dissent.png

That man in the white house used his Veteran’s Day speech to yet again suggest that those bold enough to question his unilaterally-imposed foreign policy are aiding the enemy (happy birthday, G!):

While it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. (Applause.) Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war….

The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. (Applause.) These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America’s will. As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them. (Applause.) Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. (Applause.) And our troops deserve to know that whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our nation is united, and we will settle for nothing less than victory. (Applause.)

There is plenty about that quote and the speech in general with which an informed observer of any news more involved than Fox sound-bites might choose to quibble, but that’s not my purpose today. This administration has often made the democracy-averse implication that questioning their policy is somehow un-american, contrary to some unquestionable objective, or an aid to our real or purported enemies.

I saw Good Night, and Good Luck last night. It was generally a very good film about Edward R. Murrow‘s rhetorical struggle against McCarthyism. The parallels to our current situation – especially as highlighted by Mr. Bush’s comments today – are striking and chilling.

Most troubling of all, I thought, was that the movie showed a 1950’s U.S. that was much better equipped to resist – at least in the media – the dangerous ideology of McCarthy and his ilk than we are today to struggle with the neo-con worldview. The closest our mainstream media comes consistently and intelligently noting the emperor’s lack of clothing has to hide as comedy!

Of course, the intarweb provides a critical counterbalance, but at best, its current incarnation lets a small single-digit percentage of relatively like-minded folks stay in touch and informed. I can’t imagine the horrors of our current state without it — we’d certainly have already completed the transition to Oceania. But still, there is no way the net is (yet?) equivalent to broadcast TV in its ability to counter the prevailing message – look no further than last year’s election for proof.

The scene in the movie which shows Murrow and producer Fred Friendly agreeing to pay for the sponsor’s ads during their McCarthy-focused episode is described in further detail in the wikipedia entry:

Murrow and his See It Now co-producer, Fred Friendly, paid for their own newspaper advertisement for the program; they were not allowed to use CBS’ money for the publicity campaign or even use the CBS logo. Nonetheless, this 30-minute TV episode contributed to a nationwide backlash against McCarthy and against the Red Scare in general, and it is seen as a turning point in the history of television.

The broadcast provoked tens of thousands of letters, telegrams and phone calls to CBS headquarters, running 10 to 1 in favor of Murrow. In a Murrow retrospective produced by CBS for the A&E Network series Biography, Friendly noted how truck drivers pulled up to Murrow on the street in subsequent days and shouted “Good show, Ed. Good show, Ed.”

Can you imagine this happening now? I’m reminded, in the opposite extreme, of the part of The Corporation which profiles the Florida journalists who were driven out of their jobs for accurate, documented reporting on rBGH dangers, or of any of countless stories told in Outfoxed.

It certainly isn’t news that our watchdogs have swallowed a sedative of historic magnitude and impact. It’s terrifying, none the less. Murrow was prescient with regard to the overall trajectory TV was/is on as a media force, as well. From his 1958 speed to the Radio and Television News Directors Association:

We are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable and complacent. We have currently a built-in allergy to unpleasant or disturbing information. Our mass media reflect this. But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.

Imagine what Mr. Murrow might have said about “Who’s Your Daddy?” or “The Simple Life”.

Good luck, indeed.

 

impeach06.png

There is a portion of GWB’s Veterans’ day speech with which I think we can all agree:

…the civilized world knows very well that other fanatics in history, from Hitler to Stalin to Pol Pot, consumed whole nations in war and genocide before leaving the stage of history. Evil men, obsessed with ambition and unburdened by conscience, must be taken very seriously — and we must stop them before their crimes can multiply.

If the shoe fits, Mr. “President”…

 

Google print is yet another out-freeking-standing new tool from the google people. Literate people of the world, rejoice!

 

If you haven’t yet seen it, behold the world’s ugliest dog.

My reaction was “that’s not a dog”, though a co-worker’s impulsive “that’s not alive” seems equally likely. However, this is apparently veritable.

 

I’m astounded that JB hasn’t posted this yet. From Zogby International:

“President Bush’s televised address to the nation produced no noticeable bounce in his approval numbers, with his job approval rating slipping a point from a week ago, to 43%, in the latest Zogby International poll. And, in a sign of continuing polarization, more than two-in-five voters (42%) say they would favor impeachment proceedings if it is found the President misled the nation about his reasons for going to war with Iraq.”

