December 27, 2009
Moved to www.1001words.com
On the off-chance that someone is visiting this page, I moved my site to www.1001words.com.
February 10, 2008
Obama's Appeal to Republicans
I think this quote from a Republican voting for Obama captures the main reason for his crossover support:In Virginia, a Longtime Republican Votes for Change - washin...
"That was a time when we felt really good about being Americans," DeBusk said, her feet folded onto the couch in her spacious living room. "He made you feel proud to be an American. He was very patriotic, and he was able to express that in a way that people felt it. I would love that for my children, because I think we feel badly about ourselves. Every day, you're hearing they [people in the rest of the world] hate the Americans. These people hate the Americans."
February 04, 2008
Hey, Feed People
I moved to Wordpress, a different blogging suite, and my RSS feed has changed. The new one is http://www.1001words.com/feed . Visiting www.1001words.com will bring up the new site.
February 02, 2008
Okay....
I'm going to try to move my blog to a completely different publishing system. See you in a day.
Blog May Be Down
I'm going to fiddle around with the blog a little. It may be down for a day or two.
Yay for Yoono!
Yoono was exactly what I was looking for in an Internet media sharing site. I love it so far. Almost every day I see an interesting article or blog post that I want to share, but the extra step of creating a blog post to do so was enough to deter me. Yoono makes it very easy to impulsively share media on the web. You right-click or select what you want to share, select "Buzz it", type in a descriptive note if you want to, and that's pretty much it.
Here is my Yoono blog. I will add it to my sidebar soon, and likely post most of my links on here from now on. I already added a few if you want to check it out.
This is the first time in a while that I thought, "I wish there a program that did X" and found out that Program X actually exists.
Here is my Yoono blog. I will add it to my sidebar soon, and likely post most of my links on here from now on. I already added a few if you want to check it out.
This is the first time in a while that I thought, "I wish there a program that did X" and found out that Program X actually exists.
Recommendation Request
What's the best way to share the interesting things you find on the Internet?
I'm looking for a cool stuff aggregater, something that would be integrated with Firefox, allow me to add bookmarks with one click (like del.icio.us), allow me to write a description when I want to (kind of like del.icio.us), offers a recently bookmark feature that I can add to my blog page (like del.icio.us?)...
Okay, I'm going to give del.icio.us another try and see if it has what I need. I remember trying it and not being keen on the interface, so if you have another option, let me know.
Update: Yeah, del.icio.us isn't what I need. I think I found the perfect web app: Yoono. Just installed it, but it's very promising so far.
I'm looking for a cool stuff aggregater, something that would be integrated with Firefox, allow me to add bookmarks with one click (like del.icio.us), allow me to write a description when I want to (kind of like del.icio.us), offers a recently bookmark feature that I can add to my blog page (like del.icio.us?)...
Okay, I'm going to give del.icio.us another try and see if it has what I need. I remember trying it and not being keen on the interface, so if you have another option, let me know.
Update: Yeah, del.icio.us isn't what I need. I think I found the perfect web app: Yoono. Just installed it, but it's very promising so far.
February 01, 2008
Non-live Debate Blogging, Part 2
Anyone else watch the debate between Clinton and Obama? I'm not sure how many more Democratic debates there will be, but you can watch them online at the sponsoring network's web site if you don't have cable.
Both of them had very strong performances in what was a pleasantly civil debate. The moderators asked some good questions, a few of which should have been asked 10 debates ago, but late is better than never.
The only slight downside is that Wolf Blitzer would occasionally egg on Obama and Clinton to attack each other. "Senator Clinton, that sounds like a swipe at you from Senator Obama. Care to respond?" I think his salary is based in part how much the candidates fight on stage. The O.C. did well at brushing off Blitzer's rhetorical equivalents of "Fight, fight, fight!"
It's very possible that before Clinton laughs, the command center director in her head saying: "We got a joke from the moderator. Processing. Okay. Optimal response calculated. Prepare laughter. Open mouth, smile--not too much. Perfect. Engage laughter units!"
It doesn't matter because even if it's somewhat calculated, it still goes leaps and bounds into making her more likable. She was as warm and as easy going as she can be, and her biggest gain from the night was easing some of the enmity her abrasive campaign style generated in the past few weeks.
Obama isn't as good of a debater as Clinton, so it was an accomplishment that he did as well as she did in this debate. Obama is a cerebral guy, and unfortunately has trouble articulating his intellectual and political philosophy in easy-to-understand snippets. That's his fault though. Most of what I know about the way he thinks is from articles about him or extended interviews with him, not from what he says at debates, which unfairly or not is the primary exposure most Americans will have to him before voting.
That's why many people think he's vague or unsubstantive. His arguments for his candidacy and way of thinking aren't as sharp as they could be, to the point where sometimes I felt I could argue his case better than he could.
But he crystallized some of the ideas behind his candidacy and delivered them in a way that would connect with more voters in this debate.
There were several examples of this, the best perhaps when he was criticizing both Clinton and McCain: "I don't want to just end the war, I want to end the mindset that got us here in the first place.”
