This things I believe

Facebook wars

Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:17:27 GMT

My non-epic battle with Facebook continues. After being told by a customer disservice rep via e-mail about a month ago that my account would not be reactivated, I took the next step: I actually filed a complaint via the Better Business Bureau of Silicon Valley. I received a letter today from the BBB telling me that FB (which is a member of the Bureau) did not respond to my complaints despite two requests from the BBB to do so.

I'm still ticked off over the whole thing and need to figure out what to do next.

Beefy

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 22:40:29 GMT

Truth in advertising.

More handiwork of our would-be vice commander-in-chief Sarah Palin

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:47:15 GMT

From this article: McCain has cited her authority over the Alaska National Guard as one example [of her experience]. But in a memo last spring, Air Force Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell warned that "missions are at risk" in the state's units because of a personnel shortage. The lack of qualified airmen, Campbell said, "has reached a crisis level."

In an interview on Wednesday with The Associated Press, Campbell said the situation has improved since then, but not enough to eliminate his concern that shortages will result in "the burnout of troops."

The joys of abstinence-only sex ed

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:24:12 GMT

In an interview with Salon.com, Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, aka Kos from Daily Kos, makes an excellent observation about the pregnancy of Sarah Palin's daughter. The emphasis is mine.

Do you think Barack Obama responded correctly to Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy?

Yeah, of course. It's not his job to be digging into that. If the Republicans are going to be all high and mighty about people digging into the lives of candidates' families, all I can do is laugh, given the treatment that Michelle Obama has been given by Republicans -- maybe not John McCain proper, but every surrogate beneath him.

Ultimately, when it comes to Bristol Palin, the issue isn't, oh well, she's a bad girl. We're progressives; we don't care if she got pregnant. That's between her and her family and she's got to deal with it; and in fact, progressives believe in having the services available to make her life better and to help her in what's going to be a very, very difficult journey ahead. The issue is, of course, that Sarah Palin is a strong supporter of abstinence-only education. Here we have a situation where they claim that abstinence-only will prevent teen pregnancy when her own daughter has gotten pregnant. There are legitimate policy questions that go beyond the fact of Bristol Palin to the kind of governor [Palin] would be, the way she would help govern this country were she the vice president. And I think that is obviously, legitimately fair game.

What is a "community organizer"?

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:29:36 GMT

So you may have heard that Sarah Palin and Rudy Guiliani made light of Barack Obama's experience as a "community organizer." Here's a blog entry that poses the question, "Why are they doing it?" It doesn't give an answer, mind, but it does give a good explanation of what Obama did in that role -- and points out that Palin's previous jobs included "beauty queen" and "sports reporter."

An excerpt (and the emphasis is mine):
Now, the truth is that, starting at age 23, Obama ran a faith-based charity called the Developing Communities Project.

It was made up of eight Catholic parishes when he got there and had one staff member. He was its director, meaning he was in charge. He made decisions about it, including staffing, budgets, etc. And when he left in 1988 to go to law school, he had grown its budget from $70,000 to $400,000, its staff from 1 to 13 people. More important, he created a job training program for this community and a college prep tutoring program.

As mayor, [Palin] built a hockey rink/rec center using eminent domain (because apparently there just isn't enough land in Alaska).

Oh brother ...

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:36:56 GMT

And God said, "Let there be a gas pipeline." At least, that's what Sarah Palin heard in her pretty little head, apparently.

Palin: Iraq war 'a task that is from God,' gas pipeline 'God's will'
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told ministry students at her former church that the United States sent troops to fight in the Iraq war on a "task that is from God."

In an address last June, the Republican vice presidential candidate also urged ministry students to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it "God's will."

Palin asked the students to pray for the troops in Iraq, and noted that her eldest son, Track, was expected to be deployed there.

"Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God," she said. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan."

A video of the speech was posted at the Wasilla Assembly of God's Web site before finding its way on to other sites on the Internet.

Palin told graduating students of the church's School of Ministry, "What I need to do is strike a deal with you guys." As they preached the love of Jesus throughout Alaska, she said, she'd work to implement God's will from the governor's office, including creating jobs by building a pipeline to bring North Slope natural gas to North American markets.

"God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.

"I can do my job there in developing our natural resources and doing things like getting the roads paved and making sure our troopers have their cop cars and their uniforms and their guns, and making sure our public schools are funded," she added. "But really all of that stuff doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."

Palin attended the evangelical church from the time she was a teenager until 2002, the church said in a statement posted on its Web site. She has continued to attend special conferences and meetings there. Religious conservatives have welcomed her selection as John McCain's running mate.

The Assemblies of God, which claims nearly 3 million members, is one of the biggest Pentecostal groups in the U.S. Unlike most other Christians — including most evangelicals — Pentecostals believe in "baptism in the Holy Spirit." That can manifest itself through speaking in tongues, modern-day prophesy and faith healing. The Assemblies of God teaches that spirit baptism must be accompanied by speaking in tongues. Still, some churchgoers never have the experience.

Rob Boston, a spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, lamented Palin's comments.

"I miss the days when pastors delivered sermons and politicians delivered political speeches," he said. "The United States is increasingly diverse religiously. The job of a president is to unify all those different people and bring them together around policy goals, not to act as a kind of national pastor and bring people to God."

The section of the church's Web site where videos of past sermons were posted was shut down Wednesday, and a message was posted saying that the site "was never intended to handle the traffic it has received in the last few days."

John McCain is all about warrantless wiretapping

Fri, 06 Jun 2008 17:21:36 GMT

Been a while since I talked about anything political here on LJ (or posted, for that matter) but thought this article from the NYT warranted sharing. Seems Mr. McCain believes that the president's warrantless wiretapping is find and dandy and totally lawful -- and if you disagree, you must be a trial lawyer or part of the ACLU.

Text behind the cut...

Adviser Says McCain Backs Bush Wiretaps
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
WASHINGTON — A top adviser to Senator John McCain says Mr. McCain believes that President Bush’s program of wiretapping without warrants was lawful, a position that appears to bring him into closer alignment with the sweeping theories of executive authority pushed by the Bush administration legal team.

In a letter posted online by National Review this week, the adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, said Mr. McCain believed that the Constitution gave Mr. Bush the power to authorize the National Security Agency to monitor Americans’ international phone calls and e-mail without warrants, despite a 1978 federal statute that required court oversight of surveillance.

Mr. McCain believes that “neither the administration nor the telecoms need apologize for actions that most people, except for the A.C.L.U. and trial lawyers, understand were constitutional and appropriate in the wake of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001,” Mr. Holtz-Eakin wrote.

And if Mr. McCain is elected president, Mr. Holtz-Eakin added, he would do everything he could to prevent terrorist attacks, “including asking the telecoms for appropriate assistance to collect intelligence against foreign threats to the United States as authorized by Article II of the Constitution.”

Although a spokesman for Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, denied that the senator’s views on surveillance and executive power had shifted, legal specialists said the letter contrasted with statements Mr. McCain previously made about the limits of presidential power.

In an interview about his views on the limits of executive power with The Boston Globe six months ago, Mr. McCain strongly suggested that if he became the next commander in chief, he would consider himself obligated to obey a statute restricting what he did in national security matters.

Mr. McCain was asked whether he believed that the president had constitutional power to conduct surveillance on American soil for national security purposes without a warrant, regardless of federal statutes.

He replied: “There are some areas where the statutes don’t apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications. Where they do apply, however, I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is.”

Following up, the interviewer asked whether Mr. McCain was saying a statute trumped a president’s powers as commander in chief when it came to a surveillance law. “I don’t think the president has the right to disobey any law,” Mr. McCain replied.

David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive power issues, said that while the language used by Mr. McCain in his answers six months ago was imprecise, the recent statement by Mr. Holtz-Eakin “seems to contradict precisely what he said earlier.”

Mr. McCain’s position, as outlined by Mr. Holtz-Eakin, was criticized by the campaign of his presumptive Democratic opponent in the presidential election, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois. Greg Craig, an Obama campaign adviser, said Wednesday that anyone reading Mr. McCain’s answers to The Globe and the more recent statement would be “totally confused” about “what Senator McCain thinks about what the Constitution means and what President Bush did.”

“American voters deserve to know which side of this flip-flop he’s on today, and what he would do as president,” Mr. Craig said in a phone interview.

Tucker Bounds, a McCain campaign spokesman, said Mr. McCain’s position on surveillance laws and executive power “has not changed.”

“John McCain has been an unequivocal advocate of pursuing the radicals and extremists who seek to attack Americans,” Mr. Bounds wrote in an e-mail message, adding that Mr. McCain’s “votes and positions have been completely consistent and any suggestion otherwise is a distortion of his clear record.”

Asked whether the views Mr. Holtz-Eakin imputed to Mr. McCain were inaccurate, Mr. Bounds did not repudiate the statement. But late Thursday Mr. Bounds called and said, “to the extent that the comments of members of our staff are misinterpreted, they shouldn’t be read into as anything otherwise.”

Neither Mr. McCain nor Mr. Holtz-Eakin, a former head of the Congressional Budget Office who primarily advises the campaign on economic issues, was available for comment, Mr. Bounds said.

Mr. McCain has long distanced himself from the Bush administration on legal issues involving detention and interrogation in the fight against terrorism, an approach that has sometimes aroused suspicion among conservative supporters of the Bush administration.

But more recently, as Mr. McCain has worked to consolidate his party’s base, he has taken several positions that have won him praise from his former critics while drawing fire from Democrats.

In February, for example, Mr. McCain voted against limiting the Central Intelligence Agency to the techniques approved in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation, which complies with the Geneva Conventions. Mr. McCain said the C.I.A. needed the flexibility to use other techniques so long as it did not abuse detainees.

He also voted for legislation that would free telecommunications companies from lawsuits alleging that they illegally allowed the N.S.A. to eavesdrop on their customers’ phone calls and e-mail without a warrant. The legislation would also essentially legalize a form of surveillance without warrants going forward.

But Mr. McCain had previously stopped short of endorsing the view that Mr. Bush’s program of surveillance without warrants was lawful all along because a president’s wartime powers can trump statutory limits.

Andrew C. McCarthy, a National Review columnist who has defended the administration’s legal theories, wrote that Mr. Holtz-Eakin’s statement “implicitly shows Senator McCain’s thinking has changed as time has gone on and he has educated himself on this issue.”

And Glenn Greenwald, a Salon columnist and critic of the Bush administration’s legal claims, wrote that the statement was a “complete reversal” by Mr. McCain, accusing the candidate of seeking “to shore up the support of right-wing extremists.”

The reaction to Mr. Holtz-Eakin’s statement is the latest link in a chain of disputes over Mr. McCain’s positions on surveillance over the past two weeks.

On May 23, the McCain campaign sent a volunteer lawyer, Chuck Fish, to be the candidate’s surrogate at a conference on computer policy. Mr. Fish spoke at a panel discussion on whether phone and Internet companies should be granted immunity from lawsuits for having helped Mr. Bush’s surveillance program.

Mr. Fish suggested that Mr. McCain wanted to impose conditions — like Congressional hearings — that would ensure that such “forgiveness” would not signal that the telecoms should feel free to disregard communications privacy laws in the future if a president tells them to.

After Wired magazine wrote about Mr. Fish’s remarks on its blog, raising the question of whether Mr. McCain’s position had become more skeptical about immunity, the McCain campaign put out a statement saying that Mr. Fish was mistaken. Mr. McCain supported ending the lawsuits without conditions and his position had not changed, the campaign said.

On May 29, The Washington Post quoted Mr. Holtz-Eakin as saying that Mr. McCain did not want the telecoms “put into this position again” and that “there must be clear guidelines for their participation and sufficient vetting” in any future situation.

Mr. Holtz-Eakin’s comments in turn drew fire from Mr. McCarthy. In a blog posting on the National Review Web site, he demanded to know whether Mr. McCain believes the Constitution authorizes a president to lawfully go “arguably beyond what is prescribed in a statute” during a national security crisis.

Mr. Holtz-Eakin laid out Mr. McCain’s position on the president’s claimed constitutional powers to bypass surveillance laws in a letter to Mr. McCarthy, who this week called the statement “extremely significant” and said it “marks a welcome evolution on the senator’s thinking about executive power.”

Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:55:59 GMT

The various birthday and holiday gifts I've purchased for friends and family are slowly pouring in -- and they're all wrapped! Amazon had a special through which they'd wrap gifts for 99 cents a pop. I was happy to pay that amount. They certainly look nicer than they would have had I wrapped them.

So now I have yet another reason to prefer shopping on Amazon instead of going to the mall.

Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:54:56 GMT

Pumpkin's developed a lovely new morning routine. She likes to go out in the yard to do her bidness, which is fine and dandy in that it reduces litterbox shoveling doodies.

But then she'll find something -- a leaf or a bit of greenery -- and eat it. Then she'll come in and, shortly thereafter, upchuck. And while I'm not one to inspect feline vomit too carefully, I can also see the foreign substance that no doubt prompted the pukage.

Note to self: Remove all leaves and rogue greenery from yard.

Important cat-versation

Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:05:04 GMT

Boooooo!

Fri, 19 Oct 2007 05:05:48 GMT

You Are a Ghost

Mysterious, independent, and often unseen - you always do things your own way.
You are introverted, shy, and even a little secretive.
People are dying to know you better, but you're a difficult person to know.
A lot of your contributions to the world are left invisible and unfelt.

Your greatest power: Blending in really well

Your greatest weakness: Being too passive

You play well with: Witches

What Kind of Monster Are You?

Public service announcement

Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:28:33 GMT

How to make an LJ-Cut

Online quizzes are so smart!

Sun, 09 Sep 2007 01:21:28 GMT

You Are a Log Ride

You prefer to live a fairly calm, relaxed life... with a few surprises thrown in.
You don't tend to get yourself worked up easily. You can roll with what life throws at you.
In relationships, you are steady and solid. You maintain a pretty broad perspective on what's going on.
That's not to say you can't get swept away. You're emotions run as deep as anyone else's.

Your life seems like it has been remarkably easy so far. But that's due to how you manage it.
You never stretch yourself too thinly, and you think out your decisions carefully.
Taking the time to enjoy each day is important to you, and you don't let your emotions rule you.
You stay the course and do what's right... knowing it will all work out in the end.

At your best, you are tolerant and understanding of other people's quirks.
You take "go with the flow" to the extreme. Even if you don't like where you're going.
At your worst, you repress your feelings and end up being a little tightly wound.
You definitely have some explosive emotions that occasionally come to the surface!

What Carnival Ride Are You?

Fri, 07 Sep 2007 02:09:36 GMT

View Poll: #1051393

The REAL Rudy: Command Center

Thu, 06 Sep 2007 21:13:11 GMT

Well, people who still support Bush will not doubt be thrilled with how Rudy prepares for and handles emergencies.

Pope preaches green

Tue, 04 Sep 2007 01:44:44 GMT

I was pleasantly amazed to read last night that the pope has called on his followers to be better stewards of the planet. He gave a sermon (homily?) about it the other day to a huge gathering of followers in Italy, and the Vatican even handed out "biodegradable plates, recycling bags for their trash and a hand-cranked cell-phone recharger."

It doesn't end there: According to the article, "the Vatican ... has joined a reforestation project aimed at offsetting its CO2 emissions, and has also said it was installing solar cells on the roof of its main auditorium."

I emphasize that bit about the CO2 emissions, because I didn't think devout Christians bought into the theory of global warming. The fact that the Vatican is concerned gives me hope that those who've scoffed at the idea for religious reasons will think again.

Mon, 03 Sep 2007 21:56:17 GMT

Amazing what a difference a day makes. I've been struggling with Chase for a while now, actually, about fees that I thought were unfair. I tried to e-mail them and, last night, to call them, and I kept meeting indifference and nonchalance. Exasperated, I decided today that I would just close out all of my cards. I phoned them and got an account minion. I told him I wanted to cancel my account. He immediately transferred me to a specialist. Ooh! You know they were serious. I told the specialist what my beef was, and within two minutes, he credited all my fees.

Really, that was all I wanted in the first place. I guess most people out there aren't willing to play "hardball," are intimidated by credit card companies, or are willing to endure crappy service. Whatever. I win.

