Heh heh.

Drama Drama Drama
Whine Whine Whine
Waaah Waaah Waaah

Give it a rest, unplug, get a life.

Why do you come here?
And why do you hang around?
I'm so sorry
You had to sneak into my room, just to read my diary
it was just to see all the things you knew I'd written about you
So many illustrations
I'm so very sickened
I am so sickened now
I was a good lay

yikes

AS I prepare to have another child, I have been worried about the future.

Looks like someone else has stated it, with facts to back it up, for me. Shit.

Peak Oil Mania

by mtippett July 1, 2008 at 03:45 pm http://www.blogger.com/www.nowpublic.com

Wow. That didn’t take long. Back in December when everyone was compiling lists about what the best gadgets of the year were or other nonsense, Jim Kunstler was predicting that 2008 would be the year of peak oil. It is now July and he is right.

Consider this excerpt from a recent piece in the New York Times:

The economics of long commutes are forcing many to the conclusion that suburban living is no longer viable, and suburban housing prices are falling accordingly.

"Suddenly, the economics of American suburban life are under assault as skyrocketing energy prices inflate the costs of reaching, heating and cooling homes on the distant edges of metropolitan areas.

[L]ife on the edges of suburbia is beginning to feel untenable.

And closer to home (in Vancouver, that is) the most respected national paper penned and editorial calling for revolution. In their view, the current state of affairs in Canada is unsustainable if the government doesn’t recognize the existential peril that peak oil represents for Canadians. They write:

Each upward tick in oil prices signals the slow death of a postwar North American way of life, built around car ownership and suburban sprawl. In a harsh diagnosis of the plight of the United States, which could easily apply to Canada too, CIBC World Markets economists Jeff Rubin and Benjamin Tal foresee “the greatest mass exodus of vehicles off America's highways in history.” The change will be especially radical for the four-fifths of households earning less than $25,000 that now own a car. One in five of those low-income Americans will “probably stop driving or give up the second vehicle” over the next four years because the cost of gasoline will gobble up one-fifth of their incomes, a rise from 7 per cent today.

Unfortunately the mainstream media has largely kept us blissfully unaware of this impending crisis, focusing instead on the meaningless, celebrity driven filler that now inhabit our rapidly dwindling news diet.
Well the invisible hand of capitalism is about to flip us all the bird. As Kuntsler says in the latest post of his aptly named blog – Clusterfuck Nation – this ain’t gonna be like your Grandma’s depression:

Our debt problems today are of a magnitude so extreme that astronomers would be hard pressed to calculate them. By any rational measure our society is comprehensively bankrupt. From the federal treasury down to the suburban cul-de-sacs so much loaned money is either not being paid back, or is at risk of never being paid back, that the suckage of presumed wealth has passed through an event horizon out of the known universe into some other realm of space-time, never to be seen again in this realm. This would seem to be the very essence of monetary deflation -- money defaulted out-of-existence.

This condition is partly disguised by both the loss of credibility of US currency and real-world scarcities of oil and food, but the upshot will be something at least twice as bad as the Great Depression of the 1930s: people with no money in a land with no resources (with manpower that has no discipline), hardly any family farms left, cities that are basket-cases of bottomless need, comatose small towns stripped of their assets and social capital, an aviation industry on the verge of death, and a railroad system that is the laughingstock of the world. Not to mention the mind-boggling liabilities of suburbia and the motoring infrastructure that services it.

When it becomes this obvious that the present course of economic development is so clearly flawed then the smart thing to do is develop alternative plans. We need to be investing NOW in new ways of ensuring food security and other essential components of a sustainable, post peak oil world.

My latest review

Portishead - Third

Portishead aren't what anyone would called prolific.

Third is, appropriately, their third album. But they've been together for almost 20 years, and this is their first album since 1997's eponymous Portishead. Myself, I've always liked what I've heard by the band, but I can't truthfully say I've ever soberly heard one of their first two albums in it's entirety. Most of my experience with the band, and I'll wager that many of our male readers will probably have similar experience, is linked inextricably with a shadowy female in their past. Or present. I hate to generalize, but that's just the facts, jack.

