited. The rumour spread and album sales soared. Capitol kept mum (wouldn't you?).

But it was all conjecture, and eventually Klaatu revealed themselves to be a group of Canadian studio musicians. Album sales... well, reflected this revelation accordingly. And once again the world was left to console itself with some sweet Beatlesque music, in the absence of the genuine article.

Klaatu is an important entry in this series because it proves my underlying thesis. There IS music out there so Beatlesque that it can fool the average listener. If you want to believe it's the lads, your ears won't tell you otherwise. But upon further inspection, there's only one song on 3:47 EST (the album's official title) that qualifies as truly Beatlesque. Without it, it's hard to imagine the "Klaatu are The Beatles" rumour getting started in the first place.

Track Title: Sub-Rosa Subway
Could Have Been On: Magical Mystery Tour/Yellow Submarine Soundtrack


First, there's the one-two punch of that jaunty piano accompanied by a bouncing bass line. And then come the vocals, a dead-ringer for McCartney. It doesn't take much imagination to picture him singing this buoyant melody, eye-brows raised, head bobbing. The mix of straight-up rock with layers of horns, strings and sound effects would fit right in on Magical Mystery Tour. The drums are booming and uncomplicated, very much Ringo's style around that time. It's got a lot punch, but there's also some nice subtle interplay between the guitar and bass. Even at their most bombastic, The Beatles never lost a sense of craftsmanship. The lively swell of instruments gradually fades in a coda very similar to the one on Harrison's epic "All Too Much."

The rest of the album, which is good in it's own right, never achieves the same effect despite scattered Beatlesque moments. "Calling Occupants of Interplanetary Craft" comes close, but it's a little too synth-heavy to make the cut. The breathy vocals don't help either. It's a great track though, and The Carpenters had a moderate hit with a highly faithful cover in 1977.

Who's on the 100,000 Dollar Bill?

For reasons beyond my understanding, my office was closed on President's Day. So as a thank you to the noble men who made it possible for me to sleep til 10:30 and watch the rest of my netflick, here are some oft-forgotten spendable Presidential portraits.

Jefferson on the $2.


McKinley on the $500.


Cleveland on the $1000.
ALSO! Did you know that Grover Cleveland married his best friend's hot 21 year old daughter while he was president and she was in college? Well, hot by those days' standards. Seriously, guys. Wikipedia is full of historical knowledge. LEARN!

Madison on the $5000.


And finally, the big kahuna. On the $100,000, the largest US denomination ever printed...

WOODROW WILSON!


Tragically, no bills higher than $100 are currently in production or likely to ever be printed again. But don't fret, obscure-President-currency lovers. The US Mint has already begun the Presidential $1 Coin Program! Started in 2007, the Presidential $1 Coin Program (or P$CP!) is the ambitious undertaking to engrave every single President onto their very own limited edition dollar coin at the rate of 4 per year. Not excited yet? What if I told you that the William Henry Fucking Harrison coin is being released this Thursday, February 19th 2009!?

Better grab a sleeping bag and some Clif bars, because the lines at your local Federal Reserve Bank are going to put the iPhone to shame.

(made by me)

I Know It Because I Know It Because I Know It

A few months ago, I discovered a cable-access show out of Austin called The Atheist Experience. They take calls from both believers and nonbelievers, but the calls from believers are generally a lot more interesting.

The title of this post is just a snippet of the flawless logic this Christian caller uses to support her claims.


It's a great program. Most of all because it gets this debate out in the open. There is still a big taboo surrounding the subject of God. Question someone on their spiritual belief and it's instantly labeled rude. And for good reason. It's a way to shame someone into not asking any questions.

A lot of times the show's callers won't get into specifics. Because, let's face it, it's in the specifics that supernatural beliefs start to sound awfully improbable and impractical. But when they try to, it's rather entertaining.

Frauds and Charlatans

Derren Brown is a mentalist, a magician of the mind. But what he does isn't really magic. Sometimes it looks like jedi mind tricks. It's part hypnosis, part psychology and relies heavily on a technique called Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP). His work is fascinating because, in a way, he takes away people's identities.