Unfortunately, I see no way to get any similar satisfaction from IKEA. They still suck.

Mon, 03 Sep 2007 18:20:39 GMT

I stopped at Macy's over the weekend and was floored to see that they already had decorated Christmas trees on display. I know it's cliche to observe, but ... isn't it a bit early for Christmas?

Customer service, shmustomer shmervice

Mon, 03 Sep 2007 09:34:21 GMT

What the hell is happening with corporate customer service these days?

Let's start with Chase. I have automatic payment set up on my credit-card account, yet for whatever reason, I've gotten slapped with finance charge fees on a relatively new card. I tried e-mailing, requesting a waive, and got no satisfaction. Then I called today and complained. The person I spoke to simply said she couldn't waive the fees. I said that if they don't waive the fees, I'll cancel my card. And that had no affect. She made no attempt to sway me to stay. She seemed entirely unapologetic about it. So, it's cancelled. Crazy, no?

Meanwhile, IKEA continues to be a pain in the ass as I try in earnest to get those last few gosh-darn parts for my kitchen! Their system is ridiculous, as I've mentioned. They have a record my back-order. There's even a number associated with it. Yet they can't, or won't, contact me when items are available. Rather, I need to keep calling, and they'll say, "Oh, well, it looks like this part will be ready week 33 and this one week 40. Try back then." I call back, "Oh, this will in week 42, and this week 45." It's ridiculous. And again, they just don't seem to care.

Miss Teen USA 2007 - South Carolina answers a question

Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:33:14 GMT

I thought it was just our education system.

Family Guy - Bill Clinton plays Dance Dance Revolution

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 07:24:50 GMT

Go, Bill!

Sun, 26 Aug 2007 13:24:22 GMT

6:22 a.m. I haven't slept all night. That's not healthy, is it? Granted, I did get to bed very late last night (or, more accurately, early this morning), but still. I was already on a screwy sleep cycle when I was going to sleep at 3.

Too much on my mind, I guess. Work. Dating. Improv. Scrabble.

Sigh.

Back on the improv stage

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 20:10:24 GMT

At long last, I'm making a (hopefully) triumphant return to the improvisation stage this evening at the local theater where I took classes a while back. The head of the theater invited me to do a brief monologue at the midpoint of the show -- plus it looks like I'll get to be in a scene later in the evening, too.

I'm actually a bit nervous about this one, mostly because the monologue is supposed to be true, inspired by a random work I'll be getting from the audience. I think making up something would be easier than coming up with a memory on the spot that relates to a random word. I'm already "cheating" by sifting through my memories for potentially interesting and entertaining scenes from my life.

Of course, I could embellish or make up something if need be, I suppose. Like the time I was abducted by those hot alien chicks from the planet Orgasmia. Good times.

Tue, 21 Aug 2007 22:40:48 GMT

Attention PR minions of Earth:

I have some more valuable tips for you today as to how to more effectively do your job. (Notably, I am working under the assumption that you wish for members of the media to write about the companies you're being paid to publicize.)

1. If you invite a member of the media to an event and say that you will be sending over additional information shortly, do send that information. That way, said member of the media will be able to determine if he or she wants to and is able to attend.

2. If you fail to send the information and the member of the media sends you and your colleagues requests for said information, do not wait more than 24 hours to provide it.

3. If you must wait 24 hours to provide information, be certain to at least send it before the event is to begin. That way, if there is, for example, a Webcast, the media member might watch it when it goes live.

4. If you end up responding to the media member's repeated requests for information well after the event had ended, apologize for your negligence and provide more than just a URL.

Thank you.

Tue, 21 Aug 2007 04:41:59 GMT

A random woman on Match contacted me. It was a two sentence message, along the lines of "Great profile. Very funny." So I took at peek at hers. And lo, among her various pictures, there was one where she was wearing a t-shirt that reads "If you can't stand behind our troops, stand in FRONT of them."

So, does that translate do "If you don't support the war, you deserve to be shot"?

Whatever, the case, I really can't stand that type of "if you don't agree with me, you deserve to die" kind of rhetoric.