What I remember from Portishead is the dramatic, cinematic soundscapes built with tremolo, reverb, delayed guitar, and a very ethereal, almost fragile female voice layered overtop. Portishead have always been considered of the "Trip Hop" genre, although they themselves eschew this moniker. All those elements are present on the new album, but something is...different.

'Silence', the opening track, immediately announces that business is not as usual, with the upbeat and aggressive drum track. I had to double check to make sure I hadn't accidentally clicked on to some extra remix track tacked onto the end of the album. This track starts off great. The beat is a nice change of pace, and combined with the delayed guitar, it makes a really sinister groove. And then, inexplicably, it all stops. The beat disappears, all the noise is scaled back, Beth Gibbons starts singing, and her voice sort of hangs out there in space. The quality of her voice just doesn't work with music this aggressive. It's still a cool track, but it went from 'epic' to 'just ok' in my mind, mainly due to the vocals. The guitar riff for the last minute of the song also seems to have been played on an out of tune guitar, and a sour note is hit repeatedly. I can only assume this is left in the mix intentionally, perhaps to add some more edge. If so, it is unnecessary, and doesn't have the desired effect. It just sounds amateurish.

The next two tracks ('Hunter', 'Nylon Smile') are much more familiar to the average listener. Vintage Portishead; quiet, and subdued. However, and this is where the band shines, please don't read "subdued" as "relaxing with a good book". Please read it as "tied to a wooden chair in a one bulb cement room, wondering where the hell you are". This is where Gibbons fragile voice is allowed to do its nasty business. Her pleasant voice always sounds just on the verge of breaking, like a whisper of some tragic secret, in the dark. The fourth track ('The Rip') also makes me think of Stereolab, which I personally think was a band that hasn't been given its due as one of the progenitors of the whole trip hop movement, so it's nice to hear things come full circle.

And from there, the album strikes a nice balance of familiarity with innovation; the beautiful and orchestral juxtaposed with the angular and jarring.

Much of the album, particularly the more aggressive tunes, hearkens to older Cocteau Twins, or even The Cure. The droning hooks that repeat throughout the entirety of many of the songs ('We Carry On') makes me think of industrial music, like Nitzer Ebb, or Depeche Mode on Construction Time Again ('Machine Gun'). The discordant guitars and keyboards makes me think of Radiohead's Kid A or Amnesiac. The good thing about this album is it seems to reference a lot of familiar things, but is original enough that you can never really put your finger on just what they're copping.

This is not a pleasant album. This is not what I would describe as "really good background music", which is how I would've described their previous work (in fact, I have had their previous worked described as exactly that by more than one of the aforementioned shadowy females of my past). This album is challenging. It is jarring. This album is possibly alienating, especially now that a lot of the people that loved them in 1997 will have matured, and their tastes perhaps will have mellowed. So, considering they liked a band that was pretty mellow already, this album could throw them into quite a tailspin.

But this album is a triumph. It took balls to release it. It would've been so easy to release an album that eased people back into the band after such a lengthy hiatus. That in itself is a middle finger worthy of any punk band you care to mention. This band grew, and doesn't care if you come along for the ride. It is fun to listen to, and one should pay attention. This album is not aging gracefully. It is telling you to fuck off with your pretensions, with your pigeonholing, with your expectations. It is telling you to plug in your headphones, and fasten your seat belts. Portishead is dead; long live Portishead!

8.5/10

Cool Tracks:
Hunter
We Carry On
Threads

Hmmmm. Van-nasty is thinking about taking her blog private, due to the nasty effect blogging can sometimes have on ones career. This got me to thinking...it might be prudent to do likewise.

Haven't decided quite yet, but if I do, just send me an email for access, and I will see if you worthy, or found wanting muahahahahaha

(not like anyone ever comes here to read anything i post anyways)

The Alternate Opinion

Here are obviously controversial articles about two globally important (and lionized) individuals, submitted purely for the sake of equal coverage.

