Wednesday, March 31, 2004
Last day I wear a white blouse when there is even a remote chance of rain
Now its hailing. Weird Tucson weather. Good thing all my classes are done for the day.
So, I go into class at 2 o'clock this afternoon with the sun shining but some clouds in the sky and fifty minutes later its raining and thundering.
Now its hailing. Weird Tucson weather. Good thing all my classes are done for the day.
posted by Laura Keslar at 2:58 PM | |
How desperate can one presidential candidate be?
But some people (read: John Kerry) just dont get it. No matter how many foul words you have on your website (four pages worth, in this case--chalk it up to a virus, they did) or F-words you use or what nifty borrowed motorcycle you rode in on on Jay Leno, you will always be on the outside. You will never be one of the popular kids. Take it from me, one of the chronically disenfranchised kids in high school. It just makes people point and laugh.
And yet, Kerry keeps on trying--a virtual energizer bunny. Maybe, just maybe, his publicist hopes that he can appeal to the youth through his "fascination" with rap and hip-hop and his ability to snowboard. And maybe all the cool kids will be tricked into voting for Kerry, because he acts young and hip. After all, he even looks younger too.
Even before the t-shirt fiasco, political candidates have known that it would be a difficult task to appeal to younger voters, much less get them to vote at all. And they have done everything to try to woe young voters into the voting booths to vote for them.
But some people (read: John Kerry) just dont get it. No matter how many foul words you have on your website (four pages worth, in this case--chalk it up to a virus, they did) or F-words you use or what nifty borrowed motorcycle you rode in on on Jay Leno, you will always be on the outside. You will never be one of the popular kids. Take it from me, one of the chronically disenfranchised kids in high school. It just makes people point and laugh.
And yet, Kerry keeps on trying--a virtual energizer bunny. Maybe, just maybe, his publicist hopes that he can appeal to the youth through his "fascination" with rap and hip-hop and his ability to snowboard. And maybe all the cool kids will be tricked into voting for Kerry, because he acts young and hip. After all, he even looks younger too.
posted by Laura Keslar at 1:21 AM | |
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Bah on homework
Well, suprise surprise. Upon perusing some of The Corner's archives, I found this peachy little post. Now, for some reason, I feel vindicated. I knew I wasnt insane to think the books were absolutely fun to read. And I am pleased to know I was not the first to discover these books.
Which does remind me, I should put down the Hayek and von Mises and pick up Fraser, instead.
Besides asking people if they think Donald Rumsfeld, Jonah Goldberg, and Matt Drudge are hot, I have also been asking if they had read any books by George MacDonald Fraser--this includes from my dear loving mother to my roommate to random people I meet while standing in line. The common response to my two questions tend to be along the lines of "No," typically followed by a few choice words maligning my senses, intelligence, and sanity.
Well, suprise surprise. Upon perusing some of The Corner's archives, I found this peachy little post. Now, for some reason, I feel vindicated. I knew I wasnt insane to think the books were absolutely fun to read. And I am pleased to know I was not the first to discover these books.
Which does remind me, I should put down the Hayek and von Mises and pick up Fraser, instead.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:57 PM | |
Wanton Women Beware
Note of caution to all you licentious women: either decrease the time you spend in the sun or stop having sex. My recommendation: celibacy and sun screen.
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:37 PM | |
And I thought my childhood was bad
So this is what children in Norway do for fun....
posted by Laura Keslar at 4:45 PM | |
Monday, March 29, 2004
Shake it like a Polaroid Picture
Maybe this guy has been listening to Outkast's Hey Ya for way too long.
posted by Laura Keslar at 6:59 PM | |
An Asinine Post on Tasteful Tattoos
Well, this guy thinks so.
I mean, tasteful can describe many things--but a tattoo? Something that mars the skin with black permanent ink? If black, permanent ink can be tasteful, then let me grab the Sharpy and draw some classy design.
When the synonyms for tasteful include classy, cultivated, and elegant, I really cant see how anyone can describe a tattoo--any tattoo--as tasteful.
Maybe he just doesnt have a grasp of the English language or maybe America's standards are messed up. Either way, me and my happy face sharpy tattoo are going to sleep.
Is it possible to have a "tasteful tattoo"?
Well, this guy thinks so.
I mean, tasteful can describe many things--but a tattoo? Something that mars the skin with black permanent ink? If black, permanent ink can be tasteful, then let me grab the Sharpy and draw some classy design.
When the synonyms for tasteful include classy, cultivated, and elegant, I really cant see how anyone can describe a tattoo--any tattoo--as tasteful.
Maybe he just doesnt have a grasp of the English language or maybe America's standards are messed up. Either way, me and my happy face sharpy tattoo are going to sleep.
posted by Laura Keslar at 3:34 AM | |
What Would Jesus Say while Campaigning?
Like when John Kerry used the verse in James talking about faith and good deeds and implying govt should take care of the people.
Its amazing he didnt say to "render unto Cesar that which is Cesar's" but then that just might reveal enough of that red underneath that white, white skin.
However, it was interesting. I am assuming that he has never considered the Bible to support property rights (think of the story of David/Bathsheba and Nathan the prophet telling David the story of the man who stole the poor man's one ewe lamb) or private charity. In the New Testament, people were told not to give to the church unless its with a cheerful heart. Forgive me for saying this, but how many people cheerfully hand over to the govt their money come April 15? Not many, mind you.
What the Bush administration said in regards to what Kerry had to say was quite right; Kerry's insinuation was anything but Kosher. However, the Bush administration did overreact. It showed how sensitive it was to any and every accusation.
Is it just me or does it bother you to no end when people decide to invoke Gods name to serve some purpose of their own? We have all seen those trite bumper stickers asking WWJB, as in, who would Jesus bomb, but could things get any worse than that? I think so.
Like when John Kerry used the verse in James talking about faith and good deeds and implying govt should take care of the people.
Its amazing he didnt say to "render unto Cesar that which is Cesar's" but then that just might reveal enough of that red underneath that white, white skin.
However, it was interesting. I am assuming that he has never considered the Bible to support property rights (think of the story of David/Bathsheba and Nathan the prophet telling David the story of the man who stole the poor man's one ewe lamb) or private charity. In the New Testament, people were told not to give to the church unless its with a cheerful heart. Forgive me for saying this, but how many people cheerfully hand over to the govt their money come April 15? Not many, mind you.
What the Bush administration said in regards to what Kerry had to say was quite right; Kerry's insinuation was anything but Kosher. However, the Bush administration did overreact. It showed how sensitive it was to any and every accusation.
posted by Laura Keslar at 2:17 AM | |
Sunday, March 28, 2004
Rated X -- for eXtremely stupid
However, several friends think he is definitely not attractive. It didnt help that one person I asked was a guy, but...I would have expected a better answer than the fact that Goldberg has too much of a male's anatomy.
But, still, I think Rumsfeld beats everyone on attractiveness. And don't tell me otherwise.
Ok, once again, I have decided another conservative was *hot.* This time, its not Rumsfeld, though he still is very fine. Instead, its Jonah Goldberg. Now, he has had his bad, good, and facial hair pictures. He doesnt look too bad in facial hair, though that might be because I like facial hair in general.
However, several friends think he is definitely not attractive. It didnt help that one person I asked was a guy, but...I would have expected a better answer than the fact that Goldberg has too much of a male's anatomy.
But, still, I think Rumsfeld beats everyone on attractiveness. And don't tell me otherwise.
posted by Laura Keslar at 7:16 PM | |
Experts vs. Religious
The Christian believes things because of what is written in the Bible, the expert because of the empirical evidence. The author sets up this situation where the Christians are being unreasonable whereas the experts are intelligent, understanding, tolerant, and most of all, logical.
Experts say it's important to note that the word "homosexual" did not even emerge until the 19th century, leaving the translations, from Hebrew and Greek, open to interpretation by translators and publishers.
And hence, why I am KJV-O. I believe that the word of God is scripture; I believe that the translators were inspired by God and chose the right words for what they translated. But the funny thing is, the KJV does not use the word "homosexual." Instead, it users "abusers of themselves with mankind" or "Sodomites."
When the article talks about those who do not believe a literal interpretation of what the Scriptures were saying, it refers to those people as "other readers" or "critics" or "others"--disassociating them with those people called "Christians" who take a more literal view of the Bible.
Funny how things are. The author, without realizing it, has clearly identified the possibility that people who reject the Bible's clear and concise language are in fact rejecting the thing which they proclaim--that is, Christ.
The AZDaily Star offered an article recently about how Christians differ on the subject of homosexuality. Instead of being how Christians differ, the article actually sets up an either/or scenario between the Christian and the expert.
The Christian believes things because of what is written in the Bible, the expert because of the empirical evidence. The author sets up this situation where the Christians are being unreasonable whereas the experts are intelligent, understanding, tolerant, and most of all, logical.
Experts say it's important to note that the word "homosexual" did not even emerge until the 19th century, leaving the translations, from Hebrew and Greek, open to interpretation by translators and publishers.
And hence, why I am KJV-O. I believe that the word of God is scripture; I believe that the translators were inspired by God and chose the right words for what they translated. But the funny thing is, the KJV does not use the word "homosexual." Instead, it users "abusers of themselves with mankind" or "Sodomites."
When the article talks about those who do not believe a literal interpretation of what the Scriptures were saying, it refers to those people as "other readers" or "critics" or "others"--disassociating them with those people called "Christians" who take a more literal view of the Bible.
Funny how things are. The author, without realizing it, has clearly identified the possibility that people who reject the Bible's clear and concise language are in fact rejecting the thing which they proclaim--that is, Christ.
posted by Laura Keslar at 1:35 PM | |
Bad Grammar
So, if the SAT needs to include a portion with grammar, by all means, go for it. Especially, when people forget to add the -ly ending to particular words, like the girl in the article.
"I'll probably do really bad," said Angela Garcia, 14 and a freshman at Sunnyside High.
By the time I entered high school, I knew you were supposed to add an -ly ending to adverbs. Maybe it was my private schooling, but all the same. Come on folks. But its not just freshmen in high school who make this mistake. I hear it coming from freshmen in college.
It is a bane when people cannot speak or write in English properly.
Not proclaiming to be the queen of grammar (as evidenced by my lack of correct spelling and grammar, periodically scattered throughout the posts), but some people really do need help with grammar. And if students, when they graduate, can't use English properly, then their schools ought to know about it.
So, if the SAT needs to include a portion with grammar, by all means, go for it. Especially, when people forget to add the -ly ending to particular words, like the girl in the article.
"I'll probably do really bad," said Angela Garcia, 14 and a freshman at Sunnyside High.
By the time I entered high school, I knew you were supposed to add an -ly ending to adverbs. Maybe it was my private schooling, but all the same. Come on folks. But its not just freshmen in high school who make this mistake. I hear it coming from freshmen in college.
It is a bane when people cannot speak or write in English properly.
posted by Laura Keslar at 1:11 PM | |
J-Lo and Dino Bottoms
I would hate to be known simply for my posterior but I believe Jeniffer Lopez will forever be known for hers.
posted by Laura Keslar at 12:35 PM | |
Internet censorship, lovely fun
She had said that the internet was going to be the only place where free speech is given reign in the future. It is one of the few places, she said, that is still uncensored.
But what she failed to consider is that the internet is not uncensored. Everyone, or just about everyone, uses Google (hence, the reason I failed to link). But whatever search engine you use, it gives you information that it wants you to see (yes, the conspiracies start now). You only see what it gives you.