 

grammar.jpeg

Generally I’m not one to fret too much about the ongoing evolution of language. Slang doesn’t bother me; in fact, I was amused and more pleased than not when “bootylicious” made the OED. I’ll generally argue on the side of communicative flexibility in questions of what’s correct (e.g. the begging of questions). And, of course, “embiggen”, “unpossible”, and “cromulent” are, well, perfectly cromulent words in my book.

I’ll admit that I find the chronic misuse of other aspects of our language more irritating. The contraction “it’s” and the possessive “its” just aren’t that hard to keep straight, and the frequency with which I see intelligent and otherwise literate-seeming people use “apostrophe’s” [sic] where none are required continues to baffle me.

I am far from a grammar or language snob, really. I’ve never been an English teacher, and my grammar skills are only passable. I’ll carelessly interchange “I’m doing good” and “I’m doing well”, for example, even though I technically know better. I struggle with “affect” vs. “effect” from time to time, and I probably don’t google for help every time I should, thus occasionally contributing to our language’s slide towards an exclusively phonetic standard of communicativeness. While I happily work with and respect many people who have a copy of Strunk & White on their desk at the office, I don’t even know which shelf contains the copy we have at home.

With all that said, I put gratuitous quotes with “its” vs. “it’s” and errant apostrophes on the list of annoying and common errors. While driving down I-94 earlier in the week, I saw a semi cab with the following painted on the back:

My way “is” the highway

Obviously, this is intended as some sort of amusing twist on “my way or the highway”. Regardless of its humor content (or lack thereof), why in the world is “is” in quotes? “Is” isn’t being discussed, as it is in this sentence. This isn’t a case of using quotes to identify an ironic use of a word (examples here). “Is” is the verb, for crying out loud!

Given the patterns this usage clearly does not fit, I can only assume that the intent of this airbrushing was emphatic, as in “My way is the highway” or “My way is the highway”.

I’ve noticed this use of quotes a fair bit lately, and I think that may have to do with the increasing use of largely plain text communications media (email, IM, text messaging). For some reason, the geek-popular _inline_ _underline_ isn’t very popular (I suppose non-geeks don’t have much use for the underscore). If plain text emphasis without underscores is the goal, I’d personally find *this* approach preferable, as it at least doesn’t overlap with other existing notation.

As I drove down I-94, thinking about the “is” situation, I remembered the sign one of the english teachers in my high school had posted in a hall-facing window every student walked by thousands of times before graduating. The sign read:

A lot is two words.

And I don’t think I’ve ever even paused to consider writing “alot”. The gratuitous quote situation could use similar handling, in my opinion. Just today I saw a sign at a retail clothing store that read:

Buy one, get one “free”

(Is it not really free?)

It’s fortunate, in times like this, that the Internet has decentralized and distributed the power once held only by high school English teachers. Now, thanks to a few minutes with the GIMP and cafepress, “you too” can help spread the word

:

quote.jpg

To start I’ve just made a 3×5″ sticker ($2.49 at cost) – I can easily make other shapes or items available if there’s interest.

 

Sorry, not that kind.

Trashpicts is mesmerizing (as read Rich’s dashlog day continues…).

 

Fresh from Rich’s dashlog, the “Star Wars Character or Hip Hop Artist” quiz. [Rich apparently has blogging standards, causing him to direct small tidbits for which he has no meaningful commentary away from his blog. This post is evidence that, despite the help of del.icio.us, I apparently have no such standards. 🙂 ]

I’m sure it will come as little surprise to anyone reading this that I scored pretty poorly on the quiz — 9 out of 20 (it was suggested that a wookie could do better).

 

woah: a lifelike android

 

The UltraSwarm project, from the University of Essex, sounds really neat:

British researchers are turning to Linux and embedded processors to build a fleet of tiny, robotic helicopters capable of swarming like angry bees and evaluating their surroundings with a single hive mind.

But wait, there’s more:

If all goes according to plan, the helicopters will communicate with one another over Bluetooth, allowing them to move as one entity, and even to carry out sophisticated computation-heavy tasks using distributed computing techniques.

“We’ll have a flock of helicopters; they will be autonomous individually and as a swarm, and they will be gathering and processing visual data in distributed way,” says Owen Holland, project director and deputy head of the university’s computer science department.

If anyone is looking for birthday ideas, an intelligent swarm of robotic helicoptors is always a nice gift…

© 2021 layer8 Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha