one week

I don’t know if I’ve been putting off writing this, but certainly I haven’t had the energy for it.

Not sure whether to build up with lots of drama, or just say it. So, I’m pretty much just gonna say it.

So last week I was robbed. At gunpoint, semi-automatic handgun. My wallet and phone were stolen.

It happened pretty fast, but it’s amazing how many times you replay that over and over and over. And over.

I’m fine, although still short two replacement credit cards and an ATM card. My Wash U ID and Wal-Mart gift card probably are gone for good. I know, serves me right for having a Wal-Mart gift card.

I’m not sure how to explain it, but it’s a little difficult to talk about. Something just so raw and vulnerable about it. You know it’s dumb, but nonetheless, it is. Julie was asking how I was feeling, and this is what I wrote back to her: I'm annoyed. frustrated. saddened. embarrassed. alone. It's really lonely between a wall and a gun.

I can describe the scene pretty well, what we did that evening and what happened during those couple minutes. But making it personal is hard.

Fortunately I’m ok and they ditched most of the wallet, which a security guard at the arch found. Julie and I had gone to dinner, and while she was upset that she wasn’t with me at the time, I’m really glad she wasn’t. Things could have potentially turned out much worse.

three weeks

So my boss mentioned last night it's three weeks until Christmas.

Where does the time go?

numbers fun

I had a couple different thoughts, but they both involve somewhat rather random numbers which I nonetheless find interesting this afternoon as I settle into the Chiefs game and putting off errands I should have run yesterday.

First, on the topic of football, I think it is becoming increasingly clear that the NFL this season is substantially less interesting than the baseball season was. Now, I’m a big baseball fan, so personally that’s my opinion most years, but I recognize that football is generally perceived as the prime American sport. This year, however, is downright boring. There are good teams and bad teams, and we knew them very early on, and frankly, there’s little anticipation that anything exciting is going to happen. I was checking ESPN’s predictions for this week, where they have eight commentators and one computer calculation choose who they think will win. Of the 16 games playing this weekend, only 5 had a 4/5 or 3/6 split. 9 out of the 16 were unanimous consensus picks – a whopping 56%. I checked last week, and of the 7 unanimous picks, 6 won. Combine that with the fact that there are NFC teams with losing records in the playoff hunt, and you’re just thankful for college football. Wait, scratch that, we’ve known all season Ohio State and USC would meet in the Rose Bowl. That’s what happens when you root for Notre Dame, Michigan travels to Columbus, and you have roommates from Texas and Florida. Oh, did I leave out Arkansas and Boise State? Cry me a river.

The other thing is quite happy. It’s been roughly two years now since I was at DFC (financial services), and my retirement account hit a fun but totally arbitrary milestone. It topped $5K! I suspect that will about buy me a new pair of glasses and lunch at McDonald’s by the time I’m 90, but that’s the point. The principal won’t get you very far; you need lots of investment return to outpace inflation. And spoil the grandkids with fancy new plasma holoscreens. According to Quicken, if I’ve put in all the data correctly, my Roth has netted an annualized 15.6% over the last two years. Not too shabby.

As a general not-so-gentle nudge, if $5,000 sounds like a lot of money, put more money into your retirement account. Now.

It was really eye-opening meeting people and person and after person, a difficult but solvable issue was how to save. A much more difficult issue which many hadn’t even really thought about solving was procrastination. So many people I met knew it was important, and wanted to be saving; they just hadn’t started (there's always next year...). And of course, I’m in the same boat. I had some fun playing around with my car money in college (Ameritrade is great fun), but I didn’t start saving long-term until I was actually working in financial services.

Don’t be a slacker :)

go outside right now

Listen to springtime! Walk down a street lined with trees, look at the sunshine illuminating everything clear and snowy. And listen. Listen to the ice melting off the trees, pelting puddle and car and human.

there needs to be a number to call

(R) There are times where I miss having my falling apart Chevy Cavalier. In that thing, I didn't care if I got in an accident. There wasn't much paint remaining to be scraped off anyhow. Other drivers watched out for me.

This morning, there was not one but two jerks who really deserved a nice scratch down their cars. Interestingly, they were both Illinois drivers, so I guess I can't blame St. Louisans today.

Now, I know people run stop signs and yellow lights here. But this is ridiculous. The van turning left in front of us ran the red light. Then, the, uh, gentleman in the fancy car ran the red light behind the van running the red light. So we've got three lanes of traffic staring at a green light while two vehicles sit out in the intersection. Yes, that's right; they couldn't clear the intersection. They ran a red light when the street onto which they were turning wasn't even clear. Those pesky pedestrians, walking when they have a walk sign.

So then Illinois car number two pulls up a few stoplights later in the right lane. The right lane in this part of town turns into street parking, so traffic has to merge into the middle or left lanes. This guy, though, thought he'd skip the merging line and raced right to where the cars park. Instead of merging, he decided to just swerve into my lane and keep driving. 1988 Cavalier with falling ceiling and rusting exterior would have let him hit it. And don't think this guy was ignorant of what would happen. He turned into the AG Edwards parking garage a block later, which is not a public garage. He probably does that every day.

Until he meets a car with 200,000 miles on it with which the driver is ready to part ways.

the ridiculousness continues

It's football time. Do you know what the means?

Get ready for stem cell ads! Apparently the group Do No Harm, which has backing from some members of the President's Council on Bioethics, has put together a nice little post-election spot. The scene is in a lobby or cafe kind of place in a hospital or clinic. You see a trustworthy looking woman in nursing scrubs walking to the table talking about stem cell research. Someone else is on her laptop at the table, reading off the football score. 72 for adult stem cells, 0 for embryonic stem cells (despite decades of research, of course).

The woman in scrubs gives the SCNT is human cloning line, then, the money shot.

Woman (with authoritative expert tone): You remember Dolly the sheep? It's the same process.

Man (with glasses, overhearing from next table, in a caring, concerned voice): You mean they want to clone human beings?

Oh, snap. We caught you now evil scientists. It's bad enough you don't support productive adult stem cell research but do support the shut out, baby-killing embryonic stem cell research. You just want to clone human beings!

Let's see, how was Dolly born? She must have been grown in a petri dish.

Here's the website they leave at the end of the ad.

Oh, wait, you mean Dolly was born by a sheep, not in a test tube? You mean scientists do support adult stem cell research? You mean there have been lots of barriers enacted to prevent embryonic stem cell research, barriers not faced in examining adult stem cells? You mean there are hundreds of thousands of fertilized embryos lying around and many more that have already been killed?

Shh, don't upset anybody with nuanced thought. Embryonic stem cell research = Dolly the sheep. That's all you need to know.

conservative free trade at its finest

It's almost cliched to talk about all the ways the conservative movement yaks about free enterprise and competition and then does everything it can to make markets unfree.

But I found this one particularly interesting. Apparently in Louisianna and Oklahoma, the states have passed laws banning the use of names of armed forces personnel who have been killed in combat on products like t-shirts and bumper stickers. There have been two bills introduced into the House this year to ban such products nationwide.

Apparently, it's ok for Fox News to use public airwaves to say whatever misleading things they want, but a t-shirt manufacturer can't sell a t-shirt saying Bush Lied, They Died.

Of course, these lovely t-shirts are ok by the conservative kingmakers. And I'm sure everyone in the military feels this way.

happy thanksgiving 2006

I'm celebrating my 300th post by only eating one meal a day. Well, one meal plus snacking on the leftovers all day. You get the idea. My nutrition tip of the year, for those of you who think it's the chemicals in the turkey that make you sleepy, try eating less food. It's all about the calories. In fact, the meal actually counteracts the chemical because it's overwhelmed by all the other chemicals.

I ran across an article this morning trying to get myself out of bed in my cold basement looking at some other chemical reactions that get overwhelmed as we age. I found myself coming to a very different conclusion to a study regarding how teenage brains work than this guy at Newseek did. Basically, psychologists ask young people whether or not it's ok to do stupid stuff (say, light your hair on fire or drink drano or race your car to the edge of a cliff). What they found is that teenage brains are more active than adult brains.

"The results are fascinating, and unsettling. While teenagers are just as likely as adults to get the answer right (the correct answer is “No”), teens actually have to mull the question over momentarily before they answer. As summarized by psychologists Valerie Reyna of Cornell and Frank Farley of Temple in the current issue of the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest, teenagers take a split second longer than adults to reject such patently inane behaviors. And more of the teenage brain lights up, suggesting that they are actually going through some kind of deliberative calculation before concluding what the rest of us assume is obvious."

Now, the middle age male author writing about this sides with the conclusion of the psychologists that this is a deficiency in the teenage brain. It is better when asked to play Russian Roulette, the study authors suggest, to act instinctively in saying no rather than to think about it for a millisecond before saying no. I cannot disagree more stongly! The willingness of teenagers to think critically about everything, to harbor fewer learned biases and socialized instinctive responses, I think, is fabulous. The idea that utilizing more of your brain (in a non-urgent situation) is bad strikes me as quite silly. I'll take teens over psychs any day.