My questions for Obama - Fidel Castro

The brightest and best of the presidential hopefuls seeks to extend a cruel, immoral Cuba blockade.

It would be dishonest of me to remain silent after hearing Barack Obama's speech delivered at the Cuban American National Foundation last Friday. I feel no resentment towards him, for he is not responsible for the crimes perpetrated against Cuba and humanity. Were I to defend him, I would do his adversaries a favour. I have therefore no reservations about criticising him and expressing myself frankly.

What were Obama's statements? "Throughout my entire life, there has been injustice and repression in Cuba. Never, in my lifetime, have the people of Cuba known freedom. Never, in the lives of two generations of Cubans, have the people of Cuba known democracy ... I won't stand for this injustice ... I will maintain the embargo."

This man who is doubtless, from the social and human points of view, the most progressive candidate for the US presidency, portrays the Cuban revolution as anti-democratic and lacking in respect for freedom and human rights. It is the same argument US administrations have used again and again to justify crimes against our country. The blockade is an act of genocide. I don't want to see US children inculcated with those shameful values.

No small and blockaded country like ours would have been able to hold its ground for so long on the basis of ambition, vanity, deceit or the abuse of power, the kind of power its neighbour has. To state otherwise is an insult to the intelligence of our heroic people.

I am not questioning Obama's great intelligence, his debating skills or his work ethic. He is a talented orator and is ahead of his rivals in the electoral race. Nevertheless, I am obliged to raise a number of delicate questions. I do not expect answers; I wish only to raise them for the record.

Is it right for the president of the US to order the assassination of any one person in the world, whatever the pretext? Is it ethical for the president of the US to order the torture of other human beings? Should state terrorism be used by a country as powerful as the US as an instrument to bring peace to the planet?

Is an Adjustment Act, applied as punishment to only one country, Cuba, in order to destabilise it, good and honourable when it costs innocent children and mothers their lives? Are the brain drain and the continuous theft of the best scientific and intellectual minds in poor countries moral and justifiable?

Is it fair to stage pre-emptive attacks? Is it honourable and sane to invest millions and millions of dollars in the military-industrial complex, to produce weapons that can destroy life on earth several times over? Is that the way in which the US expresses its respect for freedom, democracy and human rights?

Before judging our country, Obama should know that Cuba - with its education, health, sports, culture and science programmes, implemented not only in its own territory but also in other poor countries around the world, and in spite of the economic and financial blockade and the aggression of his powerful country - is proof that much can be done with very little. Cuba has never subordinated cooperation with other countries to ideological requirements. We offered the US our help when hurricane Katrina lashed the city of New Orleans. Our revolution can mobilise tens of thousands of doctors and health technicians. It can mobilise an equally vast number of teachers and citizens who are willing to travel to any corner of the world to fulfil any noble purpose, not to usurp rights or take possession of raw materials.

The goodwill and determination of people constitute limitless resources that would not fit in the vault of a bank. They cannot spring from the hypocritical politics of an empire.

· Fidel Castro is former president of Cuba. This is an edited version of an article that appeared in Granma, the Cuban Communist party newspaper granma.co.cu

Down with the Dalai Lama - Brendan O'Neill
May 29, 2008 10:00 AM
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/brendan_oneill/2008/05/down_with_the_dalai_lama.html

Has there ever been a political figure more ridiculous than the Dalai Lama? This is the "humble monk" who forswears worldly goods in favour of living a simple life dressed in maroon robes. Yet in 1992 he guest-edited French Vogue, the bible of the decadent high-fashion classes, which is packed with pictures of the half-starved daughters of the aristocracy modelling skirts and shirts that most of us could never afford.

He claims to be the current incarnation of the Tulkus line of Buddhist masters, who are "exempt from the wheel of death and rebirth". Yet he's best known for hanging out with clueless western celebs like Richard Gere and Sharon Stone (who is still most famous for showing her vagina on the big screen). Stone once introduced the Dalai Lama at a glittering fundraising ball as "Mr Please, Please, Please Let Me Back Into China!"