Look at what has happened at Google.de and Google.fr. Or at the article at PHXnews.
But on a side note, its great how other things are censored. Schools internet content is censored and my dads computer at work is censored. During spring break, I went on it to blog and check my email. And do some odd internet searches. And when I got an interesting quiz, or checked out a certain non-goofy internet site, a screen saying that site was filtered would pop up in lieu of the site I was looking for. Lovely fun.
After reading this, I was reminded of a conversation that I had with an older woman named Sue at that protest a few weeks back.
She had said that the internet was going to be the only place where free speech is given reign in the future. It is one of the few places, she said, that is still uncensored.
But what she failed to consider is that the internet is not uncensored. Everyone, or just about everyone, uses Google (hence, the reason I failed to link). But whatever search engine you use, it gives you information that it wants you to see (yes, the conspiracies start now). You only see what it gives you.
Look at what has happened at Google.de and Google.fr. Or at the article at PHXnews.
But on a side note, its great how other things are censored. Schools internet content is censored and my dads computer at work is censored. During spring break, I went on it to blog and check my email. And do some odd internet searches. And when I got an interesting quiz, or checked out a certain non-goofy internet site, a screen saying that site was filtered would pop up in lieu of the site I was looking for. Lovely fun.
posted by Laura Keslar at 12:13 PM | |
Sarcasm, of all things?
In her sarcasm, Vox is absolutely right and very much funny, at least I thought so.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:35 AM | |
Saturday, March 27, 2004
So, is Islam a country far far away?
Well, my roommate today has done something just about as funny. She thought that Palestine existed today as a country and Arafat was the dictator of Palestine. Hee. Arafat is a terrorist--but a dictator?
Last year when writing a paper, I went to a friend to get some motivation and inspiration for the essay. So, I askd her what she thought of Islam (yeah, stupid question I know), but her response was funny. She said, "isnt Islam a country far far away?"
Well, my roommate today has done something just about as funny. She thought that Palestine existed today as a country and Arafat was the dictator of Palestine. Hee. Arafat is a terrorist--but a dictator?
posted by Laura Keslar at 5:00 PM | |
Phew, I am glad that was over
So, three hours after the end of the PCAT, I am feeling relaxed and probably overly-confident about how well I did. It was quite an easy test, if the biology portion was all forgotten. Don't know what I was dreading.
posted by Laura Keslar at 4:02 PM | |
Friday, March 26, 2004
Political Biases of Kaplan's PCAT Study Guide
But aside from that, I have decided that the study guide was baised toward a liberal perspective. Maybe it was those flickering fluorescent lights or the musty books that was influencing me, causing me to leap to conclusions, as the weird girl next door suggested, but you never know.
I mean, isnt this the sort of thing you would hear in your gen ed "Class, gender, and sexuality: an examination of privilege in America" course: "Much to the consternation of female executives, the exclusive club remained a(n) ___bastion___ of male privilege."
:cough:
What was that? Psh. Bias, I swear.
So, I spent three hours at the library this evening studying for the PCAT that will happen tomorrow. After studying the vocabulary, reading comprehension, math, and chemistry portions, I know I will do well on those parts--but its biology thats going to kill me. I hate biology.
But aside from that, I have decided that the study guide was baised toward a liberal perspective. Maybe it was those flickering fluorescent lights or the musty books that was influencing me, causing me to leap to conclusions, as the weird girl next door suggested, but you never know.
I mean, isnt this the sort of thing you would hear in your gen ed "Class, gender, and sexuality: an examination of privilege in America" course: "Much to the consternation of female executives, the exclusive club remained a(n) ___bastion___ of male privilege."
:cough:
What was that? Psh. Bias, I swear.
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:13 PM | |
Me, a theologian?
Now, I don't think it helped that I thought I knew everything that there was to know in the Bible. Participating in a Bible quizing program called Bible Bowl, I knew more scriptures than my other church members, but not as much as a great theologian would need. But, now I realize that I know far less than what I ought to know. Its a shame.
Having participated in Bible Bowl for seven years, between sixth and twelfth grade, I had studied Genesis, Exodus, parts of Numbers and Deuteronomy, and I and II Samuel. (Our pastor put to song the main points of 1 Samuel, some of which I remember--like, "In chapter one, Sammy comes to life. Hannah was his mother, one of Elkahanah's wives. Hannah was so thrilled with Sammy's birth you see; she dedicated Sammy to God's family. You can sing it to the Beverly Hillbillies song and get it right.) But those books were only the Old Testament; of the New Testament, I studied and memorized from Luke, John, Acts, Romans, I and II Corinthians, I and II Thessalonians, I and II Timothy, Hebrews, James, I, II, and III John, and I and II Peter. In order to get my cat three years ago, I had to memorize Exodus 1-11. But ask me today how much I remember, and I could probably quote bits and pieces for you and thats it.
From all the studying that I did, I would say that my favorite book of the Bible is 1 Peter, because it covers a variety of issues as well as it is an encouragement and a great guideline for dealing with authority. It is also very vivid. I love it.
But from all the studying that I have done, I have come to some major conclusions in regards to what the Bible says, of which, I will mention some hot topics and points.
In short, I am a dispensationalist and have, at one point, been described as being a hyper-dispensationalist, though hyper-dispensationalism is heresy. I believe that much of what is written in Matthew, Hebrews, and James as well as other chapters in the New Testament that many people use to support the idea that a man can lose his salvation refers to the Jews during the tribulation, as the audience of each book indicates. During the church age, God deals with the Christian by granting him eternal salvation, salvation that cannot be revoked because he sinned.
So, therefore, along these lines, I am also a dispensationalist pre-millennialist, believing that the church will be raptured before the tribulation.
I am neither a calvinist nor an arminian. I have already explained some of my beliefs along this line right here. In regards to calvinism, I only believe that man can never lose his salvation, because to do such, it causes man to be saved solely by his work in the body. However, I do believe that men can resist the calling of the Spirit. Man, because of the small amount of faith God gives every man, And as for Arminianism, I believe that a man can choose whom he will follow. Though God demands that all men everywhere repent, a man can refuse to obey and be condemned to hell when he dies. The man who rejects God condemns himself, as John 3 indicates.
Baptism is not necessary for salvation, but necessary for obedience. And as for the method of baptism, well...I am a baptist.
As for the trinity, I am not a oneness pentecostal. Jesus is the Word as flesh, there is God the Father, and God the Spirit. They all coexist as one being, in a similar fashion as man coexists as body, spirit, and soul. Christ was fully God and fully man.
I also believe that in six days, God created the heavens and the earth. A very literal six days. And on the seventh day he rested. Although I dont believe animals evolve into new lifeforms, like pigeons evolving from reptiles, I do believe in some slight forms of evolution like the evolution of species, the different species of birds and of dogs and of cats. No dog evolved into a cat (or the other way around) and nor did they have a common ancestor.
Adam was in the Garden with Eve--two specific people. There was no Lillith and no Naamah. Adam is not symbolic of a race of men planted on earth.
Women should not be pastoring churches and should be submissive to their own husbands--yes, I take the Southern Baptists' point on this one. They ought to remain silent in the church, as the Scriptures say. However, it is not required by scripture that a woman should have long hair or uncut hair. She also doesnt have to wear a dress or skirt down to her ankles. The key in the Bible is to cover up your nakedness and remain modest. And, throughout the Bible, nakedness is above the knees, therefore, women and men should wear things that cover up above the knee. And modesy includes not showing off every fat roll a woman has.
I believe the King James Bible is the word of God. I also believe that there is advanced revelation. I believe that a translation can be scripture. The King James Bible is the word purified seven times that was promised by God in Psalms and throughout the Bible. In short, I am a King James Onlyist. I do believe that people can get saved from reading other versions of the Bible, but they are lacking in scriptures and distort the truth some of the time.
Among modern Christians in the spotlight (depending which spotlight), I like Peter Ruckman and Gail Riplinger (though she is like the KJV-O's very own Ann Coulter). I don't always agree with Ruckman on different issues, but he does make some great points. And there are others among the KJV-O crowd that I like, but of them, I am not fond of David Cloud. Hyles I am neutral on.
Jack Chick and his tracks are great, and he is not a racists despite what people I know say about him. He is right on on many things.
Among other Christians from different denominations, I tend to take a dislike to Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, D. J. Kennedy, James Dobson, James White, Bruce Metzger, etc. But, I do have some likes, though. I like David Wilkerson; afterall, it was through one of his letters that I was convinced to become a Christian. But that story will be coming later as my testimony.
So, I hope this answers anyones questions about some of the major theological issues that I hold to. I really can't think of anything else that would be important. While I might not become the world's next greatest theologian, studying the word of God is its own blessing.
When I was younger, my parent's church's youth pastor asked all the students in the Sunday school class what they wanted to be when they grew up. I used to desire to become a politician, a scientist that would cure cancer, a doctor, and a lawyer. But, after one of the girls said that she wanted to be the first female president, I rolled my eyes and voiced my opinion that I wanted to be a theologian.
Now, I don't think it helped that I thought I knew everything that there was to know in the Bible. Participating in a Bible quizing program called Bible Bowl, I knew more scriptures than my other church members, but not as much as a great theologian would need. But, now I realize that I know far less than what I ought to know. Its a shame.
Having participated in Bible Bowl for seven years, between sixth and twelfth grade, I had studied Genesis, Exodus, parts of Numbers and Deuteronomy, and I and II Samuel. (Our pastor put to song the main points of 1 Samuel, some of which I remember--like, "In chapter one, Sammy comes to life. Hannah was his mother, one of Elkahanah's wives. Hannah was so thrilled with Sammy's birth you see; she dedicated Sammy to God's family. You can sing it to the Beverly Hillbillies song and get it right.) But those books were only the Old Testament; of the New Testament, I studied and memorized from Luke, John, Acts, Romans, I and II Corinthians, I and II Thessalonians, I and II Timothy, Hebrews, James, I, II, and III John, and I and II Peter. In order to get my cat three years ago, I had to memorize Exodus 1-11. But ask me today how much I remember, and I could probably quote bits and pieces for you and thats it.
From all the studying that I did, I would say that my favorite book of the Bible is 1 Peter, because it covers a variety of issues as well as it is an encouragement and a great guideline for dealing with authority. It is also very vivid. I love it.
But from all the studying that I have done, I have come to some major conclusions in regards to what the Bible says, of which, I will mention some hot topics and points.
In short, I am a dispensationalist and have, at one point, been described as being a hyper-dispensationalist, though hyper-dispensationalism is heresy. I believe that much of what is written in Matthew, Hebrews, and James as well as other chapters in the New Testament that many people use to support the idea that a man can lose his salvation refers to the Jews during the tribulation, as the audience of each book indicates. During the church age, God deals with the Christian by granting him eternal salvation, salvation that cannot be revoked because he sinned.
So, therefore, along these lines, I am also a dispensationalist pre-millennialist, believing that the church will be raptured before the tribulation.
I am neither a calvinist nor an arminian. I have already explained some of my beliefs along this line right here. In regards to calvinism, I only believe that man can never lose his salvation, because to do such, it causes man to be saved solely by his work in the body. However, I do believe that men can resist the calling of the Spirit. Man, because of the small amount of faith God gives every man, And as for Arminianism, I believe that a man can choose whom he will follow. Though God demands that all men everywhere repent, a man can refuse to obey and be condemned to hell when he dies. The man who rejects God condemns himself, as John 3 indicates.
Baptism is not necessary for salvation, but necessary for obedience. And as for the method of baptism, well...I am a baptist.
As for the trinity, I am not a oneness pentecostal. Jesus is the Word as flesh, there is God the Father, and God the Spirit. They all coexist as one being, in a similar fashion as man coexists as body, spirit, and soul. Christ was fully God and fully man.
I also believe that in six days, God created the heavens and the earth. A very literal six days. And on the seventh day he rested. Although I dont believe animals evolve into new lifeforms, like pigeons evolving from reptiles, I do believe in some slight forms of evolution like the evolution of species, the different species of birds and of dogs and of cats. No dog evolved into a cat (or the other way around) and nor did they have a common ancestor.
Adam was in the Garden with Eve--two specific people. There was no Lillith and no Naamah. Adam is not symbolic of a race of men planted on earth.
Women should not be pastoring churches and should be submissive to their own husbands--yes, I take the Southern Baptists' point on this one. They ought to remain silent in the church, as the Scriptures say. However, it is not required by scripture that a woman should have long hair or uncut hair. She also doesnt have to wear a dress or skirt down to her ankles. The key in the Bible is to cover up your nakedness and remain modest. And, throughout the Bible, nakedness is above the knees, therefore, women and men should wear things that cover up above the knee. And modesy includes not showing off every fat roll a woman has.
I believe the King James Bible is the word of God. I also believe that there is advanced revelation. I believe that a translation can be scripture. The King James Bible is the word purified seven times that was promised by God in Psalms and throughout the Bible. In short, I am a King James Onlyist. I do believe that people can get saved from reading other versions of the Bible, but they are lacking in scriptures and distort the truth some of the time.
Among modern Christians in the spotlight (depending which spotlight), I like Peter Ruckman and Gail Riplinger (though she is like the KJV-O's very own Ann Coulter). I don't always agree with Ruckman on different issues, but he does make some great points. And there are others among the KJV-O crowd that I like, but of them, I am not fond of David Cloud. Hyles I am neutral on.
Jack Chick and his tracks are great, and he is not a racists despite what people I know say about him. He is right on on many things.
Among other Christians from different denominations, I tend to take a dislike to Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, D. J. Kennedy, James Dobson, James White, Bruce Metzger, etc. But, I do have some likes, though. I like David Wilkerson; afterall, it was through one of his letters that I was convinced to become a Christian. But that story will be coming later as my testimony.
So, I hope this answers anyones questions about some of the major theological issues that I hold to. I really can't think of anything else that would be important. While I might not become the world's next greatest theologian, studying the word of God is its own blessing.
posted by Laura Keslar at 12:28 PM | |
Thursday, March 25, 2004
Outsourcing is resulting from education deficiency?
And although the article touched on the issues of litigation, health care, and expensive wages, it fails to fully comprehend the issue and blames it on something that has very little to do with the problem--the lack of good education of America's workers.
If education were really to blame, and the lack of people skilled in technical areas, then why are companies fleeing California to other states in the United States? After all, it does have highly-skilled, highly-educated workers; as Arnold Beichman suggestions, its because of the costs of running a business in the state--not because of lack of education of the workers.
As for the last quote of the Wired article: "About the only job these profit-hungry, blood-sucking corporations aren't going to be able to outsource is the kind that requires you to physically be there in order to serve up those burgers and fries to customers."
I am quite astonished. Many people like to blame outsourcing for taking away jobs from people, but hardly ever do I hear about them complaining about the ways illegal and mass immigration takes away jobs from people. However, that is beside the point. Although outsourcing does move jobs offshore, it offers some benefits. It allows for cheaper production thus making things more cost efficient for the consumer. Likewise, it also promotes higher positions within the US. While all the labour jobs are going overseas, the management positions and such other positions remain. These jobs tend to be pay more, and as such the average worker in the United States earns more money.
But also, this quote indicates some ignorance--or perhaps, some emotions--on the part of the speaker. Jobs will remain in the US that must have direct contact with the customer--jobs like health care providers, teachers/professors, and so forth and so on. Not all of these jobs are menial--like flipping burgers.
Come now people. If you want government intervention to preventjobs from flowing to foreign countries, eliminate the many things that cause the US to be #10 at the Heritage Foundation's Free Countries. The key is not more education and more funding, but less regulation, less taxation.
Garrett, from the Arizona Growler, brought this article to my attention--dealing with offshore outsourcing in relation to education and government funding.
And although the article touched on the issues of litigation, health care, and expensive wages, it fails to fully comprehend the issue and blames it on something that has very little to do with the problem--the lack of good education of America's workers.
If education were really to blame, and the lack of people skilled in technical areas, then why are companies fleeing California to other states in the United States? After all, it does have highly-skilled, highly-educated workers; as Arnold Beichman suggestions, its because of the costs of running a business in the state--not because of lack of education of the workers.
As for the last quote of the Wired article: "About the only job these profit-hungry, blood-sucking corporations aren't going to be able to outsource is the kind that requires you to physically be there in order to serve up those burgers and fries to customers."
I am quite astonished. Many people like to blame outsourcing for taking away jobs from people, but hardly ever do I hear about them complaining about the ways illegal and mass immigration takes away jobs from people. However, that is beside the point. Although outsourcing does move jobs offshore, it offers some benefits. It allows for cheaper production thus making things more cost efficient for the consumer. Likewise, it also promotes higher positions within the US. While all the labour jobs are going overseas, the management positions and such other positions remain. These jobs tend to be pay more, and as such the average worker in the United States earns more money.
But also, this quote indicates some ignorance--or perhaps, some emotions--on the part of the speaker. Jobs will remain in the US that must have direct contact with the customer--jobs like health care providers, teachers/professors, and so forth and so on. Not all of these jobs are menial--like flipping burgers.
Come now people. If you want government intervention to preventjobs from flowing to foreign countries, eliminate the many things that cause the US to be #10 at the Heritage Foundation's Free Countries. The key is not more education and more funding, but less regulation, less taxation.
posted by Laura Keslar at 1:48 AM | |
Wednesday, March 24, 2004
The EU and Capitalism? Bah
I was surprised this afternoon when I read a quote by EU Competition Comissioner Mario Monti said, "dominant companies have a special responsibility to ensure that the way they do business doesn't prevent competition."
Having coupled with socialism for so long, I was of the mind to believe that the EU had no concern for a free economy.
So, when have the members of the EU ever been concerned with preserving captalism by insuring competition?
I was surprised this afternoon when I read a quote by EU Competition Comissioner Mario Monti said, "dominant companies have a special responsibility to ensure that the way they do business doesn't prevent competition."
Having coupled with socialism for so long, I was of the mind to believe that the EU had no concern for a free economy.
posted by Laura Keslar at 5:48 PM | |
If all your friends jumped off a cliff...
It seems that is the way it goes in the circles of Washington DC.
The longer President Bush is in office, the more political figures seem to be influenced by the current anti-war, anti-Bush fervor prevalent among the Hollywood elite, Europe, and obtuse college students. First there was almost all of the democrats who voted for a resolution for war in Iraq. Then there was General Wesley Clark and now Richard Clarke.
People say peer pressure is bad in high school, but they never mentioned how bad it was in Washington DC.
...would you?
It seems that is the way it goes in the circles of Washington DC.
The longer President Bush is in office, the more political figures seem to be influenced by the current anti-war, anti-Bush fervor prevalent among the Hollywood elite, Europe, and obtuse college students. First there was almost all of the democrats who voted for a resolution for war in Iraq. Then there was General Wesley Clark and now Richard Clarke.
People say peer pressure is bad in high school, but they never mentioned how bad it was in Washington DC.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:31 AM | |
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
If you haven't noticed...
Likewise, I did change up a few things, and have indicated that some future topics are forthcoming (outsourcing, capitalism/democracy, and a summary of my ideologies and theology), but probably not this week.
I don't believe it has helped that my roommate has asked that all lights be vanquished from the room while she tries to sleep, which occurs around midnight every night.
I have also realized that the title of my lovely little blog has no relation to anything that I have ever said or probably will ever say, and as such, my reasoning behind the title will be, also, forthcoming in the near-future.
Anyway, I figured I should post something somewhat intelligible and reasonable tonight, and this is about it.
I realized that my blogging has now bordered on a personal journal, and such things I hate. But there has been a reason for it; my lack of attentiveness to all things UA and Arizona has generated such a response from myself that has evidenced itself as diary-like entries. This has been caused by the torture several professors decided to visit upon one poor college student. Similarly, this poor college student has the PCAT to study for, an exam which will take place on this Saturday.
Likewise, I did change up a few things, and have indicated that some future topics are forthcoming (outsourcing, capitalism/democracy, and a summary of my ideologies and theology), but probably not this week.
I don't believe it has helped that my roommate has asked that all lights be vanquished from the room while she tries to sleep, which occurs around midnight every night.
I have also realized that the title of my lovely little blog has no relation to anything that I have ever said or probably will ever say, and as such, my reasoning behind the title will be, also, forthcoming in the near-future.
Anyway, I figured I should post something somewhat intelligible and reasonable tonight, and this is about it.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:50 PM | |
My roommate sucks
And here I am thinking spring break would remedy all my problems with her.
The only thing that could rememdy my problem is my own room, my own kitchen, and my own bathroom.
She snores. She can't sleep with the lights on. She eats loudly. Whats wrong with her?
And here I am thinking spring break would remedy all my problems with her.
The only thing that could rememdy my problem is my own room, my own kitchen, and my own bathroom.
posted by Laura Keslar at 2:56 AM | |
Life is so funny
Funny thing is, he fails to address the real issues of why illegals are getting free benefits and burdening the institutions of Arizona. Similarly, he fails to address why illegals are voting.
Furthermore, he mentions that less than 12 point something percent of people in the state of Arizona are illegals. I don't know about you, but one criminal is one criminal too many. I wouldnt want to have only one murderer on the loose, one burglar robbing homes, or one seat belt wearer not wearing his seatbelt. Ok, the seatbelt comment was a bit extreme, but tell me, when did have a little number of criminals become a boon? I prefer to have none.
So yesterday evening (for those of you who havent gone to bed yet, like myself, yes, its morning and its a new day) I briefly typed about the Protect Arizona Now Initiative. And, as life would have it, this very topic becames the center of a State Press article.
Funny thing is, he fails to address the real issues of why illegals are getting free benefits and burdening the institutions of Arizona. Similarly, he fails to address why illegals are voting.
Furthermore, he mentions that less than 12 point something percent of people in the state of Arizona are illegals. I don't know about you, but one criminal is one criminal too many. I wouldnt want to have only one murderer on the loose, one burglar robbing homes, or one seat belt wearer not wearing his seatbelt. Ok, the seatbelt comment was a bit extreme, but tell me, when did have a little number of criminals become a boon? I prefer to have none.
posted by Laura Keslar at 2:55 AM | |
I havent gone to bed yet--sorry to burst your bubble
But the UA has "Safe Zones" for gay people. Does this mean that everywhere else is only safe for somber people?
posted by Laura Keslar at 2:45 AM | |
Random Thoughts Caused by an Empty Stomach
And what is with the crazy people next door? One of the girls is singing about "how her toe is broken as a twig in the spring."
And I am laying in bed, trying to figure out how to write my proposal for a-chem, thinking about how hungry I am.
Also, I am thinking about changing the subtitle of this blog from "can cause cancer only in the state of california"--or whatever I have here--to something about aromaticy and pleasant odors.
Why am I surrounded by books and papers only after the first day back to classes?
Why am I still up? I am off to bed yall, sorry for causing you mental trauma with this post.
Crazy Arizona bloggers. Do they ever sleep? Why in heaven's name are they posting this late at night? Why, I ask, why?
And what is with the crazy people next door? One of the girls is singing about "how her toe is broken as a twig in the spring."
And I am laying in bed, trying to figure out how to write my proposal for a-chem, thinking about how hungry I am.
Also, I am thinking about changing the subtitle of this blog from "can cause cancer only in the state of california"--or whatever I have here--to something about aromaticy and pleasant odors.
Why am I surrounded by books and papers only after the first day back to classes?
Why am I still up? I am off to bed yall, sorry for causing you mental trauma with this post.
posted by Laura Keslar at 12:28 AM | |
Monday, March 22, 2004
You know you are avoiding homework when...
ringsofbenzene: yeah...its just analytical chemistry; boring boring a-chem
Friend: I'm sorry -- I hate boring
ringsofbenzene: lol, dont we all? :wink:
Friend: I hate boring worse than you hate boring hehe
ringsofbenzene: no you dont, I hate boring to infinity! And therefore, I win
Friend: I hate boring past infinity
ringsofbenzene: i hate boring times infinity times GOD
you have an IM conversation that goes along the lines of this:
ringsofbenzene: yeah...its just analytical chemistry; boring boring a-chem
Friend: I'm sorry -- I hate boring
ringsofbenzene: lol, dont we all? :wink:
Friend: I hate boring worse than you hate boring hehe
ringsofbenzene: no you dont, I hate boring to infinity! And therefore, I win
Friend: I hate boring past infinity
ringsofbenzene: i hate boring times infinity times GOD
posted by Laura Keslar at 7:15 PM | |
I think, therefore...Oh screw it...
I have been giving outsourcing a lot of thought recently and perhaps, sometime tonight when analytical chemistry lab is finished, I will share with yall my exact opinions on it. Things have been changing in this head of mine. But then, I have also promised a couple other things, as well...like why a democratic country cannot allow socialist principals to be instituted in a free country, despite if that is what a majority of the population wants. There was something else, if only I could remember it. Ah, bah.
posted by Laura Keslar at 5:31 PM | |
And people think that illegals just take the jobs that no one else wants
And as a result, many people are concerned about illegal immigration and have been trying to do something about it.
Currently, our state of Arizona is going through a crisis (at least, I want to think its a crisis). For the past decade, we have gotten less and less conservative, with our state voting in a democrat governor in 2002 and Bill Clinton in 1996. Though some might just claim that this was due to the increased growth of the state and thus changing demographics, they fail to consider that it might possibly be because of the large amount of undocumented aliens (no, not the ones from Mars) entering into Arizona through the southern borders.
In order to prevent these illegals from influencing elections (what would you expect? They enter the country illegally, they work illegally in this country, they get benefits illegally in this country, so why shouldnt they vote illegally as well?), concerned citizens have formed the Protect Arizona Now Act.
And yet, the democrats in our state have decided that this act must be opposed. The democrats believe that the bill is racist. Governor Napolitano was quoted as saying that “this bill is not designed to prevent voter fraud, I'll tell you that," thereby implying the false accusation that the bill was racist against hispanics, according to another article found at Intellectual Conservative. She has also stated that the initiative would prevent the "poor voters" from voting.
Though I wish I could go on, surely you are getting the point. Napolitano does not care for the state of Arizona, with its budget woes and the excessive burden imposed by illegal immigrants on Arizona citizens. Instead, it seems, she merely wishes for another chance at playing governor.
So, I found this lovely article at Phoenix News. The article shows exactly the harms that illegal immigration does to not just Americans--but to the illegals as well.
And as a result, many people are concerned about illegal immigration and have been trying to do something about it.
Currently, our state of Arizona is going through a crisis (at least, I want to think its a crisis). For the past decade, we have gotten less and less conservative, with our state voting in a democrat governor in 2002 and Bill Clinton in 1996. Though some might just claim that this was due to the increased growth of the state and thus changing demographics, they fail to consider that it might possibly be because of the large amount of undocumented aliens (no, not the ones from Mars) entering into Arizona through the southern borders.
In order to prevent these illegals from influencing elections (what would you expect? They enter the country illegally, they work illegally in this country, they get benefits illegally in this country, so why shouldnt they vote illegally as well?), concerned citizens have formed the Protect Arizona Now Act.
And yet, the democrats in our state have decided that this act must be opposed. The democrats believe that the bill is racist. Governor Napolitano was quoted as saying that “this bill is not designed to prevent voter fraud, I'll tell you that," thereby implying the false accusation that the bill was racist against hispanics, according to another article found at Intellectual Conservative. She has also stated that the initiative would prevent the "poor voters" from voting.
Though I wish I could go on, surely you are getting the point. Napolitano does not care for the state of Arizona, with its budget woes and the excessive burden imposed by illegal immigrants on Arizona citizens. Instead, it seems, she merely wishes for another chance at playing governor.
posted by Laura Keslar at 5:16 PM | |
PURL
Peace and Unity? Whats next, Respect and Love?
Despite what people want to continue to think, Christianity's root belief is not love or peace or unity, though each is extolled upon. Jesus said that the greatest commandment was to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And God himself commands obedience; after all, in I Samuel 15, he says that obedience is better than sacrifice and rebellion is the sin of witch craft.
So what does it mean to obey God? To love your neighbors? Bah, thats part of it though. But most of all, God commands all men everywhere to repent and be baptized.
These people who want to say that its only semantics that create the rifts between Christianity, Judaism and Islam are fools to the finest degree. Of course, God is God in Christianity, Jehovah (or however you want to spell it) is god in Judaism, and Allah is god in Islam. But you miss out on the finer nuances of the religions by simplifying it to this extent.
Most Muslims believe or consider that the trinitarian doctrine that Christians hold to is polytheistic, believing that there is the Word as God, the Spirit as God, and the Father as God. You have muslims believing that Jesus was never crucified and that, in agreement with the gnostic tradition, Simon of Cyrene was crucified in his place. Though muslims believe that Jesus was the messiah, they do not believe he was God or the son of God. He was merely a servant of God. Jews, on the other hand, do not believe Jesus was the messiah, but merely a good man or non-existent.
How can these religions worship the same God when something as fundamental as the role of Jesus in each religion differs so significantly?
But, back to the article at hand: peace and unity. Christ, when he first came to earth, it was to heal the broken hearted, to make the blind to see and the deaf to hear in fulfillment of prophecy in Isaiah.
But when Jesus returns, he will bring about the Lords wrath. If you notice in Luke 4 where he cuts off what he was reading from Isaiah, he stopped after he read, "to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD." Crossreferencing to Isaiah 61, you find out what the rest of the verse says regarding Christ: "to proclaim...the day of vegeance of our God."
And as for the unity spoken of in the bible, it is not in reference to unity among all religions or even unity among all Christians. Rather, it is unity of one church when they have the same doctrine--or at least, important doctrine. Paul says that if anyone brings another gospel or another Christ than what he taught them and wrote to them, they are to reject that person. However, he does indicate in I Corinthians that there are some things which he wrote of that were not to divide the church--like hair length. As such, as Christians, we know that Islam and Judaism teach something other than what the word of God teaches and cannot be in unity with them. Nor can be in unity with our "brothers" in Christ who reject the teachings of Paul or Peter or John. Our unity is with the believer who accepts what God has said unconditionally--allowing what is written to be examined under the influence of the spirit and under the light of other scriptures so that when we interpret what is meant, we do not get something other than what was truly meant.
What is this, a rave?
Peace and Unity? Whats next, Respect and Love?
Despite what people want to continue to think, Christianity's root belief is not love or peace or unity, though each is extolled upon. Jesus said that the greatest commandment was to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And God himself commands obedience; after all, in I Samuel 15, he says that obedience is better than sacrifice and rebellion is the sin of witch craft.
So what does it mean to obey God? To love your neighbors? Bah, thats part of it though. But most of all, God commands all men everywhere to repent and be baptized.
These people who want to say that its only semantics that create the rifts between Christianity, Judaism and Islam are fools to the finest degree. Of course, God is God in Christianity, Jehovah (or however you want to spell it) is god in Judaism, and Allah is god in Islam. But you miss out on the finer nuances of the religions by simplifying it to this extent.
Most Muslims believe or consider that the trinitarian doctrine that Christians hold to is polytheistic, believing that there is the Word as God, the Spirit as God, and the Father as God. You have muslims believing that Jesus was never crucified and that, in agreement with the gnostic tradition, Simon of Cyrene was crucified in his place. Though muslims believe that Jesus was the messiah, they do not believe he was God or the son of God. He was merely a servant of God. Jews, on the other hand, do not believe Jesus was the messiah, but merely a good man or non-existent.
How can these religions worship the same God when something as fundamental as the role of Jesus in each religion differs so significantly?
But, back to the article at hand: peace and unity. Christ, when he first came to earth, it was to heal the broken hearted, to make the blind to see and the deaf to hear in fulfillment of prophecy in Isaiah.
But when Jesus returns, he will bring about the Lords wrath. If you notice in Luke 4 where he cuts off what he was reading from Isaiah, he stopped after he read, "to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD." Crossreferencing to Isaiah 61, you find out what the rest of the verse says regarding Christ: "to proclaim...the day of vegeance of our God."
And as for the unity spoken of in the bible, it is not in reference to unity among all religions or even unity among all Christians. Rather, it is unity of one church when they have the same doctrine--or at least, important doctrine. Paul says that if anyone brings another gospel or another Christ than what he taught them and wrote to them, they are to reject that person. However, he does indicate in I Corinthians that there are some things which he wrote of that were not to divide the church--like hair length. As such, as Christians, we know that Islam and Judaism teach something other than what the word of God teaches and cannot be in unity with them. Nor can be in unity with our "brothers" in Christ who reject the teachings of Paul or Peter or John. Our unity is with the believer who accepts what God has said unconditionally--allowing what is written to be examined under the influence of the spirit and under the light of other scriptures so that when we interpret what is meant, we do not get something other than what was truly meant.
posted by Laura Keslar at 4:47 PM | |
Am I bitter about the way I spent my spring break? Nah...
Furthermore, to add to this whorishness, we get to the On the Spot feature that delves into the drinking habits of the guy being interviewed.
With the way this "newspaper" covers events, whatever innocence I have left will no longer exist once I get done with school in the next five years.
Oh, and EDIT: I totally forgot about the comic at the back of the paper, this comic whom hardly ever has anything wholesome to write on and has made commented on the Iraqi war as well as the Catholic Church's "sexism."
Did anyone just see my eyes roll?
Gosh, can't the Arizona Daily Wildcat spare us the visuals of what people do in Mexico? I dont need to see four people mimicing sexually explicit acts on the beach front.
Furthermore, to add to this whorishness, we get to the On the Spot feature that delves into the drinking habits of the guy being interviewed.
With the way this "newspaper" covers events, whatever innocence I have left will no longer exist once I get done with school in the next five years.
Oh, and EDIT: I totally forgot about the comic at the back of the paper, this comic whom hardly ever has anything wholesome to write on and has made commented on the Iraqi war as well as the Catholic Church's "sexism."