I'll take "deliberative calculation" over blindly responding with "what the rest of us assume is obvious" any day.

fun family factoid

Did you know that more 18-34 year olds lived at home in the 1980s than today? I love how Census data goes against trends that trendy trendpointerouters like to talk about.

Also thought I'd say bravo to the Clayton kiddies for pulling off a great weekend. Yay, now we can relax and enjoy Thanksgiving. Sze, good to see you. They got me a set of cards as a thank you present. It's the Bush cards for the second term - even more slanted to the right.

where props are due

I've noticed that the Weekly Standard has had some really good coverage of the 2006 election. It's like insert a little dose of reality, and their inner journalist shines through. I think they ran one of the best articles about the stem cell issue in Missouri. About the only misleading thing is to call President Bush's Council on Bioethics bipartisan (for example, people who disagree with the President's will tend to get removed from the council), but that's a minor quibble in this article . Take a look. They zero in on the core issue, which has to do with embryos, not women, fertilitiy clinics, money, scientists, or biotech companies.

And while on the subject of elections, a friend reminded me of just how impressive the Onion's coverage of the 2000 election was. Their coverage of a (fake) television address by President-elect Bush is remarkable for its accuracy. It really is worth another read.

Also, if you know me, you know I have plenty of things to complain about St. Louis. So, I should definitely point out when something exciting happens. They changed the light cycles at a couple stoplights along Forest Park Parkway! What do you know, driving straight from point A to point B is now my fastest route to work, rather than the ridiculous meandering I would make down to the interstate for a mile and back up to my work (which is on the same road).

baptist fun

Ooh, first an amendment 2 update. While I was writing the post below, I saw another Life Communications ad (during the football game, of course); it was the one with Suppan, Sweeney, Warner, Heaton, and the guy from Passion of the Christ. Interestingly, it had been edited this time. What was cut out was the lies. It was still deceptive, but much less hard-hitting. I wonder if they got a lot of complaints and realized most people are smarter than that, or if they just needed a shorter version of the ad for the game today?

Anyway, on to the Baptist fun...

If you like drama, Baptist life for a generation has rarely failed to disappoint. This year's annual gathering of the Missouri Baptist Convention (the state affiliation of the national Southern Baptist Convention) provided lots of excitement.

First and foremost, I have now been involved with not one but two churches that have been kicked out of the convention. Yes, kicked out, as in, your money and opinions are not welcome here. Basically, the authoritarian fundamentalist conservative movement which has spilled over into secular life the past few years has much of its roots in the takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention by fundamentalists in the 70s and 80s. If you're unfamiliar with this rather fascinating power grab, here's a good chronology and the wikipedia article for the Southern Baptist Convention. By the way, if you are familiar with this and would like to take issue with my description of it as a fundamentalist takeover, I would love to engage that discussion.

But that's just for background. What happened last week is the messengers to the convention decided that Third and 18 other Missouri churches were no longer welcome. We give money to multiple Baptist groups, and that kind of inclusion is dangerous to the fundamentalists who need to control everything. It's not a young/old, liberal/conservative, traditional/contemporary kind of thing. It comes down to a core question of authority and hierarchy, one which puts Baptists and Catholics on opposite ends of a Christian spectrum between which most other denominations fall (at least, historically). Does the pastor of a church rule the church or serve the church? Do the state conventions exist to tell local churches what to do, or to facillitate cooperation among local churches? Does the Southern Baptist Convention exist to promote a pure conservative ideology, or a broader coalition inclusive of a variety of viewpoints? Is the bureaucracy of the convention to be used for service and ministry, or for furthering a specific agenda? My home church is in a college town and has a wide variety of viewpoints on all kinds of stuff, from trivial to fundamental. That's my formative experience of Baptist life. Promise Keepers and women deacons fellowshipping together. Alcoholics and prohibitionists studying Scripture together, dancers and poker players eating donuts with those who think you need to make room for Jesus between you and your dance partner and that the devil is to be found in cards. A few years ago, our disinterest in taking a stand on homosexuality, among other things, got us kicked out of the Missouri Baptist Convention. Third is a little different. Rather than the more academic and teaching bent of intellectual plurality, Third is more prone to emphasize unity and inclusion of a different sort. There is great desire for harmony and good relations with all. In particular, this manifests itself in being a church not separated by the slavery issue. It's both black and white, urban and suburban. Significantly, it is a place that has maintained ties with both the SBC (ok for missionaries to own slaves) and American Baptists (not ok for missionaries to own slaves). That's what makes Third being a part of the most recent group kicked out interesting. Unlike Second, my home church, Third was never aligned solely with the state and national Southern Baptists. Third goes out of its way to avoid political entanglements in Baptist life.

But that's just the beginning of the excitement; really, it's more just the natural conclusion of events that were put in motion years ago, although I recognize that I am less distraught than some others as I have already been through the experience of being made to feel most unwelcome for sticking to traditional Baptist values. No, this year's convention had much more excitement, as well. I share a couple highlights. Interestingly, the Missouri Baptist Convention hasn't posted the full text of any of the speeches. The only thing I've found with quotes seems to be an article that ran in the Post-Dispatch a few days ago.

On Islam:

Today, Islam has a strategic plan to defeat and occupy America...What they are after is your sons and daughters...They are coming to this country in the guise of students, and the Saudi government is paying their expenses...They are trying to establish a Muslim state inside America, and they are going to take the city of Detroit back to the 15th century and practice Sharia law there...your freedom is on the floor with their foot on it, with their sword raised, and if you don't convert, your head comes off.

That's not some powerless nutcase on the fringe who caught a reporter by the restroom. That's the Reverend David Clippard, Executive Director of the Missouri Baptist Convention, giving an address to open the annual meeting. In fairness, it should be noted that Clippard commented the following day that, "I don't hate Islamic people". Thanks for clearing that up.

On Wal-Mart:

We encourage the 2,100 Missouri Baptist churches and their members to exercise moral stewardship regarding the businesses they patronize.

Oh hey, they're recognizing the impact companies have on workers and communities. Oh, wait, it's a Disney repeat. Apparently Wal-Mart has immoral "pro-homosexual support". I think that's the first time anybody has accused Wal-Mart of being too generous with their employees.

And to top it off, Senator Talent (who is not Baptist) was there speaking about stem cells. Remember, his decision to oppose Amendment 2 and to simultaneously remove his name as a cosponsor from Senator Brownback's anti-human cloning bill is all about principle. Good Missouri Baptist principles.

twofer

These are both a few days old, but I've been preoccupied recently by commercials about stem cells. And I decided to be social last night.

Odd priorities, I know.

But this is exciting; one in the awesome way and one in the oh dear Lord kind of way.

First, awesomeness for L-town. Our school board was named Missouri's Outstanding Board of Education. Take that you other 529 school boards.

Second, St. Louis decided to celebrate winning the World Series by topping another list. Most dangerous city in the country.

And Julie's car just got broken into this weekend. How fabulous.

learn something new every day

I knew Thomas Friedman is a rich guy; most people with fame, multiple books, and lots of speaking gigs are. But I didn't realize he rode with the billionaires. Apparently his wife of almost 30 years is a Bucksbaum of the billionaire real estate entity. Her family owns something like 200 million square feet of retail space.

No wonder Friedman has always been so simplistically optimistic about globalization. And she's a Stanford grad, too; yet one more reason to think about grad school out there...

final thoughts

(P) Even though it's still a week and a half until the election, short of something amazing happening, it looks pretty clear to me that the tactics of supporters and opponents of the Missouri Stem Cell Initiative are pretty much set. It left me wondering, then, about a pretty simple question. When I was driving home this afternoon, I saw a bumper sticker on a big SUV in front of me that said, "They're lying. It's cloning. Vote no."

And that's exactly what I had been thinking about. Why the lying? I find many parts of the email from Professor Harbour, for example, to be deceptive, but aside from the part about violating free speech, it's a fallacy largely either of omissions or red herrings, not lying. But some of the other things, like that bumper sticker, or ads from Vitae, Life Communications, or the Missouri Roundtable, are flat out lies. When they do surveys of public opinion about human cloning, what people are against is the ability to make a human being in the mass-produced, sci-fi kind of way. Amendment 2 explicitly criminalizes human cloning, and it provides very specific definitions that are clearly what people mean when they express concerns about cloning. When people talk about big checks for poor women and college students, they're just lying. The amendment explicitly criminalizes that.

Now, there are all sorts of reasons why people lie, some more nefarious than others. But what I can't quite satisfy myself on is an explanation of why lie about this issue. The opposition position is essentially a moral one. Is it wrong to fertilize an egg with a sperm outside of a human body? Or at least, is it wrong if that blastocyst is not implanted in a woman's womb? If the death of an embryo really is the death of a human being, then perhaps we do need restrictive legislation in Jefferson City.

But lies greatly undermine one's credibility when making a moral claim. Also, in an area like this that does have some more complex scientific issues behind it, lies are very confusing. One of my gravest concerns is that the whole concept of morality being important in beginning of life issues is being eroded by the extremism and manipulation in the public message presented by groups that oppose embryonic stem cell research. Sure, there are concerns about harm to women and commercialization of the technology and so forth, but those are so far removed from this particular initiative that the most appropriate response appears to be laughter. We have been doing this for decades. Embryos have been destroyed for years. If this really is wrong, we're essentially committing acts of genocide in fertility clinics.

Yet instead of talking about that basic, central question, the opposition has gone off on several tangential discussions, none of which are unique to the Missouri amendment (or embryonic stem cell research more generally). The only thing I can think of is that this has brought to public attention in Missouri the conflict with science that religious right leaders have engaged in all over the country, generally below the radar. There have been attempts in Jefferson City to pass restrictive legislation, and that uncertainty is part of why researchers have left Missouri already; after all, that's the prime point of the amendment. It doesn't provide tax dollars or anything; it prevents lawmakers from outlawing the research or withholding grants simply because it involves embryonic stem cell research. Who can forget the ridicule that Kansas got with the school board decision about creationism? It's almost like people who oppose this are embarrassed to admit publicly that they think killing embryos is wrong. Why would it be ok to do in vitro fertilization and discard a dozen embryos, but not be ok to perform research on embryos, many of which would be discarded anyway?

But rather than asking these questions, we are left with lies. Why? To me, that seems an admission that given an informed, democratic outcome, opponents of Amendment 2 know they lose. Most people, yes, even here in Missouruh, think it's ridiculous to prevent research that might help improve the lives of people or prevent couples that want to have children from trying everything possible to have children, so long as there are reasonable restrictions like those laid out in the amendment.

If you really thought we are making a mistake, do you really think lies will convince us of the moral superiority of your position?

Addendum: One last thought I had. This is a moral issue, and there's no act of government that can make something immoral acceptable. So I wonder if there would be a way to get everybody on record who opposes the amendment (or at least key figures like representative Bartle and Senator Talent) promising not to use or recommend for others to use any treatments derived from embryonic stem cell research. Even if SCNT and embryonic stem cell research were banned at the federal level, US scientists (and the venture capital that follows them) would find somewhere to practice research (in fact, it's my understanding that Missouri institutions like Stowers are currently paying researchers to work in other countries). Not for the sake of saying I told you so, or for denying care in the future; I wouldn't actually want to hold anyone to it. But rather as a way of demonstrating now the real level of committment people have to the professed beliefs.

world champions

'nuff said.

Just be ready for work Monday morning.

short and sweet

(PR) Or annoyingly detailed? I'm torn on which way to go. Hence the boldface, for you skimmers.

For startes, if you haven't read the initiative or what people who support it actually say, read it! This is one of those cases where it is so straightforward, that if you just read it you'll immediately see the fear mongering and manipulation for what it is.

Primarily, my response is one of passion and directness. I feel very strongly that in a pluralistic society, there are naturally going to be core issues about which people will disagree. But I also feel that when positions are presented less than genuinely, it is important to point that out. Misinformation and deception are poisonous. And that's exactly what this letter looks like to me. Basically, it's either one believes that a professor at the med school is so ignorant and naive about doing background research and constructing an argument (and so careless about making unsubstantiated statements) that he didn't realize how deceptive his lengthy email is, or it was constructed that way on purpose. If it really is the former, then I am sorry. You have my apologies, and my urging to perhaps sit in on an English class or two. The reason Wash U attaches the legal disclaimer is because that email account is for work related correspondence. Students who use wustl accounts for both school and personal use, in contrast, have no such disclaimer. I also never said Professor Harbour was misusing his Wash U resources; I pointed out he was using them. There's a big difference; I was pointing out how ridiculous it is to talk about voices being muted.

If, as I suspect, it's the latter, then it is most appropriate to respond strongly. The first paragraph couldn't be better crafted to lead into this. This letter is hard to write, I'm not political, I don't believe in imposing my views on others, but the proponents are just so inaccurate my unique scientific and medical expertise compels me to speak out. If that's the case, then why don't you answer the actual arguments made by supporters of the amendment? Why are you writing such a long and fearmongering letter with surprisingly little scientific or medical insight? Why do you ignore the central component of human cloning, namely, the fact that the embryo has to be implanted in the womb in order to become a person, and the central component of in vitro fertilization, namely, the making of a blastocyst outside of the womb (and many, many more than are actually used by the couple trying to get pregnant)?

The energy analogy is quite flawed. Petroleum is used in a myriad of products. My goodness, petroleum is used in order to make photovoltaic cells. But you don't claim to be an expert on that, even though you talk about it. Nuclear weapons are very serious things. But you don't claim to be an expert there. Funding of election issues is very interesting, but you don't claim any special expertise there, nor do you even explain anything (The Stowers donated virtually all the money. What a time for some outrage about the role of billionaires in the political arena; when they do something that doesn't benefit the radical right. Care to suggest that we should limit the influence of money on politics? How much more money does Senator Talent have in the campaign for the Senate seat?). The integrity and academic freedom of our medical institutions is very important, but nothing at all to substantiate a rather disturbing claim about violations of free speech. Rather, the email is loaded with emotional appeals to fears of what might happen. And of course, to add that final human touch, it's signed Bill (and Tonya) Harbour.

I am convinced this is not an issue for experts. There's nothing hard to understand, no convoluted language, no fine print. There are no taxes or anything; it's just a constitutional amendment to prevent Missouri lawmakers from passing restrictions in the future. Either you think it's wrong to make human blastocysts, or you think it's wrong to prevent research that might lead to better understanding of diseases and ways to cure them. The whole thing is like 2,000 words long (as the actress from Everybody Loves Raymond has been pointing out, except making it sound like 2,000 is a lot of words. Oh my goodness, that's, like, four pages. Seriously, Ms. Heaton, have you ever read legislation that can fit on four pages? I would love to see how long a 2,000 word script would last.) But I particularly enjoy the irony that Professor Harbour presents his qualifications as a doctor to argue that doctors shouldn't make these decisions. Rather, lawmakers in Jefferson City should ban these practices, even if they're legal in other states or allowed by the federal government. Yet, what exactly that proposal would look like goes unmentioned. Should we ban the process of making a human blastocyst? After all, that's what Professor Harbour is indicting. Fertility clinics have for decades been doing precisely what he and others are saying will bring detrimental harm to women; the harm that is cited is from fertility clinics. There are embryos just lying around frozen, not being used. The only ones that can be used are ones given with explicit voluntary consent of the donor; eggs can't be donated solely for the use of research. There is a review board for people doing embryonic stem cell research. But nevermind those pesky details. Surely if this passes, people will just ignore the law and exploit women to clone human beings.

S has covered the scientific end of my thoughts better than I could, so just read the comment left there for detail about that.

Finally, lest you think I am singling out Professor Harbour, know that I have the same dislike for similar messages from others. For example, I have already written an extensive post regarding the ads run by the Vitae Foundation. And then this evening, while I'm typing this watching Suppan struggle a little bit in Game 4 of the World Series, I see a most interesting ad. An ad that surely can end the debate, at least about the silencing of critics (as if that was ever a legitimate argument). It had famous Missouri athletes and even an actor and an actress in it, and it was most definitely against amendment 2. Let me preface this by saying two of them are some of my favorite athletes. The other athlete and the actress and actor I'm sort of ambivalent about. But all five are wrong, and misleadingly wrong in the ad. It involved Mike Sweeney (Royals), Jeff Suppan (Cardinals), Kurt Warner (former Rams QB), Patricia Heaton (Everybody Loves Raymond), and Jim Caviezel (Passion of the Christ). It was run by the Life Communications Fund. The repeated message is to not be tricked or deceived by the Missouri initiative. What is so incredible, though, is the way they play fast and loose with the facts; the script is what is being tricky and deceiptful. Where does the $6 billion California has spent come in? Why are we implying that the complications that have happened at fertility clinics are the fault of embryonic stem cell research? It's a blatant lie to make it sound like women now have a right to be paid for their eggs. In fact, the initiative specifically prohibits women receiving valuable compensation. What she literally means is that women can be reimbursed for certain costs involved, but that's sure not how they've scripted it to sound. You really have to see this ad for yourself. They're attacking everything from the California initiative to in vitro fertilization, all while making it sound like all the problems are because of the Missouri amendment.

Interestingly, I can find articles and blog posts about the Life Communications Fund, but I can't seem to find a website. The KC Star seems like they're wanting to get input from Sweeney and the Royals about the ad, so maybe there will be more to read about over the weekend.

Addendum: This is another video that is just breathtakingly deceptive.

Addendum 2: Found a website. Interesting. I wonder how they feel about in vitro fertilization. What does happen to all those fertilized eggs that aren't implanted? And what about the ones that are implanted and die anyway? Those mass murdering wannabe moms...

no silver spoon handy

Reach for a silver teething ring, instead. Jodi got something from Tiffany's in the mail, and among other things they had a $150 silver coated teething ring. Clearly the key for getting baby started out right.

Speaking of people with money to spend, it was fun and aggravating to drive home from work and see our newly refinished metro station parking lot crammed with cars. It must be rough all you World Series ticketholders.

part 3

Professor Harbour to me:

"From: Harbour@vision.wustl.edu
Subject: RE: please authenticate
Date: October 23, 2006 12:18:57 PM CDT
To: nsdempsey@gmail.com

"But don't confuse me for just an ill-informed blog ranter."

Actually, this is exactly what I was thinking.

The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare Information. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail."

Me to Professor Harbour:

"From: nsdempsey@gmail.com
Subject: Re: please authenticate
Date: October 23, 2006 6:59:33 PM CDT
To: Harbour@vision.wustl.edu

Professor,

If you prefer to keep me ill-informed, that's certainly your prerogative. As it is mine to be perturbed by claims regarding freedom of speech violations at a university I know and love without any warrant behind the claim. I have many questions, but if you do not feel like answering the one I posed, I see little sense in sending any others.

Regards,

Nathaniel"

the internet is awesome

It's been a while since Charles and I had some good conversations. Where've you been recently? I suppose that whole school starting again probably means a bit of work for a principal. Hope the school year is going well.

But, perhaps I've found a new ideologically opposite friend, although it's too early to tell for sure.

Professor Harbour wrote me back, and this time explicitly asked that I post his email. I disagree with some claims made, but I'll wait a day or two before offering specifics in case he has further clarification.

Professor Harbour to me (note, the original part of the email has been redacted; look at my prior post to read it):

"From: Harbour, William Mailed-By: wusm-pcf.wustl.edu
To: Nathaniel Dempsey
Date: Oct 22, 2006 11:22 PM
Subject: RE: please authenticate

Nathaniel,
I am ashamed of you. If you had questions about my email, it would have been professional and appropriate of you to email me personally to clarify your misunderstandings before broadcasting your ill-informed comments on your blog site. First of all, I told you by email that there were no footnotes in my original email, and I don't know how they got in your version. However, I guess clarifying that issue before publishing your blog would have been inconvenient for your attempt to defame my character. Also, I am amused by your claim that I am misusing the Washington University name to promote my agenda. The truth is quite the opposite. Washingnton University has inappropriately gotten politically involved in this issue and has attached its name to Amendment 2, even though many Washington University faculty members are against it. Is that a truthful representation of Washington University? If you really care about the truth and not just blathering on without facts, email me directly and I would be happy to answer any questions you have. If you are really as ethical and professional as you want your readers to believe, you will post this email as a rebuttal to your previous diatribe.
______________________________________
J. William Harbour, MD
Washington University School of Medicine

The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare Information. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail."

And me to Professor Harbour:

"From: Nathaniel Dempsey Mailed-By: gmail.com
To: "Harbour, William"
Date: Oct 23, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: please authenticate

I am sorry if publishing an email sent by you from a wustl.edu account is shameful. It is this perspective of limiting dialogue that interests me. I don't know much about the science. I am deeply concerned, however, about claims about Washington University stifling debate. Make no mistake, I am continuing to follow up about this. However, the Cardinals are also in the World Series and I do have other responsibilities.

My question about your email was if you sent it. You said you did. Is there not room for divergent views on this? I strongly defend my right to post whatever ill-informed, inaccurate, offensive, wrong, and any other content I want on my personal blog. My name, contact information, and photograph are posted there for those who want to disagree. If you post a response, it is public for all the world to see, as well.

As far as the truth, there are many things I would like to know. For starters, there is anti-Amendment 2 dialogue everywhere. On what basis do you say dialogue is limited?

If you have responsibilities that prevent you from having the time to converse about this over the next week or two, that's fine (and I will of course note that when I do a follow-up post). But don't confuse me for just an ill-informed blog ranter.

Also, if you really are concerned about electronic communication you send being posted online, you really shouldn't send anything not related to work or school from your wustl account (and even then, you shouldn't write anything that you wouldn't mind being posted on a website somewhere). Electronic communication is saved forever; emails get forwarded from person to person to person. I posted your entire email, credited it to you, and then wrote my commentary. Some people would be even more shameful, as you call it. If I had wanted to do this anonymously, I would have sent my request for you to authenticate this from a Yahoo account and not used my full name so you couldn't have found my blog.

Regards,

Nathaniel"

we are crazy

For Ross and Elizabeth's birthday we went to SportsZone for dinner and enjoying game one of the World Series. Well, apparently this was a popular game and we couldn't exactly get a couple tables with enough space for all of us.

Except, outside. tygfgxd

Sorry for that. My computer was momentarily taken away from me.

Back to the story. We couldn't get tables inside. So, we set up camp on the patio. They've got a big flat screen and two smaller ones on either side. Perfect. Except it was reeeallly cold. But no matter. Cardinals won!

appears to be legit

Professor Harbour wrote me back saying he wrote it and to feel free to distribute it. So, I think I'll follow up at some point soon, particularly the part about silencing dissent. I find that really fascinating, because it's frequently a rightist talking point, when in reality, it is often liberal professors who get silenced (in no small part, due to the effort of vocal conservatives trying to restrain them).

more stem cell fun

(P) So I got this from a friend and found it really interesting:


"From: "Harbour, William" Harbour@vision.wustl.edu
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:39:48 -0500
Subject: Thoughts on Stem Cell Amendment from the Harbours

Dear Friends,

This is a letter that I find difficult to write because I am not a political person, and I don't believe in imposing my views on others. But I am deeply troubled by the inaccuracies that are being used to shape public opinion in favor of the Missouri stem cell amendment on the November ballot and I feel a responsibility to speak out since I understand the scientific and medical issues.

If you read nothing else, please read this: Amendment 2 is a deceptive piece of legislation that may mislead Missourians into approving a constitutional right to human cloning, something over 80 percent oppose. It would create a uniquely privileged status for biotech special interests to do human cloning experiments with taxpayer money.

If the industrial revolution were just now starting and we had the choice of developing a society dependent on solar energy rather than oil, is there any doubt that we would choose solar energy? I think that we face a similar choice today regarding embryonic stem cells versus adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cells may seem to the lay person to offer greater promise for cures, but even if this were true (which it is not), embryonic stem cell therapies will create an insatiable and unceasing demand for more and more womens¹ eggs. And once a hugh biotech industrial complex is establish that is dependent on women's eggs to generate more and more cloned stem cells, it will be impossible for us to get rid of it. In contrast, investing our resources in adult stem cells will ultimately result in similar or greater cures than embryonic stem cells without creating a biotech industrial complex that pursues women¹s eggs the way oil companies plunder our land for oil profits.

The basic arguments for the stem cell amendment are essentially that (1) embryonic stem cell research has tremendous potential for curing a wide variety of diseases, and (2) any concerns that this research will be abused are unfounded because we can trust the medical and scientific community to regulate itself.

Being knowledgeable of stem cell biology and related medical research, I am deeply skeptical that either of these arguments is true.

As many of you know, I am a physician-scientist at Washington University School of Medicine and have received millions of dollars in research funding, part of which has been for stem cell research related to cancer. I approached this amendment without preconceived opinions and have read the amendment carefully. I have listened to the arguments on both sides. After sifting through the rhetoric, I have concluded that there is nothing about embryonic stem cells that would indicate that they are better than adult stem cells for curing human disease. In fact, there are many problems with embryonic stem
cells, such as rejection and cancer formation. Further, adult stem cell research and therapies do not endanger women who must donate eggs for embryonic stem cells.

These deceptive tactics by the amendment proponents say to me that ³you are not intelligent enough to understand the issues so I will intentionally deceive you for your own good.²

As a medical professional, I believe that my responsibility is to make sure the public understands the issues so that they can make up their own mind. Thus, my goal in this letter is not to convince you of my personal opinions, but to make sure you have the facts from a doctor and scientist who understands the issues and does not have political or monetary motives.

Some of the most common arguments in favor of the amendment are as follows:

Argument # 1: Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), which is the type of process for creating stem cells that is at stake in this amendment, is not human cloning.

MY RESPONSE: When scientists talk about cloning, SCNT is exactly what they are talking about. SCNT is the medical dictionary definition of cloning. The amendment proponents claim that SCNT is not cloning unless the cell is placed into a woman¹s womb, but that has never been the medical definition of cloning. That is like saying that a nuclear bomb is not a eapon unless it is dropped on people. The potential for harm and abuse is great, even if one does not intend to act on this potential!

The fact is that this amendment not only allows human cloning, it creates a uniquely protected right to perform human cloning!

Argument #2: Embryonic stem cell research has the potential for curing many more diseases than adult stem cells.

MY RESPONSE: There is no scientific evidence for this claim. Many people have been led to believe that we have not yet seen the incredible curative potential of embryonic stem cells because this research is banned. The truth is that embryonic stem cells is not banned and never has been. Embryonic stem cells have been researched for many years and have been reported in the medical literature as early as 1963! And yet, there is no evidence that embryonic stem cells have cured any disease, even in animals.

But what is really frustrating for someone like me who is involved in stem cell research is that the success of adult stem cells is being ignored by the amendment proponents. Advantages of adult stem cells over embryonic stem cells: (1) they are the only stem cells that have been shown to cure disease in animals, (2) they do not require egg extraction and the associated risks to women, (3) they have amazing plasticity (the ability to change into many different cell types) that far exceeds anyone's expectations. For example, stem cells from bone marrow can be turned into brain cells.

If adult stem cells are likely to be just as good, if not better, than embryonic stem cells, why expose women to risky egg extraction and create a huge demand for eggs that will surely end up in the exploitation of poor, disadvantaged women and young, college-aged women with limited financial resources?

Argument #3: SCNT will not endanger women.

RESPONSE: To be honest, this is my greatest concern. Despite loud cries to the contrary, the widespread use of SCNT for medical research and treatment will unquestionably jeopardize the health of women, particularly poor disadvantaged women and young, college-age women with limited financial resources who will be tempted to allow themselves to be given synthetic hormones and undergo surgical procedures to extract eggs in exchange for monetary awards. We are not talking about a few hundred cloned embryos, but rather, millions and millions will be needed for this research!. And the need for more eggs will never end. Even if laws are passed to regulate this process, profiteers will undoubtedly go to third world countries to find willing subjects.

Argument #4. How could this amendment be a bad idea when leading scientists and physicians support it?

RESPONSE: Many scientists and physicians, including myself, support adult stem cell research, but are deeply concerned about embryonic stem cell research and human cloning. The reason that you do not hear more experts speak out against this amendment is that their voices have been muted. The amendment proponents have identified one wealthy couple in Kansas City who donated virtually all of the $16 million that is being used to saturate the media with pro-amendment information. Meanwhile, those who are concerned about this amendment have been denied the opportunity for public debate and discourse by our medical schools and universities. Suffice to say, the freedom of speech violations at ostensibly liberal universities to suppress voices against this amendment are breathtaking!

Final Thoughts

If for no other reason, I am deeply disturbed by this amendment because of the deception being used to promote it. For example, Cynthia Kramer, who is running for state office in our district, has used this issue to promote her campaign by implying that her life-threatening disease could have been treated more effectively with embryonic stem cells. After questioning her campaign office and reading the text of many of her interviews and website statements, I can find no evidence for this claim. In reality, she received adult stem cells in the form of a bone marrow transplant, and the fact that
she is still alive is evidence that this adult stem cell transplant was successful! When she went to Israel seeking a OEcure¹ for her disease, they told her to come back to Missouri where she could get the best care available anywhere!

I personally know of many other examples of deliberate deceptions, intentional misinformation, and freedom of speech violations.

My practice focuses on patients with cancer, and I am profoundly wounded when one of them dies of their disease. I am in the trenches every day, and I understand what is at stake. But I am convinced that this amendment is not the right direction for our state. There are much more effective ways we can spend our money and time. without endangering women

We all have to make our own decisions, and democracy only works well if we make those decisions based on facts. Whatever opinion you develop on this issue, I hope that it is based on facts. Please feel free to email me if you have more specific questions or if you would like to talk.

Thanks for your attention.

Bill (and Tonya) Harbour

______________________________________


J. William Harbour, MD


Paul A. Cibis Distinguished Endowed Professor
Washington University School of Medicine
St. Louis, Missouri 63110
The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare Information. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail."


I am curious first if anyone knows this particular professor. Click here for his faculty page.

More generally, I find it really interesting how carefully targeted the messages are. The anti-initiative ads run by the Vitae Foundation during male dominated sports programming made women out to be these victims who needed strong, moral men to stand up for them in the face of some ill-defined enemy behind amendment 2. This letter ads a new component targeting a more educated and progressive crowd. Heaven forbid, embryonic stem cells are evil oil comanies and adult stem cells are magical solar energy! And look, if this is successful, not only will poor women in the US be targeted for dangerous egg harvesting, the evil biotechnology industry will go to poor, defenseless third world countries and harm people there, too. Those evil special interests.

A second thing I love is how he presents himself as an expert on stem cells, then implies he is quite knowledgeable in other areas, too. Like financial matters. And the history of industrialization and energy policy. Kind of like how he says he's not political, then writes a rather political email. My personal take is that expertise is completely irrelevant to this particular initiative; in fact, the great irony is that he's saying he's an expert to defend that argument that the experts shouldn't be allowed to make the decisions about research. Rather, moralizing legislators should make that decision.

A third thing I love is how he has footnoted things without providing the footnote. No doubt, this was in the original email, and someone in the email forwarding chain just decided those weren't necessary.

One last thing I'll point out is that I'm actually rather perturbed that someone using my school's resources is making rather stark and disturbing claims about how "those who are concerned about this amendment have been denied the opportunity for public debate and discourse by our medical schools and universities. Suffice to say, the freedom of speech violations at ostensibly liberal universities to suppress voices against this amendment are breathtaking!"

Excuse me? You sent this from your Wash U account! [If you don't know, the email extension .wustl.edu is a domain registered and used by Washington University in St. Louis. My email address is ndempsey@wustl.edu, for example.] You are leveraging your Wash U credentials. Yet you don't ask for support on this issue, either. Feign outrage to make you sound more credible, but don't ask alumni to investigate this rather serious charge against, oh, only one of the greatest medical institutions in the world. I sent an email to the professor asking him to authenticate it, just in case this really isn't something he sent. I'm curious to see what response I get.

For a little balance to this email, check out the Missouri Coalition for Life Saving Cure's website.

sweetness

Not only was that a great series with a classic ending, but the ESPN prognosticators are almost universally calling for the Tigers to win the World Series.

Ah, there's nothing like the reverse ESPN endorsement.

long time, no rant

(R) It's been too long since I last complained about St. Louis drivers. It's been raining forever here, and this morning I'm on the entrance ramp merging onto eastbound I-64 (sorry, highway 40) from Kingshighway in the Central West End. This is a clover leaf, and it's nice because the interstate is 4 lanes here, but the right lane exits at Vandeventer, so there's no through traffic in the lane we merge into. Well this morning, with wet roads, the car two cars in front of me decides to stop as we're merging. Not, slow down to 15 mph around the curve because it's raining. No, come to a complete stop. On the entrance ramp to the highway.

Now, I understand having to slam on the brakes when the freeway is backed up. But when you just don't know how to merge, it is really really annoying. Get off the interstate if you don't know how to drive. Seriously. Try practicing at night or during the middle of the day. Don't be out in bad weather during rush hour in the city.

winter in Missouri

I went out to my car for work this week, and I could see my breath!

But no worries, it is plenty steamy in here as I type this from my iMac set up on the dining room table. We decided to go all out and clean the carpets. Picked up the Rug Doctor from Home Depot, unloaded two rooms worth of stuff, and now have a hallway/storage closet in our living room, dining room, kitchen, and entry way. Suffice it to say no one is getting in through the front door. Cookie is going crazy. If you know her, just think about that for a second.

But no worries, by the multiple buckets of not so clear water we dumped, clearly a success. Now just to watch some Chiefs action and playoff baseball and eat a couple hot dogs and some chewy Chips Ahoy. It's a rough life.

Almost as good as somebody getting a free steak dinner at her parents' cabin.

Mark your calendars, peoples. Kick ball again next Sunday at two by the school (meet in the cul-de-sac on Nina), Halloween at our place Saturday evening (that would be the Saturday right before Halloween, for you slow ones).

fall in Missouri

It was beautiful this weekend! A little warm for the full fall foliage brilliance, but enough to see trees of many colors rolling over the horizon driving back and forth across the state.

Kelli, it was great going to your wedding. I'm so happy for you and Nick! I can't imagine what you'll do for fun in Hermann this week.

Thursday was good, stopped by to see Sarah's way too energetic cat that her landlord doesn't know she has. Then Friday lunch at Flat Branch with Trina and Mike and stop by Blue Springs to see my uncle on the way in to town. Pizza and a movie at the Lee's new place. Tried the pumpkin pie, got as far as the first part; 40 minutes prep time. None of us read the rest of the directions in the store, in particular, the whole let cool for at least two hours after baking. So, pumpkin pie had to wait for eating until Saturday. Sadness.

Then Saturday up for waffles and bacon before going to grandmother's to chat and play games. One of the last remaining views of Liberty from her deck as rolling hills of farmland rather than flattened streets of Chipotle. (No kidding, there's now a Chipotle where my grandmother grew up). Then the capstone; wedding at the church. Me being the smart Liberty native I am went on autopilot toward Kelli's house. Fortunately, I realized in time the wedding was at her church. No biggie.

Then back to my neighborhood for reception fun at Wynbrick before packing stuff up from my house and going down to claim some pumpkin pie, after a brief stop of course on the way down (which somehow involved a quick tour of Kansas) to say goodbye to people who had since gathered at a place across from Kelli and Nick's called Quaff. Seriously, that's it's name. Several slices of pumpkin pie, whipped cream, monkey baseball, and Chiefs football later, we're back on the road for St. Louis. I had two things for my brother and at least managed to get him one of them.

Julie took my car to see her sister and a friend at Rockhurst that morning, so I went with Andy and Carrie to check out Lakeland decked out in my traditional attire of blue jeans and poker shirt. I wonder what our kids are going to do for a more traditional style? That's rhetorical, of course. This group is quite appealing, too.

but the website looks so welcoming

(P) I just saw a TV ad against the Missouri Stem Cell vote (amendment 2). Well, at least, it was sort of against the vote.