Watch his program called "The Heist" to see just how malleable the mind can be.

When I say he takes away people's identities, I don't mean he gives them amnesia or plastic surgery. But all of his tricks essentially force people into behavior that they wouldn't ordinarily engage in. He is tampering with their free will. You might say "I would never rob a security guard at gun point." So what happens when you DO rob a security guard at gun point? Who was this person that committed the crime? Was it you? I see two options; yes or no.

If no, then who robbed the guard? And where were you while all this was going on?

If yes, then obviously you don't know yourself as well as you thought. Which is strange, considering you ARE you. AND I suppose you would have to take responsbility for your actions.

You could argue it was you, BUT Derren Brown tricked you into doing it through an elaborate set-up involving Pavlovian conditioning. Does that absolve you of responsibility? Maybe. But if you watch the Millgram Experiment part of the program, that defense doesn't seem very persuasive. In fact, I would argue that what Derren Brown did to these people isn't all that different from what happens to us everyday. Of course, his conditioning process was extremely focused and had a specific goal in mind. It's unlikely someone would be conditioned in a similar fashion in just two weeks without this kind of intense effort. But how about smaller, subtler conditioning stretched out over years? It makes me question what makes me "me" and why "I" do what I do.

Richard Dawkins interviewed him concerning psychics, fortune tellers and faith healers. Basically, they perform their trade in the same way he does his.

Part 1 of 6. The whole interview is worth watching.

Robot Chair

One can only imgaine the impact of this terrifying new technology.

Goldilocks tried the last and smallest chair.

"This chair is just right," she sighed. But just as she settled down into the chair to rest, it broke into pieces.

Then it rea-fucking-ssembled itself. "Holy shit!" cried Goldilocks. "Surely these robotic chairs will murder us all in the night!

Not THAT Kind of Cheer

During the primaries last year, I was amazed by Fred Thompson. He spoke only in the broadest of platitudes. In the debates, his answers were feebly cobbled together from buzz words and colloquialisms. They had zero substance. One of my favorites was when he was asked how to beat Obama in the general election. "He's a liberal" was the gist of his answer. Wow. Keen insight, Fred.

I found this video today, which seems to have been made sometime in December. Despite his acting background, Fred attempting humor falls just as flat as Fred attempting relevant thought.



First off, "Weeelllll, I'm Fred Thompson." Awesome start! But could've been better with the addition of "Howdy partner. Why don't ya pull up bar stool so I can bend yer ear for a spell?"

Next, I'm relieved he's not talkin' bout THAT kind of cheer. PHEW! You don't even want to know what kind of vile, perverted cheer I was imagining. In fact, I'm delighted that the cheer he's talkin' bout is good ol' fashioned sarcasm. Bitter, stale, cheerful sarcasm.

If Pappy Fred's comedy stylings are too edgy for you, allow me to summarize. Here's a list of casualties to his biting wit: digging holes, dropping money from airplanes, fat people eating donuts, "experts", printing money. I agree that Obama should feel particularly dumb for wanting to dump cash out of airplanes and listening to experts. Of course, this caustic message of holiday cheer wouldn't be complete without a rousing, ironic "Yes We Can." Way to skewer those fools who thought that message would resonate with voters.

Whaddaya Think A Stimulus Is?

It's good to see Obama taking a stand for pragmatism. Listen to what the man said at 9:00.

Curiouser and curiouser

Nothing would be what it is
Because everything would be what it isn't
And contrarywise
What it is
It wouldn't be
And what it wouldn't be
It would

Beatlesque: Aussie Beatles

***THIS POST IS PART OF MY BEATLESQUE SERIES, IN WHICH I DISCUSS MUSIC THAT WEARS IT'S BEATLES INFLUENCE SO WELL YOU COULD ALMOST MISTAKE IT FOR THE LADS THEMSELVES***

The Bee Gee's are mostly known for their late 70's disco pop. But they first had success in the 60's aping the styles of both British Invasion bands and American R&B. After culling through much of their early catalogue, two tracks (both from the album 1st) reach Beatlesque status. I think this pairing makes for an appropriate first Beatlesque post because they represent the two extremes of Beatles inspired tunes.