Did anyone just see my eyes roll?
posted by Laura Keslar at 4:22 PM | |
The Bane of Summer: A Blight of Fat Girls and Ugly Skirts
When you see this odd and strange phenonemna, you know that summer has hit. It is a better indicator that a new season is upon you than phil the ground hog.
Or, you see those girls who are not fat, but their stomachs are just paunchy, billowing over their tight tight jeans. Or, their fat rolling around the back to bulge out when they bend over to pick something up and you get a lovely glance at those handles, which are anything but love handles.
I am glad to know that these girls are proud of the way they look, despite their...over abundance...but that is by no means reason to show me.
Now, I am not the thinnest person alive, but I am not an immodest dresser. You wear things that accent your favorable body parts and cover up your less beautiful parts. Though, if I were taking my own advice, I would wear low cut shirts and skirts above my knees--which I do not, for religious reasons. (Bible talks about nakedness as being showing anything above the knee...).
But, possibly, worse than the girls who should learn to be a bit more modest, are those girls who insist on thinking those ugly ruffled skirts are flattering. But I have harped on that issue way too much as of now.
And finally, and this will fall under modesty issues,
Girls, either get a bra with some padding or wear something other than knit shirts. I don't need to know when you are cold. The guys might like it, but who cares; they are a minority as are the lesbians. And even if you are trying to impress the guys with your excessive trampiness, there is no need to. Those ugly ruffled skirts really give it away, as well as the fact that your book bag and shirt are covered with Greek letters. Your fake tan and highlights also help in making a very noticeable character flaw even more noticeable. So spare us the one extra fact that you are, indeed, super tramp. They don't give out awards for that either.
So, in short, if you are looking for something unique this season, spare us the ugliness and be modest, for a once.
You know when warm weather hits the desert southwest when even the fatest girls begin to wear the skimpiest clothing ever. Ever. Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, between Organic Chem and a Jazz History, you see this physically large girl. Her favorite colors must be pink and white. Her tight shirt hugs her curves where God never meant curves to exist. Her extremely short, ugly ruffled skirt (which, by the way, my mother thinks are called cheerleader skirts--she definitely does not know what she is talking about) shows off legs that probably would look better in the dark or under several layers of clothes. As you walk past her, stomach flops out of her shirt she is wearing and you covertly (or, maybe not) run to the nearest bush, hoping she did not get a glance at your green face--which was not green with jealousy.
When you see this odd and strange phenonemna, you know that summer has hit. It is a better indicator that a new season is upon you than phil the ground hog.
Or, you see those girls who are not fat, but their stomachs are just paunchy, billowing over their tight tight jeans. Or, their fat rolling around the back to bulge out when they bend over to pick something up and you get a lovely glance at those handles, which are anything but love handles.
I am glad to know that these girls are proud of the way they look, despite their...over abundance...but that is by no means reason to show me.
Now, I am not the thinnest person alive, but I am not an immodest dresser. You wear things that accent your favorable body parts and cover up your less beautiful parts. Though, if I were taking my own advice, I would wear low cut shirts and skirts above my knees--which I do not, for religious reasons. (Bible talks about nakedness as being showing anything above the knee...).
But, possibly, worse than the girls who should learn to be a bit more modest, are those girls who insist on thinking those ugly ruffled skirts are flattering. But I have harped on that issue way too much as of now.
And finally, and this will fall under modesty issues,
Girls, either get a bra with some padding or wear something other than knit shirts. I don't need to know when you are cold. The guys might like it, but who cares; they are a minority as are the lesbians. And even if you are trying to impress the guys with your excessive trampiness, there is no need to. Those ugly ruffled skirts really give it away, as well as the fact that your book bag and shirt are covered with Greek letters. Your fake tan and highlights also help in making a very noticeable character flaw even more noticeable. So spare us the one extra fact that you are, indeed, super tramp. They don't give out awards for that either.
So, in short, if you are looking for something unique this season, spare us the ugliness and be modest, for a once.
posted by Laura Keslar at 4:14 PM | |
Old Statue, New News
It is pretty bad when your home city's newspaper features an old statue as major "news".
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:35 AM | |
Once Again, the Peanut Farmer is Up To No Good
Perhaps Jimmy Carter should go back to peanut farming instead of criticizing Bush foreign policy. He did a better job in Georgia that then he ever did in the White House.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:28 AM | |
Sunday, March 21, 2004
There are times in your life when you really don't want to be doing much of anything. You have exhausted all means of entertainment and finally yield to the most tedious of all forms of entertainment--plugging in your name and everyone elses name into google to see if you come up with anything. For the crazy girl next door, I found she is dead and in a porn flick. Her roommate is married and has operated an illegal mobile food establishment in the last two years. The funnest part is iming the findings to friends. (Yes, I know this is dreadfully dull, but do you blame me? Who would want to do an analytical chemistry lab?)
ringsofbenzene: but doing estee you get a bit more
crazy girl next door: ...
crazy girl next door: i'll be kind and not share that statement with her.
posted by Laura Keslar at 1:35 PM | |
It must be one of those days
First of all, this goes directly against scripture and secondly, the dictionary seems to disagree with you. Yes, I know, that squirrelly communist dictionary. Oh, and lastly, you sound like a communist when you say that.
Now, here is the logic for those three points:
1) It goes against scripture
In the new testament, the Bible talks about religion. It talks about the Jews' religion (Acts 26:5, Galatians 1:13 and 14). So it seems that the bible solely talks about religion in a bad sense. However, you find that in James talks about a good religion--the one that you are supposed to have. This religion is pleasing to God. So, how, as a Christian, can you say that Christianity is not a religion--its a relationship thing?
Furthermore, the two times that the word "religious" appears in the bible, one instance has a negative connotation whereas the other refers to people who wanted to hear more that Paul and Barnabas spoke. And even in the instance of the negative connotation in James, where someone appears religious, being described as religious appears to be a good thing.
2) Ah, the dictionary. Webster surely wasnt a Christian, dont you think?
Dictionary.com says that religion is
re·li·gion
n.
Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
Did I miss something when I read the Bible? Or is Christianity based off of the teachings of Jesus and his apostles? Is Christianity not a "a belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe?"
And does not the name Christian refer to people following Christ and his teachings?
3) And lastly, you sound like a pinko when you say "Jesus/Christianity is not a religion."
Yesterday, I talked to a woman who said she was not religious, but she was spiritual. She further went on describing how the US should control businesses and regulate who they can hire and how much they could charge.
Now, who wants to sound like this soci woman?
Anyone willing to raise their hands or say "aye"?
::crickets chirping silently in the background::
Ah, now I am glad to hear that.
Now you just need to toss your shibboleth out the door--stop sounding trite.
I am just in one of those moods where I hate everything. But with this in mind, I will address something I currently despise most of all, which is the whole "Jesus/Christianity is not a religion" comment.
First of all, this goes directly against scripture and secondly, the dictionary seems to disagree with you. Yes, I know, that squirrelly communist dictionary. Oh, and lastly, you sound like a communist when you say that.
Now, here is the logic for those three points:
1) It goes against scripture
In the new testament, the Bible talks about religion. It talks about the Jews' religion (Acts 26:5, Galatians 1:13 and 14). So it seems that the bible solely talks about religion in a bad sense. However, you find that in James talks about a good religion--the one that you are supposed to have. This religion is pleasing to God. So, how, as a Christian, can you say that Christianity is not a religion--its a relationship thing?
Furthermore, the two times that the word "religious" appears in the bible, one instance has a negative connotation whereas the other refers to people who wanted to hear more that Paul and Barnabas spoke. And even in the instance of the negative connotation in James, where someone appears religious, being described as religious appears to be a good thing.
2) Ah, the dictionary. Webster surely wasnt a Christian, dont you think?
Dictionary.com says that religion is
re·li·gion
n.
Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
Did I miss something when I read the Bible? Or is Christianity based off of the teachings of Jesus and his apostles? Is Christianity not a "a belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe?"
And does not the name Christian refer to people following Christ and his teachings?
3) And lastly, you sound like a pinko when you say "Jesus/Christianity is not a religion."
Yesterday, I talked to a woman who said she was not religious, but she was spiritual. She further went on describing how the US should control businesses and regulate who they can hire and how much they could charge.
Now, who wants to sound like this soci woman?
Anyone willing to raise their hands or say "aye"?
::crickets chirping silently in the background::
Ah, now I am glad to hear that.
Now you just need to toss your shibboleth out the door--stop sounding trite.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:47 AM | |
Be ye forewarned: cremains
But, to risk sounding rude, the article talks about creativity in uses of someone's ashes--how its gone beyond just having an urn sitting on the mantle. Obviously, no one in this article contacted my family about creativity.
Both my paternal grandparents have died in the last three years. My grandmother on January 19 (MLK day) 2004 and my grandfather in May 2001. And both were cremated.
So, where are my grandfather's ashes? Currently, they sit in an artillery shell that he picked up in Germany. There are other portions of his remains in a small box in the den at their house (we have yet to sell it) as well as a bit in a wind chime.
Yes, an artillery shell and a wind chime.
To make matters worse, when my grandmother died, my aunt decided that everyone of the living relatives who were directly descended from my grandparents (meaning, me, my brother, my dad and mom, my aunt and her daughter, and my half-brother) get a windchime that contains a mixed portion of both their ashes.
Both my roommate and my mother said how morbid. But eh, if you didn't know that ashes were contained in the chime, you would never know.
First of all, cremains? Like craisins? Isnt that just wrong?
But, to risk sounding rude, the article talks about creativity in uses of someone's ashes--how its gone beyond just having an urn sitting on the mantle. Obviously, no one in this article contacted my family about creativity.
Both my paternal grandparents have died in the last three years. My grandmother on January 19 (MLK day) 2004 and my grandfather in May 2001. And both were cremated.
So, where are my grandfather's ashes? Currently, they sit in an artillery shell that he picked up in Germany. There are other portions of his remains in a small box in the den at their house (we have yet to sell it) as well as a bit in a wind chime.
Yes, an artillery shell and a wind chime.
To make matters worse, when my grandmother died, my aunt decided that everyone of the living relatives who were directly descended from my grandparents (meaning, me, my brother, my dad and mom, my aunt and her daughter, and my half-brother) get a windchime that contains a mixed portion of both their ashes.
Both my roommate and my mother said how morbid. But eh, if you didn't know that ashes were contained in the chime, you would never know.
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:05 AM | |
I despise everything ever related to AOL including AIM
You have a meaningful conversation with someone and then AIM decides to kick the bucket. Gargh. I will not be paying for its funeral. Its cremains can go in the waste bucket, I swear.
Well, maybe its Gods hint I should be in bed.
It deserves to die a firey, painful death. What horrid horrid software. It must die, simply put.
You have a meaningful conversation with someone and then AIM decides to kick the bucket. Gargh. I will not be paying for its funeral. Its cremains can go in the waste bucket, I swear.
Well, maybe its Gods hint I should be in bed.
posted by Laura Keslar at 3:21 AM | |
Saturday, March 20, 2004
Oh, My Virgin Brain --or-- Someone, where's the soap?
Now I am scarred for life. I really do need some soap to wash my brain out. :shudders: This is worse than the stuff the girls next door put on my room's door. Ew, ew.
EDIT: Perhaps I should have known what that phrase meant. But at least I have a somewhat pure mind--well, up until now. Er.