It didn't oppose the amendment directly. Rather, through a crying woman sitting on a bed, it ran the gambit of fear and manipulation and abuse of women about donating eggs and cloning and stem cell research and everything else. The ad starts off with the woman reflecting that she just needed money for college (as if the pro-life donors behind such advertising campaigns would actually fund major scholarship programs for poor women to attend college, but that's neither here nor there) so she sold some eggs, and it goes downhill from there.

So what is this, at best, misleading and deceptive group quite willing to employ the most desperate tugs at heartstrings through the use of a crying woman reflecting on pain which the amendment doesn't even cause? Actually, it's the Vitae Foundation. Their website seems so positive, with its clean lines and calm, uplifting prose.

"Vitae believes in the power of the message. Educational messages that are respectful, helpful, and encourage dialogue in a non-threatening manner, have become the hallmark of the Vitae success." "Reaching minds...saving lives" And so on. I'm not familiar with the group, but if it really is a moderate group trying to reach people, the ad buy they made is sure going to ruin that effort and just make people like me all the more cynical about such groups. And interestingly, they post several TV ads on their website, but I couldn't find the one I just saw. Perhaps they don't want people to know they're running it? [Or it might just be a new one that coincidentally hasn't made it up on their server yet, of course, too.]

If this is the best message they can come up with that is educational, respectful, and helpful, then I feel quite comforted that amendment 2 is going to pass by a landslide. For goodness sakes, they've got Oliver North on their website saying the group saves lives. He's not responsible for anything morally questionable, is he?

I can't believe Senator Talent, in a closely contested election where he claims to be in touch with Missouri voters, who actually worked at Wash U, one of the most ardent supporters of this, is on record opposing the amendment. It would be really ironic if the stem cell issue brought enough people out to vote to bring down Talent in a state Bush won both times.

Of course, this summer Talent also removed his name as a consponsor from the Senate anti-cloning bill, so maybe he's really just another one of those wishy washy rich Chesterfield Republican types whose moral compass doesn't point much farther than navigating elections? Is that too harsh Professor? Plenty of time before now and November to prove me wrong and stand up for something, anything, really, beyond the evilness of cold medicine.

Addendum: I just saw it again, and I realized one of the more subtle things that really bothered me. The website makes a claim that they try to target their message, in particular reaching younger women of child-bearing age. Well, I am watching a Monday Night Football game in St. Louis between Green Bay and Philadelphia. I would love to see the demographic data that says that's a prime use of dollars for such a purpose. But then again, that's part of what really gets me so riled up. It is the perfect demographic for them. This ad is not targeted at women at all, who know a lot more about fertility issues generally than men. It's targeted at men who aren't as familiar about what's involved with the process of selling/donating eggs to fertility clinics while watching a program that gets the hormones running a little. And then it takes genuine concern for women and uses it to instill guilt and a sense of needing to protect this sweet little innocent girl who just didn't know how horrible it all is. I find that appalling, not only in the sexist sense that women need to be protected (and protected from whom is an interesting question itself, from immoral liberals who think women should have to sell their eggs in order to pay for college?), but also that the group decided to attack a rather peripheral and insignificant aspect of the debate as it applies to the particular Missouir initiative. It's not about new eggs at all. The moral issue is about whether one believes that future humans are prevented from coming into being by stem cell research. The fact that the ad completely ignores the main thrust of the debate, I would suggest, is a huge indict of those who say it's an immoral practice which the state should actively prohibit. After all, if they were confidant that people were sympathetic to that line of reasoning, that's what the ad would be about.

check it out

The Royals managed to finish the season not being the worst team in baseball. Even knocked Detroit out of the division lead and home field advantage.

That's what they call a moral victory, right?

more power

I've been working a lot recently so I rewarded myself with a 1GB RAM chip for my iMac.

Yay for those huge maps in Civ IV! I now have more than 5 times as much RAM as my 'ole Performa 575's entire hard drive. Good times.

fun with sports

I discovered two interesting things this week.

First, as of the time I am writing this, the Royals are not the worst team in baseball! And that's in spite of playing in the toughest division this year.

Second, the Chiefs managed to be ranked 16th for total offense and 4th (let me repeat that, 4th!) in total defense after week 1. And yet, we managed to lose that game handily. So sad.

data is overrated

(P) This is interesting. Apparently media consolidation was even worse than the vast majority of Americans thought it was. It was so bad that the FCC bosses destroyed a report about it. More good times in the reign of Bush the Younger.

a good run

Before this January when I picked up my iMac, I hadn't had a "new" computer as in one that was more or less cutting edge technology for many years, although I've certainly had lots of computers new to me over that time. So, it has been exciting having new stuff and having it last so long; over 7 months. It's risky whenever Apple releases new products to jump on board right away, but this has been great.

So, I must mark the end of this run. My machine's class is still in the comparison graphics the marketers love.

But it's the crappy one to make the new ones look good.

fun in pairs

Yesterday was great. Erin and I went to the St. Louis County Fair and Airshow. Oh, those are definitely my peoples. Got to witness a white trash fight break out right in front of us while sharing a funnel cake. Speaking of which, I don't know whether it was the funnel cake or the corn dog or the pulled pork sandwich or the onion bloom or the smoothie or the dippn dots or the cheese drenched potato ribbons or what, but I had a little too much to eat. Then after a brief respite, it was time to show Erin the big muddy blues festival on the landing. If you have never been you have no excuse. Now, I don't know if it was the hurricane or a couple Smirnoff/pineapple juice concoctions Erin made (I have a weakness for pineapple juice, particularly this, but that's neither here nor there), or the family size hurricane Erin and Jackie found right before they stopped serving, but I had a little too much to drink. All in all, a good way to celebrate Labor day weekend.

Then this morning, I find a couple cool links. Eric IMed me this song by Anne Feeney, and you must watch this political ad.

Happy Labor Day.

rolling along

The People of Lazy days are proud to announce we have shot past the 2.5 billion mark, with no sign of slowing down any time soon.

somebody liked my idea

Check it out. This was my way of celebrating the Fourth of July.

fair tax research

I have recently become particularly interested in the tax proposal with the focus group-approved name FairTax to replace all federal taxes with a flat national sales tax. There are a number of nuances that make the proposal interesting, and I have started a couple in-depth discussions with some people about this.

When it comes right down to it, I am currently quite opposed to the details of the plan. However, I do respect their attempt to radically alter our tax code, which I think does need to be done, and most of their approach, as well. For example, they actually want to change the Constitution, which is how I think radical things should be done (such as Prohibition under the 18th amendment vs. our current war on drugs).

So, looking for two things. First, if you are interested in this or know someone who is, let me know. Second, if there are details or outside research you would like to fill me in on to change my mind, I would certainly welcome such information. (In other words, don't give me stuff from their website or by affiliated individuals and organizations)

Here's the website for the movement.

full circle

If all goes well, apparently this post will end up on my Facebook profile. Sweetness. If not, my apologies in advance for not being as technically gifted with these newfangled toys the kiddies have these days. And I thought Facebook Mobile was stepping across the line.

Life is back to being busy again, with me craving more sleep than I'm actually getting, which must be how my body really likes it, because I keep returning to such a state after bits of lazier respite. This winter I couldn't find enough to do so I finally had time to explore the world of swing dancing, which is pretty much as difficult as I thought it would be, by the way, but recently I have basically ditched the people I met there because I haven't had time to squeeze it in. At times I do miss it, and it was nice getting a little regular exercise for a change, but I don't seem to do anything about it, and actions are the true indicator. It's the kind of thing that if you immerse yourself in it can be a lot of fun, but it is difficult to do more casually, which, outside of perhaps Civilization and travel, is pretty much how I do life.

Jodi had me go to Habitat orientation with her and we're doing siding and roofing and whatnot on a house off of Grand north of the Fox theater this Saturday (we have to be there at 7:50am. As in, in the morning am, on a Saturday). Habitat's a great organization, but particularly with my job, I'm not exactly looking for more service/volunteer kinds of organizations. Me time is good, too. I tell Jodi that if she wants to meet boys, having me go with her is not the way to do it, but alas comfort seems to win out over strategy rather frequently. I never thought I would think about someone else that they could really use a drink...hehe, but that's for a different post. This one's about me!

Work has been good recently. After several months of discussion, it was agreed that Nora and I would be eligible for overtime when our major new grants started, and they made it retroactive to July 1 (several of our major programs have fiscal years running from July 1 to June 30, so we often end/start things at that time). So, that definitely helps with the fun we had recently where effectively a funder took back some money that was designated for employee compensation (it was not an insignificant amount per person). Of course, this comes at a time where there were lots of other priorities (in particular, moving our operations to a new building), so we weren't getting a lot of feedback about longer term roles with the agency. Combined with other people going back to school, I had then started thinking about my own plans, hence part of the desire to go out to California and visit Stanford. Which is really great, by the way; that would be a fun place to spend a couple years. And I hear they have a half decent school, too. Anyway, so now that I have started thinking seriously about going back to school, I start getting feedback at work that maybe they would like to have us on board for a while (we represent half the under-30 crowd in the entire agency, which is interesting in it's own right). Isn't that how life works, one moment, neither work nor school seem particularly attractive longer term, and the next, you're not sure which to go for?

One thing I am not going for is marriage. I know that comes as a shock to anyone who has known me more than five minutes. Went to Kelli and Nicholas' couples shower (or is it Nickolas? gotta love future mothers-in-law) this past weekend. After initial awkwardness of only knowing 5% of the guests, it was kinda fun. Nick has several cousins spread out around St. Louis, so it was interesting to hear bits and pieces about different city neighborhoods. This world of locals is still relatively new; it's an interesting reminder how transient Wash U folks are. Also an interesting reminder of how bizarre some of our wedding rituals are. For example, there was lots of info on line about various showers and wedding registries and what presents are appropriate and whatnot. But I couldn't get one simple question answered. Is the present at a couple's shower the wedding present, or is it a separate present? After consultation with Julie that went something like this: who cares about what's appropriate, get something you want, and me going: I care, I'm not going to just show up at a wedding shower without a present, and her going: these are just designed to make people give presents, and basically her calling me on not caring about the formalities yet not being willing to break them, either. So I did a compromise that was me. Bought something off the registry for their wedding present, and I added a couple essential game items for the shower. Clearly poker chips were not on the list because Kelli wouldn't let Nick put them on. Serious card for the wedding, grumpy Care Bears card for the shower. My apologies to fans of the cartoon characters; I don't know their real names. He had a thunderstorm or something and needed a hug.

I am not-so-subtlely reminding Julie of the wedding date because I think she would enjoy meeting my friends back home, and I know they want to meet her. And anyway, I went to a wedding with her up in noco. I didn't know a single guest. She owes me.

what to do

Essembly and traveling and Civilization seem to be conspiring against me having time left for blogging. Grrr.

what to do in palo alto

Me: Ooh, why haven't we gone go-cart racing yet? [driving past a place to race go carts]

Doug: Maybe because we're not nine years old anymore.

i'm in heaven

And by that, I mean eating a nice dinner in a restaurant overlooking the Pacific Ocean as the sun is setting behind the waves.

crisis in my apartment

Day 5.

I would say I'm sick of hearing about the tactical capabilities of short range missiles launched against a nuclear power, but fortunately I've been deprived of CNN for 5 days.

In all seriousness, this is a very exciting day. We have power again, the first time since Wednesday! There are still trees down everywhere, and Cookie did not behave well, but all in all, we escaped mostly unscathed. I figure between food that was thrown away (I took out 6 garbage bags worth of trash yesterday) to extra gas and eating out, this little vacation from the electric grid cost about $100. There's something about feeling like you don't have a home and everything about life being up in the air, not knowing what's happening next, not sleeping in your own bed for several days, that is very discomforting. I have never in my life seen 22 unread email messages waiting for me when I get home. Civilization has been toying with me, sitting there unplayable.

And there are people still who don't have power. It's not that any of this is life threatening (generally), it's that it's life altering. That's what's been so amazing and frustrating about this episode.

brick ovens and remote blogging

Technically, I suppose all blogging is remote. This is particularly remote as many of the brick buildings around town can currently be more accurately described as brick ovens. Great for pizza. Not so hot for people and pets. So I'm off exploring south city with Julie and Emily. It's great when you're getting calls about St. Louis being a disaster area and you have no clue what people are talking about. Hello, we don't have power; we haven't been watching the news on TV and reading it on the internet. No, I didn't know there was fun at Busch Stadium. What, part of the East Terminal blew onto the Interstate? And so forth.

It was really fun last night; we went to Ben and Jerry's for dinner and wandered around the loop. Just kind of walking around half in a daze about how fast the weather had changed and all these tree limbs down everywhere. Storms always bring in a really neat atmostphere, and when people are without electricity, that adds an interesting element to the evening. I should say, it was fun until we got back to the apartment. Hot at bedtime is not fun.

Let's see, this morning didn't shave, and didn't even get breakfast. I drive by McDonald's on the way to work and there's a handwritten note on the door saying sorry, we're closed because we have no power. It's very interesting not being able to get something like food when you want to have it. Most of us experience that so infrequently in the US it's hard even to explain what that's like going 24 hours without a real meal, as if ice cream and granola bars isn't enough to hold one over anyway. But it was a good excuse to crash an evening with Emily and Julie, and it adds almost a childish fun to a work environment where people have other concerns besides just work that spill over into the work day.

Oh, and to be clear, I'm fine. I need to shave, and I have lost a fair amount of food, but my car seems ok and my work had AC and I have a place to set up temporary camp in. What more can you ask for?

eye candy

I have decided that Civilization IV definitely falls under the addictive category. There are some very high expectations here, so I haven't had enough time to decide if it meets them, but I am certainly having a different reaction than when I bought Master of Orion III a while back, a downright terrible and worthless addition to follow the masterful Master of Orion II. The tutorial was amusing in that there's a little animated Sid Meier giving you instructions to follow as you start a new civ. I do have some of the negative reaction wondering why so much of the eye candy one expects in a first person shooter video game has to have migrated into Civ IV, particularly as it requires much more processing speed and RAM and the DVD has to be in the drive to run (I really don't know why it doesn't allow you to do a full install; there are internet features with multiplayer options, so surely they could check serial numbers that way for copy protection). But I will say that much of it does add to the gameplay, and aside from the time and expense of development and greater system requirements, none of it really detracts from the gameplay; it appears they didn't sacrifice playability to spend more time doing fancy graphics.

Religion finally does something interesting, and there is more flexibility among governmental effects. However, at least with the government civics, it seems like a lot of real world effects have been blurred for the sake of playability, which is an interesting choice given that the Civ series has been the benchmark for making playable computer games that bear some semblance to how things have worked in history. It is quite likely this will seem more realistic as I have a chance to spend more time with it, but it feels like there should be more benefits in going from, say, hereditary rule to universal suffrage than there are built into the game mechanics.

Or maybe that's just my cultural relativity biasing my opinions. At any rate, clearly an issue needing further inquiry and research. Enough with this writing already.

Before I go, Brian, I have to ask, do you need money or something? I know law school is expensive and all, but turning brianshank.com into a porn site, come on man. At least it should have been something a little more your style, a little Asian flavor or something.

short version

I said my next post would be a review of Civ IV. Fortunately, I didn't promise how long it would be.

All you need to know is that I had a great weekend, a long one, an exhausting one, with lots of driving from the corn fields of Iowa to the blacktop around Ted Drewe's. [Don't worry, you may or may not get to know more about the weekend.]

I had to do laundry Sunday night, so naturally, I fire up a little Civ while doing it.

I didn't make it to bed until about 1:30 this morning. Not a good way to start the week, especially when your COO is getting back from his two week vacation. [Don't worry, more about Civ will come later, too. But that really is all you need to know.]

explosion of chihuly

Hmm, my intent is to write about things roughly as they are happening, but I seem to be continually behind the times here on Stay Curious these days. Here it is Tuesday, and you are just now allowed to know how awesome my weekend was.

As awesome as it can be with family, of course; they are on their way through to Michigan and Ontario for camping and whatnot. Friday we went to Soda Fountain Square for dinner; good times. My sister took forever with her milk shake, kind of like how she took forever walking last year when it was free t-shirt night at the baseball game and we ended up being too late to get free t-shirts. Went back to the apartment, played a couple games, and did a reasonable job of getting to bed at a decent hour.

That was important because I was taking them to the Missouri Botanical Garden to see the Chihuly exhibit in the morning. I'm not particularly artistic myself, so it's one of those things that I more felt I should see to expand my horizons and crap like that rather than actually wanting to go, but I figured my family would like it and in general I like the garden a lot. The exhibit incorporates glass blowing into the lawns, fountains, and in particular, the foliage in the climatron and temperate house. It was pretty much what I expected, impressive in the scale of the work and every once in a while inspiring an unexpected appreciation for a certain color or shape or something, but basically feeling like a distraction from the gardens rather than an addition to it. I most disliked the glass lillipads put in the ponds between the climatron and the rose gardens. My parents both liked it, and I successfully ran the juice dry in my dad's camera! Unfortunately, my sister didn't seem very enthused, so that's a bummer because I thought she might get into it, but what can you do?

As I am sure you know, the real excitement of the weekend, the reason it has existed for months and months and months, is because it is the opening weekend for the second Pirates movie! The first one is the kind of movie that if it’s on and I walk by, it will take me 20 minutes to realize I stopped to watch it. And have I mentioned recently how awesome Keira Knightley is? Even if that’s not a draw for you (horror of that notwithstanding), what’s not to love about a fun movie with pirates and sword fighting and a feisty governor’s daughter? Obviously, a movie made simply because the first one did well isn’t going to be as good, and in particular I’m not a fan of the CGI creatures, but let me just say that my Pirates craving has been satisfied. And I got to show Julie and my parents a real movie theater; you know, the kind that gives you mints afterward.