Track Title: In My Own Time
Could Have Been On: Revolver



Honestly, this track is so derivative that it borders on being Rutlesque. It's such a blatant rip-off of "Taxman" that it's almost not eligible. The bass groove, the jagged guitars, the melody, the fuzzy off-kilter solo, even the harmonies are a mirror image of Harrison's song. They didn't even change the key. I imagine this is the closet to a one-to-one ratio I'll come across that isn't meant to be parody. Still, it's an enjoyable listen and would probably be impressive to someone who hasn't heard Taxman. Though it's hard to imagine someone who's heard this album and NOT Revolver. But I'll forgive the brothers Gibb for this indiscretion, because 1st also contains...

Track Title: Please Read Me
Could Have Been On: Rubber Soul/Revolver



"Please Read Me" is probably the most transcendent Beatlesque track I'm likely to find. It combines Lennon's mid-60's laid-back haziness (similar to "Rain") with an enchanting, catchy chorus. The one note high harmony on the titular phrase is Paul all the way. The bridge goes a little into Beach Boys vocal territory, but the jangly guitar and smooth bass lines give it an unmistakable Beatles vibe. "Nowhere Man" is the only song I can think of that achieves a similar synthesis of John's detached singing style and umtempo pop.

Beatlesque

Over the last couple months, I've been developing a playlist. It's devoted to Beatlesque music. That is to say, music that is heavily influenced by the Beatles. More specifically, the goal has been to track down songs that are almost mistakable for Beatles originals. There are a couple limitations. Beatle solo-career stuff is obviously disqualified (though I've often thought you could slip McCartney's "Little Willow" onto the White Album without anyone noticing). Also off limits are intentional parodies of Beatles music. Otherwise, there'd be no point to this project since I already have the Rutles soundtrack and Archaeology album.

Here's the playlist so far:
Because - The Dave Clark Five
Promise You'll Tell Her - The Swinging Blue Jeans
Had To Run Around - Emitt Rhodes
Please Read Me - The Bee Gee's
In My Own Time - The Bee Gee's
Victoria - The Kinks
Strawberryfire - Apples in Stereo
Sub-Rosa Subway - Klaatu
Porpoise Song - The Monkeys
Laura - Billy Joel
Lullabye - Emitt Rhodes
You Take the Dark Out of the Night - Emitt Rhodes
Low C - Supergrass

I've ordered them roughly according to where the song could fit into Beatles chronology.

To take things a step further, I'm planning on writing posts about the tracks I've discovered so far and what qualities exactly makes them Beatlesque. I'll also continue to search and find new examples of artists imitating the Beatles so well that Ringo wishes he'd have written it.

You Gotta Believe in Something

I was struck by this reader e-mail on Daily Dish concerning the fact the burden of proof is on theists to show that God exists.

It ends with...

"I simply point out that living your life is a specific, positive claim, and thus everyone has to bear the burden of proof equally."

Okay. I'm an atheist and I'm alive. If you want positive proof that I'm alive then I'll give you my address and we can visit in person. I suppose "human secularism" is a good way to describe what I believe. And I would define it as basing decisions on empirical evidence with an eye towards improving the human condition. As opposed to basing decision on God's will with an eye towards pleasing Him. Feel free to poke holes in my belief system. Most importantly if you do find problems with my secular beliefs, I'm willing to change my mind when presented with credible data.

As for the source of meaning in my life, it's my interactions with the natural world and other human beings. Nevermind the fact that the reader is presupposing that life and the universe have meaning. I don't think there is an objective meaning. It just is what it is. I do think there is subjective meaning. And it baffles me why this isn't good enough for some people. Is it a sunset not as beautiful if it's simply the earth turning away from the sun? Is a marriage only meaningful if it's been okayed by some higher authority?