Oh, ack. Someone remind me never to read a store linked by Drudge again--or at least if I do, not to go looking for the definition of a phrase that was used in reference to juvenile sexual delinquencies and Howard Stern.
Now I am scarred for life. I really do need some soap to wash my brain out. :shudders: This is worse than the stuff the girls next door put on my room's door. Ew, ew.
EDIT: Perhaps I should have known what that phrase meant. But at least I have a somewhat pure mind--well, up until now. Er.
posted by Laura Keslar at 8:05 PM | |
As if humans released the most carbon dioxide
Yeah yeah yeah. Well, according to the government, oceans and other natural sources contribute the most to carbon dioxide. I simply love how the implication is that its all humanity's fault for global warming. And to make the article even slightly more ludicrous is the junk science that it promotes:
"The climatologists forecast continued temperature rises that will disrupt the climate, cause seas to rise and lead to other unpredictable consequences - unpredictable in part because of uncertainties in computer modeling of future climate."
Theproblem is, does rising CO2 cause temperatures to rise or does temperatures cause CO2 to rise? There is evidence that points out that both happen, cyclically.
Isnt it great when the news subtly becomes commentary?
Journalism at its finest: "Carbon dioxide, mostly from burning of coal, gasoline and other fossil fuels, traps heat that otherwise would radiate into space."
Yeah yeah yeah. Well, according to the government, oceans and other natural sources contribute the most to carbon dioxide. I simply love how the implication is that its all humanity's fault for global warming. And to make the article even slightly more ludicrous is the junk science that it promotes:
"The climatologists forecast continued temperature rises that will disrupt the climate, cause seas to rise and lead to other unpredictable consequences - unpredictable in part because of uncertainties in computer modeling of future climate."
Theproblem is, does rising CO2 cause temperatures to rise or does temperatures cause CO2 to rise? There is evidence that points out that both happen, cyclically.
Isnt it great when the news subtly becomes commentary?
posted by Laura Keslar at 6:13 PM | |
Some random thoughts on today's protest
Maybe the best part was coming back home and realizing that I burned my nose. Gargh.
I was reminded, however, how blessed I am to attend a conservative, God-fearing church. On the way to the park, there was a church. First Christian Church, I believe it was called. Since I have come to Tucson, I have simply avoided attending that church. I have never known why, but seriously indicated that there was something wrong with it (hey, hey, hey--I am not all that weird. I might get weird feelings about things--but I am definitely not a pentacostal). Until today, I never knew why I avoided it.
Three things today indicated why I have been blessed to avoid the church. First of all, the church is one of those groups who puts out water tanks in the desert for illegals crossing over from Mexico to Arizona. But this is not their first stint in conducting and helping people in their illegal activities.
One of the women who I talked with on the walk had indicated that she first got involved with protesting through the First Christian Church in Tucson by making sillouettes and spray painting dead figures on the ground on August 5 and 7 as a reminder of Hiroshima and the first use of the atomic bomb. Now consider, she said this happened back in 1982. However, the point still stands. The church has contributed to vandalism as well as aiding illegals.
Lastly, the church thanked the people who were on the protest march--they were thanked for their march for "peace." Doesnt the church realize that true peace will never come until Christ returns? And even temporary peace will not be accomplished as long as several institutions remain in place--many of which the war protestors encourage and built.
But I think as the weekend continues, I might be able to express a bit more of my opinions of what happened and actually include some of the content of the conversations I had with several people, nevermind the uninteresting things they had to say.
So, I attended the anti-war rally this weekend here in Tucson. What fun it was. Talked with a couple of leftists who are rabidly against Bush, but were jovial and easy to talk to. They offered nothing new but rehashed reasons why Bush is a moron and why the world is going to hell.
Maybe the best part was coming back home and realizing that I burned my nose. Gargh.
I was reminded, however, how blessed I am to attend a conservative, God-fearing church. On the way to the park, there was a church. First Christian Church, I believe it was called. Since I have come to Tucson, I have simply avoided attending that church. I have never known why, but seriously indicated that there was something wrong with it (hey, hey, hey--I am not all that weird. I might get weird feelings about things--but I am definitely not a pentacostal). Until today, I never knew why I avoided it.
Three things today indicated why I have been blessed to avoid the church. First of all, the church is one of those groups who puts out water tanks in the desert for illegals crossing over from Mexico to Arizona. But this is not their first stint in conducting and helping people in their illegal activities.
One of the women who I talked with on the walk had indicated that she first got involved with protesting through the First Christian Church in Tucson by making sillouettes and spray painting dead figures on the ground on August 5 and 7 as a reminder of Hiroshima and the first use of the atomic bomb. Now consider, she said this happened back in 1982. However, the point still stands. The church has contributed to vandalism as well as aiding illegals.
Lastly, the church thanked the people who were on the protest march--they were thanked for their march for "peace." Doesnt the church realize that true peace will never come until Christ returns? And even temporary peace will not be accomplished as long as several institutions remain in place--many of which the war protestors encourage and built.
But I think as the weekend continues, I might be able to express a bit more of my opinions of what happened and actually include some of the content of the conversations I had with several people, nevermind the uninteresting things they had to say.
posted by Laura Keslar at 3:15 PM | |
Why does my mother like the local paper?
Now, coming back home, I realize that it needs some major work. I was disappointed to find out that one story I had read in the Republic or Arizona Daily Star in early March only first appeared in the Sun during my spring break in mid-march. Similarly, another story that appeared in the Republic at the end of February, no one read in the Sun until March 18.
:cough: If the newspaper is aiming to be a recognized and reliable source, surely it can do a better job of publishing the stories the AP has released when it releases them.
Its a real shame, considering that Yuma is one of the faster growing towns in the United States. I used to think it was great to find that Yuma was even featured on the globe! But as Yuma grows, it needs a good newspaper, something the Yuma Sun is not.
While at home during spring break, I had very little access to the internet and was thus stuck with getting the majority of my news from the local newspaper The Yuma Sun, to which my parents' subscribe. When younger, I loved to read the paper. It was neat, interesting and exciting.
Now, coming back home, I realize that it needs some major work. I was disappointed to find out that one story I had read in the Republic or Arizona Daily Star in early March only first appeared in the Sun during my spring break in mid-march. Similarly, another story that appeared in the Republic at the end of February, no one read in the Sun until March 18.
:cough: If the newspaper is aiming to be a recognized and reliable source, surely it can do a better job of publishing the stories the AP has released when it releases them.
Its a real shame, considering that Yuma is one of the faster growing towns in the United States. I used to think it was great to find that Yuma was even featured on the globe! But as Yuma grows, it needs a good newspaper, something the Yuma Sun is not.
posted by Laura Keslar at 3:10 PM | |
Friday, March 19, 2004
Pee Wee and the Kids
Too bad Michael Jackson didn't have a name like that that would make his affinity toward youth apparent.
Well, with a name like Pee Wee Herman, what else would you expect?
Too bad Michael Jackson didn't have a name like that that would make his affinity toward youth apparent.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:17 PM | |
Marshmallow fun
Well, if you dont, you missed out on your childhood. But, even, if you have missed out, I have enough memories like these to share with you.
Well, like how I used to eat those gummy bears (and sometimes still do), I am eating my Peeps--the bunny kind.
You know what I am talking about. They are yellow. They are gooey. They are covered in sugar. And I am eating off each of their ears one at a time. Soon they are missing only one eye; then the other. Soon, the head is gone. And whats left? I lovely little ball of marshmallow fun, but that too disappears.
But I really ought not to be eating them. I don't need to gain anymore weight--after all, I did gain ten pounds in the last semester. Bleh. Stupid elevators.
I don't know how anyone could not like peeps. They are good. They are yummy. And they are full of unhealthy things--oh the wonder of processed foods.
But I do think another one just lost its head.
Ah, isnt Easter time great?
Remember when you were a kid and you used to eat gummy bears by first eating their heads and then their bottoms and then their abdomens? Or, while using toothpicks and big marshmallows, you would make snowmen?
Well, if you dont, you missed out on your childhood. But, even, if you have missed out, I have enough memories like these to share with you.
Well, like how I used to eat those gummy bears (and sometimes still do), I am eating my Peeps--the bunny kind.
You know what I am talking about. They are yellow. They are gooey. They are covered in sugar. And I am eating off each of their ears one at a time. Soon they are missing only one eye; then the other. Soon, the head is gone. And whats left? I lovely little ball of marshmallow fun, but that too disappears.
But I really ought not to be eating them. I don't need to gain anymore weight--after all, I did gain ten pounds in the last semester. Bleh. Stupid elevators.
I don't know how anyone could not like peeps. They are good. They are yummy. And they are full of unhealthy things--oh the wonder of processed foods.
But I do think another one just lost its head.
Ah, isnt Easter time great?
posted by Laura Keslar at 8:52 PM | |
So, now that spring break is over and done with
So, what did I accomplish over spring break? Besides putting in ten thousand resumes (which, by the way, were very unimpressive--I have never had a paying job) and applications, I was hired, put several hundred miles on my mother's car, tormented my cat, bugged my dad (I think one day I called him every five minutes), didn't study for the PCAT, and barely read anything. I did finish up Hayek's Road to Serfdom, finally--on which I will make some comments in regards to the current events, but only at a later time. I did pick up von Mises' Omnipotent Government. I also read the prequel and sequel to Flowers in the Attic--both of which were disturbingly incestous but enthralling all the same.
And I also bought a new pair of shoes--despite the fact that Garrett thinks shopping conditions are dismal in the Yuma area.
Randomly enough, I also dyed my hair--it used to be this "mousy" brown color...now its a dark brown. According to the box, its "darkest brown." I like it. It doesn't make me look washed out. It has also been cut to a little bit above shoulder length, despite my dad and some friends thinking I should try to grow it out long (consider, though, long means anything longer than my shoulders).
But alas, I only went to church Sunday morning. Bleh.
Anyway, hopefully tonight I can catch up on some things...like the reason why in even a democracy, the country cannot adopt socialist policies. Also topics of future posts include why the UN is failing or rather was doomed to fail from the beginning and on why the anti-war protestors are stupid. Perhaps, after tomorrow's protest, the whole anti-war protestors are stupid topic might be more fully addressed.
Spring break has ended for me. I am back at school. Back in the residence halls. Back to studying. Back to hell and torment, and gnashing of teeth.
So, what did I accomplish over spring break? Besides putting in ten thousand resumes (which, by the way, were very unimpressive--I have never had a paying job) and applications, I was hired, put several hundred miles on my mother's car, tormented my cat, bugged my dad (I think one day I called him every five minutes), didn't study for the PCAT, and barely read anything. I did finish up Hayek's Road to Serfdom, finally--on which I will make some comments in regards to the current events, but only at a later time. I did pick up von Mises' Omnipotent Government. I also read the prequel and sequel to Flowers in the Attic--both of which were disturbingly incestous but enthralling all the same.
And I also bought a new pair of shoes--despite the fact that Garrett thinks shopping conditions are dismal in the Yuma area.
Randomly enough, I also dyed my hair--it used to be this "mousy" brown color...now its a dark brown. According to the box, its "darkest brown." I like it. It doesn't make me look washed out. It has also been cut to a little bit above shoulder length, despite my dad and some friends thinking I should try to grow it out long (consider, though, long means anything longer than my shoulders).
But alas, I only went to church Sunday morning. Bleh.