Then Sunday kind of gets lost in a blur of seeing church people I haven’t seen in a couple weeks and doing laundry and spending some time with my neglected computer and cheeseball-filled World Cup goodness and being a taxi driver for a certain someone and so forth.

Next up: initial review of Civ IV! Oh, how exciting it is when your package finally reaches Hazelwood, MO. Even Sid’s talking tutorial is worth a mention…

how to celebrate the fourth of july

Other than blogging, of course! So much to write about, where to start?

After much fun with good barbecue this weekend, I was thinking what more fitting way to celebrate such a patriotic holiday as treating our leaders to the things they feel are "medically necessary in a humane and compassionate manner". Heck, the manufacturer says they're comfortable, safe, and don't cause injury, so, well, they must be. You see, we want our leaders to get all their nutrients; Cheney and Rummy look especially in need of some lifestyle assistance. So, we line up President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld, Justice Roberts, General Myers, and others who propogate the wreckless immorality in our prisons, and just as the band strikes up for the finale in the fireworks display, we force-feed them through Texas-sized plastic tubes shoved oh so daintily up their nasal cavities. Of course, due to budget constraints, there's only one tube available. As the President's the born-again one, he'll get the feeding tube last, so he can really know what it's like to follow Hebrews Chapter 13, "...remember those who are in prison, as though you were in prison with them; those who are being tortured, as though you yourselves were being tortured."

Ok, while they suffer "dumping syndrome" - nausea, vomiting, bloating, diarrhea, and shortness of breath - for the 3 hours the procedure, give or take, will last, what's next? Ah, Cardinals baseball! I made it to my first baseball game at the ridiculous waste of money otherwise known as the new Busch Stadium. It was my reward for working a ridiculous number of hours the last couple weeks. Good times. They had lost 8 straight, so it's funny to see fans of the first place team seem anxious, upset, and even angry. They booed the Cardinals a couple times. And people left before the end of the game. And this for a team that, let me repeat, was in first place in their division! I was most upset with St. Louis people and my respect will take some time to fully recover. But the ending helped a lot. Those that stayed figured out what to do with seat cushion night. Sure, you can sit on them. But what are seat cushions, really? They're pieces of foam wrapped in plastic. And light objects with a plastic surface area, when banged together, are thundersticks! Seat cushion night may never happen again, but that was playoff energy. Ah, good times. Nothing like winning in the bottom of the 9th to a raucus crowd armed with lots of projectiles.

[How ya doin' there, Georgie?]

So that was a while ago, but there hasn't been time for writing. Why you ask? Well, you, that's because work has been crazy. Among other things, one funder decided to change a contract and another one didn't get funding they were hoping for in the next year. So, lots of extra budgets and moving things around and "one more scenario..." and confused and angry staff and setting off alarms and sore necks and more goodness I'm sure that I've forgotten.

[Yeah Rummy, I bet you're glad we funded buying all these restraint chairs instead of funding programs that provide employment, training, and emergency assistance to veterans. It's not like those people did anything for our country, anyway. Having trouble settling into civilian life? Eh, just re-up; who cares if you're 39 or have damaged vision or carry deep psychological wounds. But ways of inflicting non-lethal pain on foreigners; that's a good investment for the nation!]

Saturday was good. Got to see some Liberty friends. All except the one I haven't seen in forever because she's been in Europe. Nope, her plane decided to stay in Chicago for a while. Good going Sarah.

[General Myers, you're probably enjoying this, watching all these civilians get what they deserve. But you wouldn't command uniformed personnel to do anything to anyone that couldn't be done humanely to you, right?]

Sunday was family stuff, just as the Fourth of July is supposed to be. Almost scary, actually, all this time in St. Louis, the American family get together around the pool, the grill, and vacation photos really does exist! Ooh, and don't forget the strawberry shortcake and two kinds of lemonade.

[Don't worry Cheney, we haven't forgotten about you. What's that? You think you're bleeding and developing lesions? Oh, that's supposed to happen. Good job Johnnie, you might want to press a little more forcefully on his chin if he starts trying to move again.]

Speaking of moving, drove past an incredibly moving sight while in Liberty, if being moved to embarrassment counts. Liberty is a Baptist town, and our mega-church for Baptists, Pleasant Valley (no, not this Pleasant Valley, with the running count of people entering hell as you surf their website) decided to put up some American flags. Now, this makes sense; Liberty is an all-American town in the heartland, and it's the Fourth of July weekend. Need I repeat the name of my town? At any rate, it wasn't the fact that they put up a couple American flags around the parking lot. It's that they literally surrounded the parking lot with flags. Then after building their fence, they decided to fill much of the grassy land between the parking lot and the road with what can best be described as gobs and gobs of flags. It was absolutely amazing; at once incredibly familiar and yet also showing that I have been successful at getting away enough from Liberty to be appalled as much as anything else by the scale of the effort. Is that fear? If we only have a hundred flags, the terrorists might think they've won! I don't know why; it is just as possible that each flag had a very specific meaning, perhaps a loved one lost or something like that. What I took away from it, in addition to the fun that is the Fourth of July as one gets closer to rural America, is that I've been able to put myself in a different enough position to at least notice something like that and have mixed emotions about it.

[Do you have emotions, Chief Justice? Nah, none of those, no ideas, no agendas; you're just a good-looking doll with the all-American family, right? Ah, so what if you want the President to be able to torture people at will. He's an American, elected by other Americans (well, you know, in theory, kind of like our capitalist system...), so surely anything he does can't be bad.]

And what is the all-American holiday without the all-American hero? Superman is back, in all 157 minutes of glory!

Oh, sorry, I forgot the memo; whenever someone refers to Superman, they are supposed to say Superman returns.

With exclamation points!! Superman Returns!!

oh my goodness

Have the Royals now won fully one out of every three games they've played this season?

Has my Amazon order for Civ IV really not shipped yet?

Am I getting old? Seriously, old people talk about health problems. And for the past couple days, my neck has been bothering me. Three people know this, I almost told a guy over lunch (ahh!), and now you know.

silly grocery store

Why do you put all the good cookies on sale at once! My pantry did not need three boxes of cookies.

And my time demands do not need a new computer game, yet I feel compelled to go pre-order Civ IV...can't stop myself...

small world

Who says computers don't bring people together? This is just too good.

I set up a profile on some website a while ago that I couldn't figure out how to later delete; one of those where part of it is free, but to actually have real conversations with people all of a sudden costs money, and of course they restrict any information that might let you find each other outside of the site. Anyway, not being stymied by the delete problem, I took advantage of the fact there isn't any other personal info besides the picture by simply changing the picture. No problem, right?

Well today I get home from work, check my email, and what do I find but a note from the website saying that someone clicked that they liked the picture. Not just anyone, of course; that wouldn't be noteworthy. It's somebody I know! How cool is that?

new record

I apparently haven't been to a traditional Methodist wedding before, or at least not one in Flo Valley. Getting family and wedding party down the aisle and back out was half the service. At one point, the pastor led a prayer for the new couple. Then he led us in the Lord's prayer. Then he led us in a prayer for the new couple. I'm not sure I've ever in all my years of parents who are both preacher's kids sat through three consecutive prayers. Lest you think I'm complaining, though, the whole sucker lasted 28 minutes by my watch. Well done! Congrats Matt and Erin.

fashionably late

I've been needing to do some cleaning and throwing stuff away and organizing and whatnot for a while in my room, so I got some of that done this morning. As of this writing, there are no clothes on the floor, only yesterday's clothes in the hamper, and all the clean clothes are hanging up in the closet! The old magazines are out in the trash, and I have one neat pile now by my bed of stuff left to read. Even have the shot in the Post-Dispatch of the new stadium hanging above my bed.

So, it only took me until mid June to pull out my summer clothes and stash winter sweaters in their place. At that pace, I'll get them back out, what, around January?

16 bit sadness

For post 256, a quick flashback. I've had my beloved Fossil Watch since we went to Portland for debate nationals in 2000 and Ricky convinced me I should buy one.

I came home for lunch today (why is it, now, that I am eating alone today, Kelli?). Walk into my room and hear a thud as I walk past the door. Mark this day, June 16, 2006, for it has seen the first visible scratch inflicted on my watch, just inside of the marker for 2. So sad.

pinked out

Jodi dragged me out of bed way too early on a Saturday morning. Not to do something cool like see a baseball game or go on a float trip or something. No no. To spend the morning surrounded by lots and lots of pink. And spend $20 on a t-shirt. Seriously, even the Sun Chips were in a pink bag.

But it's for a "good cause", and it was really quite a bit of fun. Her friends Cathleen and Tom were in town, for Race for the Cure, from Kentucky. They ran, but I was content to walk with Jodi (as it seems most people did, by the way). I consider myself quite tolerant of pink, but that was amazing; everything was pink. I was happy when we got done that the bottled water was clear!

They basically had booths set up between about Tucker and 18th street, and the course was a loop around them west on Olive to Compton then back east on Market to City Hall. This allows for some incredible views at the top of a couple hills of block after block of people packed together. Good times. I'll skip a lengthy discussion of all those cute runners as Julie now knows about Stay Curious. Hope you're having fun in Chicago.