The nerd in me also applauded when he finally mentioned in a debate his idea to broadcast his health care plan negotiations on C-SPAN. Clinton scoffed, although she is probably right to do so as I don't know he will get Congress and the insurance industry to agree to have their meetings open to the public. It's a nice thought though, and I'm glad he suggested it in such a public forum.
His answer on the type of people he wants in his cabinet cheered me, because it goes to the heart of how he thinks: "...people with independence, who are willing to say no to me so, so that, you know, no more yes-men or women in the White House. Because I'm not going to be right on every single issue."
The ability to realize you can be wrong is one of the hallmarks of a skeptical thinker. Is that a critical trait for a good President? Probably not if the President is intellectually strong in other ways, as Clinton is, but being open to the possibility of being incorrect does take a certain lack of ego, which is a little surprising to find in someone who aspires to be the most powerful person in America.
In short, it was an odd debate where both candidates came out looking a little better than when they came in.
On a related note, the last question to them was, "Would they consider a Clinton\Obama or a Obama\Clinton ticket?" The audience cheered wildly. Most commentators poo-pooh the idea, citing the animosity the two candidates have against each other as a deal-breaker.
I agree that it won't happen, but not because of personal dislike. Enemies can turn to friends instantly in politics, especially when it's personally advantageous to both parties. I'm sure Ted Kennedy and President Bush dislike each other, but they had no problem working with each other on No Child Left Behind. John Edwards ran against John Kerry in 2004 and ended up being his VP candidate.
The reason I can't see it happening is that they're worldviews are very different from each other. Clinton believes in top-down government. Obama bottom-up. While by the end they will be able to overcome the bad blood between the two, they still aren't going to click as people because they don't have enough in common with how they view the world. I don't see either of them willing to put up with that sort of personal awkwardness for 4-8 years.
Both of them had very strong performances in what was a pleasantly civil debate. The moderators asked some good questions, a few of which should have been asked 10 debates ago, but late is better than never.
The only slight downside is that Wolf Blitzer would occasionally egg on Obama and Clinton to attack each other. "Senator Clinton, that sounds like a swipe at you from Senator Obama. Care to respond?" I think his salary is based in part how much the candidates fight on stage. The O.C. did well at brushing off Blitzer's rhetorical equivalents of "Fight, fight, fight!"
It's very possible that before Clinton laughs, the command center director in her head saying: "We got a joke from the moderator. Processing. Okay. Optimal response calculated. Prepare laughter. Open mouth, smile--not too much. Perfect. Engage laughter units!"
It doesn't matter because even if it's somewhat calculated, it still goes leaps and bounds into making her more likable. She was as warm and as easy going as she can be, and her biggest gain from the night was easing some of the enmity her abrasive campaign style generated in the past few weeks.
Obama isn't as good of a debater as Clinton, so it was an accomplishment that he did as well as she did in this debate. Obama is a cerebral guy, and unfortunately has trouble articulating his intellectual and political philosophy in easy-to-understand snippets. That's his fault though. Most of what I know about the way he thinks is from articles about him or extended interviews with him, not from what he says at debates, which unfairly or not is the primary exposure most Americans will have to him before voting.
That's why many people think he's vague or unsubstantive. His arguments for his candidacy and way of thinking aren't as sharp as they could be, to the point where sometimes I felt I could argue his case better than he could.
But he crystallized some of the ideas behind his candidacy and delivered them in a way that would connect with more voters in this debate.
There were several examples of this, the best perhaps when he was criticizing both Clinton and McCain: "I don't want to just end the war, I want to end the mindset that got us here in the first place.”
The nerd in me also applauded when he finally mentioned in a debate his idea to broadcast his health care plan negotiations on C-SPAN. Clinton scoffed, although she is probably right to do so as I don't know he will get Congress and the insurance industry to agree to have their meetings open to the public. It's a nice thought though, and I'm glad he suggested it in such a public forum.
His answer on the type of people he wants in his cabinet cheered me, because it goes to the heart of how he thinks: "...people with independence, who are willing to say no to me so, so that, you know, no more yes-men or women in the White House. Because I'm not going to be right on every single issue."
The ability to realize you can be wrong is one of the hallmarks of a skeptical thinker. Is that a critical trait for a good President? Probably not if the President is intellectually strong in other ways, as Clinton is, but being open to the possibility of being incorrect does take a certain lack of ego, which is a little surprising to find in someone who aspires to be the most powerful person in America.
In short, it was an odd debate where both candidates came out looking a little better than when they came in.
On a related note, the last question to them was, "Would they consider a Clinton\Obama or a Obama\Clinton ticket?" The audience cheered wildly. Most commentators poo-pooh the idea, citing the animosity the two candidates have against each other as a deal-breaker.
I agree that it won't happen, but not because of personal dislike. Enemies can turn to friends instantly in politics, especially when it's personally advantageous to both parties. I'm sure Ted Kennedy and President Bush dislike each other, but they had no problem working with each other on No Child Left Behind. John Edwards ran against John Kerry in 2004 and ended up being his VP candidate.