Anyway, hopefully tonight I can catch up on some things...like the reason why in even a democracy, the country cannot adopt socialist policies. Also topics of future posts include why the UN is failing or rather was doomed to fail from the beginning and on why the anti-war protestors are stupid. Perhaps, after tomorrow's protest, the whole anti-war protestors are stupid topic might be more fully addressed.
posted by Laura Keslar at 7:48 PM | |
Tuesday, March 16, 2004
Male-Hating Feminazis
What is with the "male chauvinist teacher" comment the author of Dear Abby used? My gawd, couldnt the teacher have been referring to the fact that considering that this girl lives to be 71 years old, that she has, statistically...very little chance of being president? My brother, who is male (oh, wait, duh!), has very little chance of being President. Partially consider if both live to be 71 years old, they would have only had 36 years of opportunity to be president. Compound this by the fact that a President remains in office for 4 years, unless he dies or something horrible like that. That then leaves eight tries for someone to be President.
Furthermore, there are many other people (both men and women) who will vie for such a position--probably more qualified than a girl who has merely had her poems published in the newspaper and is in NHS.
Moreoever, statistically, women are far less likely to be a political figure at a national level than they are to be some other type of position. This and all the other reasons I have stated before, when added together, proves the teacher is quite right in his statement that the girl's dream is probably going to remain unactualized.
And by the way, hasnt she considered that some other people have dreamed of being president all their lives as well? I remember growing up thinking I was going to be a doctor or lawyer, which, upon entering 8th grade, changed to first woman president and theologian. Now, after five years, I would be content staying home and raising a brood of children.
The teacher's comment probably had nothing to do with gender--but the girl and "Dear Abby" have morphed his comment into something sexist and inappropriate. Ah, so much for a sexless society.
Ok, maybe the title is a bit extreme, but I, once again, have realized why I don't read any of the advice columns in the paper. I rather have my nose hairs pulled out, in fact.
What is with the "male chauvinist teacher" comment the author of Dear Abby used? My gawd, couldnt the teacher have been referring to the fact that considering that this girl lives to be 71 years old, that she has, statistically...very little chance of being president? My brother, who is male (oh, wait, duh!), has very little chance of being President. Partially consider if both live to be 71 years old, they would have only had 36 years of opportunity to be president. Compound this by the fact that a President remains in office for 4 years, unless he dies or something horrible like that. That then leaves eight tries for someone to be President.
Furthermore, there are many other people (both men and women) who will vie for such a position--probably more qualified than a girl who has merely had her poems published in the newspaper and is in NHS.
Moreoever, statistically, women are far less likely to be a political figure at a national level than they are to be some other type of position. This and all the other reasons I have stated before, when added together, proves the teacher is quite right in his statement that the girl's dream is probably going to remain unactualized.
And by the way, hasnt she considered that some other people have dreamed of being president all their lives as well? I remember growing up thinking I was going to be a doctor or lawyer, which, upon entering 8th grade, changed to first woman president and theologian. Now, after five years, I would be content staying home and raising a brood of children.
The teacher's comment probably had nothing to do with gender--but the girl and "Dear Abby" have morphed his comment into something sexist and inappropriate. Ah, so much for a sexless society.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:43 PM | |
Kerry-McCain and Bush-Napolitano Tickets?
In either case, whatever ticket Napolitano falls into, its doomed to fail. Last time a woman ran with a name as hard to spell and say as Napolitano's was Geraldine Ferraro. And what happened to her? To say the least, she never spelled potato incorrectly.
Secondly, I really don't think people are ready for another Janet Reno in the White House. I think we need just baby steps--first there was Reno, then there is gay adoption, which was followed by gay marriage. People are still struggling with gay men and women in the episcopalian and Methodist churches. Give it a few more years, then we can have Napolitano located somewhere near the White House.
But on to more serious matters. Although the author of the editorial replies that Napolitano has yet to issue a straightforward denial, an invitation from Bush is highly unlikely.
Numero uno (that and una mas cervesa por favor are the result of two years of public education required language courses and second semester proficiency at a college level--but enough making fun of our education system), Bush is liberal enough as it is. He can't afford to lose any more of his conservative voter base as he already has. For this same reason, a third party ticket with Judge Roy Moore would be utterly insane--such a thing would jeopardize a Bush re-election without really gaining anything in return.
Secondly, Cheney is definitely locked into the position as VP. I think that speaks for itself. If you want evidence of this, call up your local GOP headquarters and see if they have any Bush-Cheney 2004 bumper stickers. They might actually give you a couple--or more. But ask about if they have any, say, Bush-Napolitano stickers and they would laugh. Even if you asked for Bush-Dole (Elizabeth, that is...) or Bush-Rice stickers, you would receive a hardy laugh and would never be able to live it down.
As for a Kerry invitation, Napolitano would offer more appeal. She, unlike Kerry, is not embroiled in the quagmire called DC Politics. Whereas Edwards would totally overshadow Kerry, Napolitano would completely lack any ability to do that. Besides, she is not too far left that it will isolate many barely left-of-center voters but liberal enough not to endanger a strong liberal voterbase, either. Plus, she is a woman, which will guarantee those vapid women who tend to vote according to sex and not ideas.
In the upcoming election, after the new redistricting in Arizona that created many more swing districts as well as Arizona becoming less of a conservative state coupled with Napolitano's election in 2002 and Clinton's in 1996, a Kerry-Napolitano ticket might actually win over some swing voters who like to vote for people from their own home state. Several people I knew, when voting in the 2000 presidential nominations, voted for McCain--not because of his politics, but because he came from Arizona.
But even with all this, I doubt that Napolitano will seriously be considered for VP with Kerry. Now watch, come November, I will have to eat crow. Ah well, such is the price of predictions.
Some people are just too obsessed with Arizona politicians. Of course a great many politicians have come from our modest state in the last 90 years we have been in the union, however, that does not provide adequate grounds to assume Napolitano will be the next great person to arise from the ashes.
Some things are humorous; other things are downright ludicrous. This was even better than NRO's suggestion that Kerry's running mate ought to be Napolitano.
In either case, whatever ticket Napolitano falls into, its doomed to fail. Last time a woman ran with a name as hard to spell and say as Napolitano's was Geraldine Ferraro. And what happened to her? To say the least, she never spelled potato incorrectly.
Secondly, I really don't think people are ready for another Janet Reno in the White House. I think we need just baby steps--first there was Reno, then there is gay adoption, which was followed by gay marriage. People are still struggling with gay men and women in the episcopalian and Methodist churches. Give it a few more years, then we can have Napolitano located somewhere near the White House.
But on to more serious matters. Although the author of the editorial replies that Napolitano has yet to issue a straightforward denial, an invitation from Bush is highly unlikely.
Numero uno (that and una mas cervesa por favor are the result of two years of public education required language courses and second semester proficiency at a college level--but enough making fun of our education system), Bush is liberal enough as it is. He can't afford to lose any more of his conservative voter base as he already has. For this same reason, a third party ticket with Judge Roy Moore would be utterly insane--such a thing would jeopardize a Bush re-election without really gaining anything in return.
Secondly, Cheney is definitely locked into the position as VP. I think that speaks for itself. If you want evidence of this, call up your local GOP headquarters and see if they have any Bush-Cheney 2004 bumper stickers. They might actually give you a couple--or more. But ask about if they have any, say, Bush-Napolitano stickers and they would laugh. Even if you asked for Bush-Dole (Elizabeth, that is...) or Bush-Rice stickers, you would receive a hardy laugh and would never be able to live it down.
As for a Kerry invitation, Napolitano would offer more appeal. She, unlike Kerry, is not embroiled in the quagmire called DC Politics. Whereas Edwards would totally overshadow Kerry, Napolitano would completely lack any ability to do that. Besides, she is not too far left that it will isolate many barely left-of-center voters but liberal enough not to endanger a strong liberal voterbase, either. Plus, she is a woman, which will guarantee those vapid women who tend to vote according to sex and not ideas.
In the upcoming election, after the new redistricting in Arizona that created many more swing districts as well as Arizona becoming less of a conservative state coupled with Napolitano's election in 2002 and Clinton's in 1996, a Kerry-Napolitano ticket might actually win over some swing voters who like to vote for people from their own home state. Several people I knew, when voting in the 2000 presidential nominations, voted for McCain--not because of his politics, but because he came from Arizona.
But even with all this, I doubt that Napolitano will seriously be considered for VP with Kerry. Now watch, come November, I will have to eat crow. Ah well, such is the price of predictions.
Some people are just too obsessed with Arizona politicians. Of course a great many politicians have come from our modest state in the last 90 years we have been in the union, however, that does not provide adequate grounds to assume Napolitano will be the next great person to arise from the ashes.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:32 PM | |
And furthermore, Bush will not be coming to speak
If you want something that has more commentary than this does, I suggest you check out what Garrett has to say from Arizona Growler. He did a great job summarizing and commenting on the whole letter to President Likins thing.
And despite the fact that I have known the politics of most of my professors, including chemistry and biology and math professors, the funniest thing is that I did not see any of their names petitioning Likins to withdraw the invitation. The list, though, made me realize how happy I am not a psych major (I really ought to make a joke about psych majors, but that has the potential to isolate and reduce my already sparsely populated audience).
So, all the whiners at the UA should be pleased, even if President Bush's refusal to speak at the UA's commencement ceremony was not from their doing.
If you want something that has more commentary than this does, I suggest you check out what Garrett has to say from Arizona Growler. He did a great job summarizing and commenting on the whole letter to President Likins thing.
And despite the fact that I have known the politics of most of my professors, including chemistry and biology and math professors, the funniest thing is that I did not see any of their names petitioning Likins to withdraw the invitation. The list, though, made me realize how happy I am not a psych major (I really ought to make a joke about psych majors, but that has the potential to isolate and reduce my already sparsely populated audience).
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:59 PM | |
No kidding Sherlock
Hope no one takes umbrage at this, but these suggestions simply don't protect you from being robbed. Living in the city with the highest larceny rates, I should know. You can seriously lock up your bicycle to a good sturdy bike rack, unlike this one, and come back with only the remains of your bike lock scattered near where your bike used to be. You can have your car doors locked, your windows rolled up, and still come back to see your car intact minus the window and radio. Best of all is when you come back not only missing your license plate but having someone elses on your car.
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:57 PM | |
Marriage Update
Why can't they all stop? Why do they all have to get married?
I hear of people in their late 20s talking about how all their friends are getting married--this is happening to me at a much younger age--I am not even 20, yet.
And today, at the local coffee shop, I met up with some friends from junior high and high school only to find out that two of them are marrying each other in May.
Why can't they all stop? Why do they all have to get married?
I hear of people in their late 20s talking about how all their friends are getting married--this is happening to me at a much younger age--I am not even 20, yet.
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:46 PM | |
Ok, I admit it, I am a secret muslim convert
To put it harshly, several Muslim friends, though they think it is pretty neat that he converted and all, don't really like his speaking style and some of the things he talks about. But, they also respect his position.
But as for me, when he spoke during the Ramadan Fast-a-thon, he spoke of the tree in the garden of Eden. Beyond that, I really don't remember much of what he said. He, personally, put me to sleep.
Last fall, during Ramadan, I participated in the Fastathon sponsored by the local Muslim whatnot club. While there, I heard this guy speak. It was kind of weird seeing a very white, very, what one would presume, non-muslim all dressed up and speak about Islam to a sundry group of Christians and Muslims. Every so often I see him wandering around the UA campus.