The Dalai Lama says he wants Tibetan autonomy and political independence. Yet he allows himself to be used as a tool by western powers keen to humiliate China. Between the late 1950s and 1974, he is alleged to have received around $15,000 a month, or $180,000 a year, from the CIA. He has also been, according to the same reporter, "remarkably nepotistic", promoting his brothers and their wives to positions of extraordinary power in his fiefdom-in-exile in Dharamsala, northern India.

He poses as the quirky, giggly, modern monk who once auctioned his Land Rover on eBay for $80,000 and has even done an advert for Apple (quite what skinny white computers have got to do with Buddhism is anybody's guess). Yet in truth he is a product of the crushing feudalism of archaic, pre-modern Tibet, where an elite of Buddhist monks treated the masses as serfs and ruthlessly punished them if they stepped out of line.

The Dalai Lama demands religious freedom. Yet he persecutes a Buddhist sect that worships a deity called Dorje Shugden. He outlawed praying to Dorje Shugden in 1996, and those who defied his writ were thrown out of their jobs, mocked in the streets and even had their homes smashed up by heavy-handed officials from his government-in-exile. When worshippers complained about their treatment, they were told by representatives of the Dalai Lama that "concepts like democracy and freedom of religion are empty when it comes to the wellbeing of the Dalai Lama".

As the Dalai Lama tours Britain, lots of people are asking: why won't Brown receive him at Downing Street? I have a different question: why should Brown, who for all his troubles is still the head of an elected political party, meet with an authoritarian, fame-chasing, Apple-loving monk?

The Dalai Lama has effectively been turned into a cartoon good guy. In America and western Europe, where backward anti-modern sentiments are widespread amongst self-loathing sections of the educated and the elite, the Dalai Lama has been embraced as a living, breathing representative of unsullied goodness. Despite the fact that he advertises Apple, guest-edits Vogue and drives a Land Rover, he is held up as evidence that living the simple eastern life is preferable to, in the words of Philip Rawson, westerners' "gradually more pointless pursuit of material satisfactions". Just as earlier generations of disillusioned aristocrats fell in love with a fictional version of Tibet (Shangri-La), so contemporary un-progressives idolise a fictional image of the Dalai Lama.

Most strikingly, the Dalai Lama is used as a battering ram by western governments in their culture war with China. The reason he is flattered by world leaders and bankrolled by the CIA is not because these institutions care very much for liberty in Tibet, but rather because they want to ratchet up international pressure on their new competitors in world politics: the Chinese. You don't have to be a defender of the authoritarian regime in Beijing (and I most certainly am not) to see that such global sabre-rattling is more likely to entrench tensions between the Tibetan people and China, and increase instability in world affairs, rather than herald anything like a new era of freedom in the east.

Far from "helping Tibet", the slavish western worshippers of the Dalai Lama are helping to stifle the development of a real, lively movement for liberty and democracy in the Tibetan regions. One author on the Tibetan independence movement argues that "the Dalai Lama's role as ultimate spiritual authority is holding back the political process of democratisation", since "the assumption that he occupies the correct moral ground from a spiritual perspective means that any challenge to his political authority may be interpreted as anti-religious".

At least one reason why the Dalai Lama can pose as "the ultimate spiritual authority" and all-round supreme leader of Tibetans and their future is because influential elements in the west have empowered him to play that role. In doing so, they have been complicit in the infantilisation of the Tibetan people. Tibetans now suffer the double horror of being ruled by undemocratic Chinese officials on one hand, and demeaned by the Dalai Lama and his western supporters on the other.

The pathetic saga continues...

Another day, another ridiculous and completely idiotic comment from a Lukas Rossi fan. People, figure it out. I'm just going to keep making you look stupid. And it's so easy, it's actually making me feel...dirty.

Anyways, I posted it over :here:

sigh

Sweet! Here's hoping this doesn't take a million years.

A hilarious weekend for hockey, in a mean-spirited, schadenfreude sort of way...