The reason I can't see it happening is that they're worldviews are very different from each other. Clinton believes in top-down government. Obama bottom-up. While by the end they will be able to overcome the bad blood between the two, they still aren't going to click as people because they don't have enough in common with how they view the world. I don't see either of them willing to put up with that sort of personal awkwardness for 4-8 years.
January 31, 2008
Non-live Debate Blogging, Part 1
Best blog comment on the Obama\Clinton debate comes from Josh Marshall of TPM:
"8:08 PM ... What GOP operative masterminded holding this debate at the Kodak theater with a bunch of movie stars in the audience?"
Seriously. What was the venue decision meeting like?
CNN PRODUCER: "Here's what I'm going to do for you. You tell me where you want to hold the Republican presidential debate, and we'll do it."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Anywhere? Wow. Even the Ronald Reagan library?"
CNN PRODUCER: "You got it. What else do you want?"
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Uh...midway through the debate, could you bring out one of Reagan's diaries, so we can further worship Our Savior and Holy Father?"
CNN PRODUCER: "I'm going to do you one better. Not only will we bring out one of Reagan's diaries, I'll program Anderson Cooper to say "I'm a little too nervous to actually even touch it, but that is Ronald Reagan's original diary."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Program?"
CNN PRODUCER: "Yeah. He's a robot. That's why his hair is white. Silicone gets like that in a sun."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Wow. Well, thank you. This is so much more than I expected."
CNN PRODUCER: "Whoa, hold on there. We're not done yet. Where do you want to hold the Democratic presidential debate?"
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Are you being serious?"
CNN PRODUCER: "Yeah. Shoot."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Okay. I'll play along. I want you to have the debate...in Hollywood. In the Kodak theater, where they hold the Academy Awards. Oh, and no regular people in the first 10 rows. Just rich, obnoxious Hollywood celebrities whose very countenance will remind middle America of the phrase 'Hollywood liberal.' "
CNN PRODUCER: "As good as done." [yells] "Cooper-Bot, get in here!"
ANDERSON COOPER-BOT: "YES, MASTER."
CNN PRODUCER: "Cooper-Bot, you're going to the Reagan library, Before you go, tell Wolf-Bot he's going to Hollywood. And make sure he's loaded his Obnoxious Goading sub-routine. If he doesn't start a fight between Clinton and Obama, he's scrapped."
ANDERSON COOPER-BOT: "RIGHT AWAY, MASTER."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Wow. Robot technology has progressed so far in 30 years."
CNN PRODUCER: "You've seen a robot before?"
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Hello? Reagan fan here."
"8:08 PM ... What GOP operative masterminded holding this debate at the Kodak theater with a bunch of movie stars in the audience?"
Seriously. What was the venue decision meeting like?
CNN PRODUCER: "Here's what I'm going to do for you. You tell me where you want to hold the Republican presidential debate, and we'll do it."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Anywhere? Wow. Even the Ronald Reagan library?"
CNN PRODUCER: "You got it. What else do you want?"
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Uh...midway through the debate, could you bring out one of Reagan's diaries, so we can further worship Our Savior and Holy Father?"
CNN PRODUCER: "I'm going to do you one better. Not only will we bring out one of Reagan's diaries, I'll program Anderson Cooper to say "I'm a little too nervous to actually even touch it, but that is Ronald Reagan's original diary."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Program?"
CNN PRODUCER: "Yeah. He's a robot. That's why his hair is white. Silicone gets like that in a sun."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Wow. Well, thank you. This is so much more than I expected."
CNN PRODUCER: "Whoa, hold on there. We're not done yet. Where do you want to hold the Democratic presidential debate?"
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Are you being serious?"
CNN PRODUCER: "Yeah. Shoot."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Okay. I'll play along. I want you to have the debate...in Hollywood. In the Kodak theater, where they hold the Academy Awards. Oh, and no regular people in the first 10 rows. Just rich, obnoxious Hollywood celebrities whose very countenance will remind middle America of the phrase 'Hollywood liberal.' "
CNN PRODUCER: "As good as done." [yells] "Cooper-Bot, get in here!"
ANDERSON COOPER-BOT: "YES, MASTER."
CNN PRODUCER: "Cooper-Bot, you're going to the Reagan library, Before you go, tell Wolf-Bot he's going to Hollywood. And make sure he's loaded his Obnoxious Goading sub-routine. If he doesn't start a fight between Clinton and Obama, he's scrapped."
ANDERSON COOPER-BOT: "RIGHT AWAY, MASTER."
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Wow. Robot technology has progressed so far in 30 years."
CNN PRODUCER: "You've seen a robot before?"
REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE: "Hello? Reagan fan here."
Well Done, Mr. Toles
Tom Toles gets one last lick in on Rudy Giuliani, the only presidential candidate to use actual 9/11 footage in his campaign videos.
January 30, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)