To put it harshly, several Muslim friends, though they think it is pretty neat that he converted and all, don't really like his speaking style and some of the things he talks about. But, they also respect his position.
But as for me, when he spoke during the Ramadan Fast-a-thon, he spoke of the tree in the garden of Eden. Beyond that, I really don't remember much of what he said. He, personally, put me to sleep.
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:44 PM | |
The Graying of Arizona
They make sure I follow the speed limit (or at least stay five miles under it), they keep me observant (well, heck, when they have a tendency to stop in the middle of a major thoroughway, you need to have a sharp eye), they help me exhibit fruits of the spirit, which does include patience though they have a tendency to foster the opposite of self-control and love (heh, showing off one finger to them probably doesnt count as a fruit, now does it?), and they keep me in shape (all the aerobic exercise from a one mile walk from my car and to the store front is worthy to take of some of that extra ten pounds I have gained over the last semester).
So, we hear that Napolitano has ordered the state to carry out studies on how to deal with Arizona's aging population. I offer two suggestions--shoot 'em all or just lock up the border between Canada and the US. Ok, well the shooting them is a bit extreme, after all, I love old people.
They make sure I follow the speed limit (or at least stay five miles under it), they keep me observant (well, heck, when they have a tendency to stop in the middle of a major thoroughway, you need to have a sharp eye), they help me exhibit fruits of the spirit, which does include patience though they have a tendency to foster the opposite of self-control and love (heh, showing off one finger to them probably doesnt count as a fruit, now does it?), and they keep me in shape (all the aerobic exercise from a one mile walk from my car and to the store front is worthy to take of some of that extra ten pounds I have gained over the last semester).
posted by Laura Keslar at 9:38 PM | |
Monday, March 15, 2004
Donald Rumsfeld is fiiine!
ringsofbenzene: Donal Rumsfeld is hot. Rumsfeld sure floats my boat; if i knew he wasnt married, I would really begin to write love letters to the man
Amy: I think the prez is hot
ringsofbenzene: nah, our prez is a cute man but not hot
Amy: oh my gosh dubya is my man!
ringsofbenzene: no, dubya is Laura Bush's man and he is sooo not hot
Amy: compared to rumsfield he is
[after a lapse of like ten minutes]
Amy: are you dead serious laura you find rumsefield hot?
ringsofbenzene: yes, I am serious; I do think he is attractive
Jessica: rumsfeld is anything but hot
Ok, this is probably not as funny as I think it is, but...its late and I need to go to bed so I can get up early and start applying for jobs tomorrow.
So, when you get bored, you and friends start talking about the most randomest things, like what celebrity you think is hot. My celebrity of choice, if you can call him that, is Donald Rumsfeld. He is absolutely the cutest man of the Bush administration. If I knew for sure he wasnt married, I would send him tons of love letters. :sighs: But at times when you are bored, your internet conversations go something like this:
ringsofbenzene: Donal Rumsfeld is hot. Rumsfeld sure floats my boat; if i knew he wasnt married, I would really begin to write love letters to the man
Amy: I think the prez is hot
ringsofbenzene: nah, our prez is a cute man but not hot
Amy: oh my gosh dubya is my man!
ringsofbenzene: no, dubya is Laura Bush's man and he is sooo not hot
Amy: compared to rumsfield he is
[after a lapse of like ten minutes]
Amy: are you dead serious laura you find rumsefield hot?
ringsofbenzene: yes, I am serious; I do think he is attractive
Jessica: rumsfeld is anything but hot
Ok, this is probably not as funny as I think it is, but...its late and I need to go to bed so I can get up early and start applying for jobs tomorrow.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:31 PM | |
Sunday, March 14, 2004
Protest on Saturday
Before I go to bed, I wanted to let yall in the Tucson area know that there will be a counter protest in Tucson. Come, join us. It will make a great way to end spring break.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:36 PM | |
Friends getting married
I went to church today and was surprised to find out that a friend of mine was getting married in early April. She had been going out with the young man, who she met at Walmart (yeah, odd) since the end of August.
But that wasnt as bad as when a friend from high school got married in October. She has now been married for almost five months, and she had just turned nineteen.
And here I am, without ever being in a serious relationship with anyone. Maybe I am too picky, especially since I am looking for Osama bin Laden. Not even the US can find Mr Right.
Maybe this is the result of having friends five years older than me, but I hate having friends getting married. It seems so odd. Its just a blessing they havent decided to have children yet.
I went to church today and was surprised to find out that a friend of mine was getting married in early April. She had been going out with the young man, who she met at Walmart (yeah, odd) since the end of August.
But that wasnt as bad as when a friend from high school got married in October. She has now been married for almost five months, and she had just turned nineteen.
And here I am, without ever being in a serious relationship with anyone. Maybe I am too picky, especially since I am looking for Osama bin Laden. Not even the US can find Mr Right.
posted by Laura Keslar at 11:03 PM | |
Seven out of ten employers are government
The University of Arizona, the City of Tucson, and the State of Arizona as well as the Tucson Unified School District are among those top ten government-related employers.
Its a shame that government has gotten so large, even on a state level, that it ranks in the top 10.
But it comes as no suprise, considering the amount of legislation that hinder local employers and small business owners.
The year of ominpotent government has come. The Arizona Daily Star has shown that out of the top ten employers in the state of Arizona seven are government-related.
The University of Arizona, the City of Tucson, and the State of Arizona as well as the Tucson Unified School District are among those top ten government-related employers.
Its a shame that government has gotten so large, even on a state level, that it ranks in the top 10.
But it comes as no suprise, considering the amount of legislation that hinder local employers and small business owners.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:48 PM | |
So glad I don't drive
My mother complained of gas prices. Not driving, I didnt realize that gas prices have reached a new record. However, I thought that OPEC was going to increase production. Well, we will have to wait and see.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:40 PM | |
I hate spring break
So, when I read this article, I had to laugh. I am not doing anything the typical student on spring break does. Instead of going to Mexico, bonding with my family, sleeping, or working, I will be applying for jobs, studying for my PCAT, not doing homework, and seeing how I can get involved with the Bush-Cheney campaign and Republican party during the summer months. I also get the joy of taking Chloe the cat and Dudley the dog to the vet. I quizmastered at a Bible Bowl round robin in San Diego (yes, I went shopping, but for only an hour out of the entire eight hours I spent in San Diego).
Oh, the greatness of spring break.
I hate it that most of my friends who attend school out of state don't have spring break until a week before or after me. Even my little brother doesn't have spring break until two weeks from now.
So, when I read this article, I had to laugh. I am not doing anything the typical student on spring break does. Instead of going to Mexico, bonding with my family, sleeping, or working, I will be applying for jobs, studying for my PCAT, not doing homework, and seeing how I can get involved with the Bush-Cheney campaign and Republican party during the summer months. I also get the joy of taking Chloe the cat and Dudley the dog to the vet. I quizmastered at a Bible Bowl round robin in San Diego (yes, I went shopping, but for only an hour out of the entire eight hours I spent in San Diego).
Oh, the greatness of spring break.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:33 PM | |
Reading, Writing, and Arithmatic
Science and math both help students to think logically about problems they face. Although not all occupations need for its workers to know vector calc or differential equations, basic algebra and geometry are necessary and promote logical assessment.
People complain about Bush's No Child Left Behind, and many of the complaints are right-on. But one of those complaints shouldnt be about how it forces teachers to "teach to the test" or how it forces teachers to teach the three R's.
And this is so bad? When has teaching children science, math, and reading been a bad thing? Knowing those things allow for a better education of the arts and the social sciences. As someone in the article said, without the ability to read, you cannot learn. However, lets extend this.
Science and math both help students to think logically about problems they face. Although not all occupations need for its workers to know vector calc or differential equations, basic algebra and geometry are necessary and promote logical assessment.
People complain about Bush's No Child Left Behind, and many of the complaints are right-on. But one of those complaints shouldnt be about how it forces teachers to "teach to the test" or how it forces teachers to teach the three R's.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:28 PM | |
Bullying and Bad Parenting
But isnt bullying wrong in the first place? Why must legislation take place to end bullying? Bullying other students with physical pain is a violation of the child's rights. Despite what my folks always said, children do have rights--and one of those rights is to be secure of one's person and belongings. If teachers are not protecting the rights of these children, something is wrong.
However, this implies that children are coming to school lacking respect for their peers. This flaw is a result of bad parenting. Parents need to teach their children to keep their hands off other children; parents need to teach their children that calling names is inappropriate. If parents would raise their children correctly, then bullying would not be as bad as it has gotten today.
This too implies further problems. Parents who do not have time or energy cannot spend the appropriate time or energy teaching their children right and wrong. This lack of energy could be the result of having a single-parent household or both parents working.
For instance, a little girl who attends my parents' church was bitten by one of her classmates. When her mother went to talk to the principal and the teacher, the administrator refused to do anything, because the mother of the girl who bit the other child refused to think her daughter did anything wrong. She was a single mother.
Families need both a man and a woman to raise their children. In a perfect society (yeah, now I am going to sound like a paleo-con where the perfect society was the 1950s), a father works and "brings home the bacon" whereas the mother keeps house and raises children. (Women, who want to work, should work without guilt as long as their job does not cause their children to be neglected to daycare operators or them coming home without the energy to spend valuable time with their children).
When women leave for work, neglecting their children, you get the result as indicated in the Republic article. This could have been the result of either divorce, cohabitation, or even women just neglecting their children in favor of their "happiness." They just forget who chooses their nursing home.
Anyway...this legislation that Arizona legislators proposed will only treat the symptoms without treating the cause of the disease of bullying. It might prolong the time before an incident like Columbine happens, but it will only do just that--prolong it.
Once again, I have barely found out that Arizona tried to outlaw bullying in schools. The bill was first proposed by a group of students.
But isnt bullying wrong in the first place? Why must legislation take place to end bullying? Bullying other students with physical pain is a violation of the child's rights. Despite what my folks always said, children do have rights--and one of those rights is to be secure of one's person and belongings. If teachers are not protecting the rights of these children, something is wrong.
However, this implies that children are coming to school lacking respect for their peers. This flaw is a result of bad parenting. Parents need to teach their children to keep their hands off other children; parents need to teach their children that calling names is inappropriate. If parents would raise their children correctly, then bullying would not be as bad as it has gotten today.
This too implies further problems. Parents who do not have time or energy cannot spend the appropriate time or energy teaching their children right and wrong. This lack of energy could be the result of having a single-parent household or both parents working.
For instance, a little girl who attends my parents' church was bitten by one of her classmates. When her mother went to talk to the principal and the teacher, the administrator refused to do anything, because the mother of the girl who bit the other child refused to think her daughter did anything wrong. She was a single mother.
Families need both a man and a woman to raise their children. In a perfect society (yeah, now I am going to sound like a paleo-con where the perfect society was the 1950s), a father works and "brings home the bacon" whereas the mother keeps house and raises children. (Women, who want to work, should work without guilt as long as their job does not cause their children to be neglected to daycare operators or them coming home without the energy to spend valuable time with their children).
When women leave for work, neglecting their children, you get the result as indicated in the Republic article. This could have been the result of either divorce, cohabitation, or even women just neglecting their children in favor of their "happiness." They just forget who chooses their nursing home.
Anyway...this legislation that Arizona legislators proposed will only treat the symptoms without treating the cause of the disease of bullying. It might prolong the time before an incident like Columbine happens, but it will only do just that--prolong it.
posted by Laura Keslar at 10:19 PM | |