First, there was Marc Andre Fluery taking the ice for game one of the Stanley Cup Playoffs:

I love the 2 Detroit kids standing next to the door, unable to contain their glee. I laughed, but then I felt horrible for the guy. I mean, imagine dreaming your whole life of taking the ice as the starting goalie in the Stanley Cup Playoffs. And then THAT happens. God.

Next, and I can't figure out if it's worse or better, so lets call it a tie, The Spokane Chiefs won The Memorial Cup. And this happened:


Just look at those two guys, standing there, not knowing what to do. TOO funny. And then they try to put it back together, which just makes it worse. It's like something from a Chris Guest movie. Hilarious. Tragic. Classic.

"Seal Got Antarctic Fever! Seal Got Antarctic Fever!"

'Sex pest' seal attacks penguin
By Matt Walker
BBC

An Antarctic fur seal has been observed trying to have sex with a king penguin.
The South African-based scientists who witnessed the incident say it is the most unusual case of mammal mating behaviour yet known.

The incident, which lasted for 45 minutes and was caught on camera, is reported in the Journal of Ethology.

The bizarre event took place on a beach on Marion Island, a sub-Antarctic island that is home to both fur seals and king penguins.

Why the seal attempted to have sex with the penguin is unclear. But the scientists who photographed the event speculate that it was the behaviour of a frustrated, sexually inexperienced young male seal.

Equally, it might be been an aggressive, predatory act; or even a playful one that turned sexual.

"At first glimpse, we thought the seal was killing the penguin," says Nico de Bruyn, of the Mammal Research Institute at the University of Pretoria, South Africa.

The brazenness of the seal's behaviour left those who saw it in no doubt as to what was happening.

De Bruyn and a colleague were on Trypot beach at Marion Island to study elephant seals when they noticed a young, adult male Antarctic fur seal, in good condition, attempting to copulate with an adult king penguin of unknown sex.

The 100kg seal first subdued the 15kg penguin by lying on it.
The penguin flapped its flippers and attempted to stand and escape - but to no avail.

The seal then alternated between resting on the penguin, and thrusting its pelvis, trying to insert itself, unsuccessfully.

After 45 minutes the seal gave up, swam into the water and then completely ignored the bird it had just assaulted, the scientists report.

Why a fur seal would indulge in such extreme sexual behaviour is unclear.
Sexual coercion among animals is extremely common: males of many species often harass, coerce or force females of their own kind to mate, while animals are also known occasionally to harass sexually a member of a closely related species.

Harassment is common among pinnipeds, the group of animals that includes seals, fur seals, and sea lions; and occasionally it happens between related species.

Male grey seals have been known to harass and mate with female harbour seals, for example, producing hybrids.

"Sexual harassment is often more commonplace in non-monogamous mating systems, and in species where males are physically much larger than the other sex and thus physically capable of coercion or harassment," says de Bruyn.

But this is thought to be the first recorded example of a mammal trying to have sex with a member of another class of vertebrate, such as a bird, fish, reptile, or amphibian.

Chinstrap penguins occasionally indulge in homosexual behaviour, and adelie penguins sometimes "prostitute" themselves to get stones for nest-building; while one in seven emperor penguins will change partners from one year to the next.

But generally, king penguins lead straightforward sex lives: males and females pair up for years on end.

Marion Island is the only place in the world where Antarctic fur seals are known to hunt king penguins on land, so the idea that the fur seal was trying to eat the object of its attention made sense.

"But then we realised that the seal's intentions were rather more amorous."
The researchers speculate that the male seal was too young to win access to female seals, and in a state of sexual excitement, looked elsewhere.

But the mating season was nearly over when the incident took place, leading the scientists to also wonder whether the seal's natural predatory aggression toward the bird became redirected into sexual arousal.

Equally, the incident may have arisen because the seal was "play-mating".
"It was most certainly a once-off and has never previously or since been recorded anywhere in the world to our knowledge," says de Bruyn.

The penguin did not appear to have been injured by the seal, the scientists report.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/7379554.stm

Published: 2008/05/02 13:10:24 GMT

© BBC MMVIII

Mothers Day is Coming!