Our brains are meaning machines. We see meaning and purpose in everything because it helps us survive. So naturally, we might see intent that isn't really there. We anthropomorphize the natural world and decide there must be a god of the harvest (Demeter). Or a god of fire (Agni). Or a god of thunder (Thor). Or if it's hard keeping track of all these gods, let's just have one big God for everything. We look at clouds and stars and our minds turn them into people and animals. We are the source of meaning. The stars didn't align themselves to look like crabs and horses for our benefit. It just is how it is. And I can find beauty in that. I don't want to automatically kill myself. I like the universe. I like living in it. And I don't see a point in inventing supernatural reasons why my existence is important and meaningful. It's meaningful to me. That's good enough.

(one orb disappearing behind the horizon of another)

Start by Listening

"And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress."

This is why Obama is the right man for the moment. He doesn't approach these complicated issues looking to map over his preconceived ideology as the solution. As Biden said when I saw them in Springfield, "This guy is a clear-eyed pragmatist who'll get the job done." By putting the focus on improving the lives of individuals, he can hopefully change the conversation from an abstract philosophical argument to a debate on practical policy. This has to be the first step and I expect this strategy to touch the whole of his presidency.

Five Living Presidents

This picture was taken recently. It's the five living US Presidents. It got me wondering how many similar photos have been taken. I found two other examples when this kind of thing has happened. "This kind of thing" meaning the incoming President has a photo-op with his predecessors.

Here we have Bush the Elder with Reagan, Carter, Ford and Nixon.


And a decade earlier, here's Reagan with Carter, Ford and Nixon.


I found a couple more interesting couplings.

Clinton and Ford.


More interesting, Clinton and Reagan.

It's not easy to find pictures of Ronnie after he retired.

And finally, Nixon and Truman.


But, I cheated a bit on this one because Nixon is only Vice President in this photo. Still, they make a handsome couple.

It's somewhat fascinating to see all of these men stand next to each other with big grins on their melting faces. It wasn't all that long ago in human history that the normal practice on seeing your political enemy was to throw a blunt heavy object at their head. In fact, that's still the norm in a lot of country's today. To see Obama and Bush, Reagan and Carter and Nixon, Bush and Clinton put aside their bitter partisan disagreements is to look at a tangible example of our country's founding principles.

In my search, I also came across these drawings of 20th Century Presidents (plus Bush the Younger) kicking back with the founder of their respective parties. Hey man, it's just dude's beeing dudes. Can I bum a smoke, Frankie?

Above: An accurate depiction of what Andrew Jackson would have done with time travel technology.


Both drawings have notable absences. Obviously, the Democrat picture was drawn before 1/20/09. But there's five famous faces missing from the Grand Ole Poker Party. Granted there were more Republican Presidents last century, so it would be harder to fit them all in one frame. But I don't think any Republican would complain about Harding, Coolidge and Hoover not getting standard bearer status. And adding McKinley would just confuse people that John McCain had somehow been sworn in on accident.

Get To Know Them First

This is great ad series that aired in California on inauguration day. It strikes exactly the right tone. It's just honest about how little a person's sexual orientation has to do with his/her lifestyle. Unfortunately one of the ABC affiliates, KABC in Los Angeles, refused to put the ads on air because they were "too controversial" considering that "many families will be watching."

By the way, here's a promo for ABC's sunday night line-up.



Now there's some heartwarming family television advertising. Let that be a lesson, gay-rights advocates. Sex it up a bit! Put a little boobage in there. Use "slumber party" as a euphemism for lesbian sex and KABC is sure to come around. Because let's face it, kids love slumber parties.

President Badass

Finally, a chief executive who is action figure worthy.

Forget W's cowboy image. Obama is a secret fucking agent!



Oh, I think you're gonna want some free health care, when he's through with you!



And you have to admit, Barack Obama does kind of sound like a name George Lucas would make up.