Ode to the Grape

Courtesy Daily Kos, I bring you proof positive that A) wine is better for you than Tae Bo, and B) biotechies can be bastards (and I'm not even talking about the rat-killing).

Read it! And then go guzzle some Grenache.

Toon In

The first petition I ever signed was the one that my brother and I created in 1989 imploring our parents to let us watch The Simpsons. Tragically, our democratic machinations were quashed; nonetheless, I have since developed an abiding affection towards animation for grown-ups. Here are, in my opinion, the five greatest examples of this art form (and if golf is a sport, then cartoons are totally art):

5. The Simpsons — The progenitor of the modern wave of animated sitcoms, The Simpsons remains not only one of the most relevant and important airing American television shows, but also, somewhat amazingly, funny.

4. Daria — The protagonist is an awesomely sarcastic Geek the Girl in this sadly-shelved show which is still cuttingly mirth-inducing ten years later.

3. American Dad — Perhaps blasphemously bumping its older brother Family Guy (which needs to start being funny again), American Dad is a fun combination of goofy humor and cultural critique. With a German fish.

2. Home Movies — I've been trying to put my finger on why I like this show so much for years, but all I know is that when I found out it was re-airing on Adult Swim I did a jig.

1. South Park — Crass, irreverent, utterly unpolished. Clearly my type.

Honorable mentions go to Futurama and King of Hill — robots and rednecks, respectively. Actually, I propose they have an old school rumble. I've got ten bucks on Peggy Hill.

My Kingdom for a New Sex Scandal

I'm beginning to suspect that this puts me in the minority, but truth be told, I could care less if the President's pastor believes that human beings are descended from gigantic talking bananas. Reverend Wright screaming "God damn America" has far less to do with my vote than the candidates' positions on education, health care, the economy and, oh yeah, that war thing. I guess I'm not very good at being a scared white voter, but honestly, if this guy shoves himself into the spotlight one more time, I think my head will explode from the tedium.

And if we're really being honest with ourselves I think we'll all agree that the question is not whether Reverend Wright loves America as much as Barack Obama does (a question which will hopefully live infamy due to its being chiseled onto George Stephanopoulos' headstone by vandals) . Rather it's whether he loves America as much as this dog does:

Shiny

Today I joined the legions of those whose televisions require not two but four letters to appropriately form their acronyms: HDTV. While the picture is sharper and the channels are more numerous, what I find myself most pleased with is the fact that I was able to hook the thing up to the new DVR cable box, the DVD player and the surround sound system myself.

I think it is also worthy of note that thanks to this new contraption, I have developed a sudden and I suspect intractable fear of sea turtles.

I'd Like a Refund on My Refund

According to President Bush, the long-awaited tax rebate checks that comprise the backbone of the bi-partisan economic stimulus package are set to start going out on Monday. As a married filer with a fortuitous SSN and a proclivity for direct deposit, that means I should be getting my $1,200 in the next few days. (Too bad my TV decided to turn pink this week, but I digress.)

In his speech, Bush attempted to bolster consumer confidence by saying, "This money is going to help Americans offset the high prices we're seeing at the gas pump and at the grocery store, and it will also give our economy a boost to help us pull out of this economic slowdown."

Um, offset the high prices "we're" seeing at the gas pump? First of all, take your "we" and shove it, President Silver Spoon! Second of all, I thought the purpose of these rebate checks was to stimulate consumer spending across sectors of the economy, thereby reviving flagging retailers — not to grease the palms of the oil profiteering pirates who are largely responsible for this mess in the first place. To be crystal clear, what we have here is the President publicly stating that American should spend the tax dollars they are about to receive in the mail to increase the profits of the oil companies. Somehow I have a sneaking suspicion that this is pretty much what he was envisioning all along — "Go ahead and jack up prices, INSERT STUPID NICKNAME HERE. Bushie's got it covered."

Hell, why not save postage and just cut out the middle man? Go ahead and make mine out to Exxon Mobile.

What's That Go to Do with the Price of Rice in Sioux Falls?

In one of the more baffling abdications of journalistic responsibility in at least, I don't know, a month, the mainstream media continues to by and large ignore the fact that our planet is experiencing an increasingly serious food shortage. But it might get harder for the likes of Chris Matthews and Larry King to keep their heads buried in the mineral-depleted soil as the soaring costs of basic foodstuffs begin to impinge upon the U.S. marketplace. Already in the past week, multiple reports of rice and grain rationing are coming out of cities as disparate as San Francisco and Sioux Falls.

Ironically, this is partially a robbing Peter problem — diversion of edible crops to the manufacture of biofuels has helped to shape the situation. Another component is the incessant plundering of grain fields to feed the nation's millions of dead cows walking.

But really, can our busy journalists be blamed for getting distracted by things like Miley Cyrus' green bra? I mean, it is Green Week or whatever, right?

Soy for Streams

The ironic thing about Earth Day is that the greatest impact humans have on the planet is perhaps less on the actual earth than on the planet's water. While we in America go through bottle after plastic bottle of clean water each day, forty percent of the planet's population lack basic sanitation facilities. Literally thousands of children die each day as a result of conditions related to water and hygiene, which I imagine is about as pleasant as it sounds.

What can you do to help? There's the obvious — water your lawn less liberally, wash your car less often, and switch to a low-flow shower head. That last action would save roughly 2,500 gallons of water per year.

But why inconvenience yourself all year long when you can absolve yourself of all moral obligations vis a vis water in just one day? According to The Food Revolution by John Robbins, the production of one single pound of beef uses between 2,500 and 5,200 gallons of water.

Simply put, forgoing one hamburger is better for the environment than not showering at all for an entire year.

I can't imagine an easier way to be environmentally proactive than occasionally skipping the Super-Mega-Double-Crazy-Vein-Polluting Beefy Burger. Besides. These things are pretty damn tasty.

Clinton and the Cold War

Twice now in the past week Hillary Clinton has suggested that the United States President should use the threat of nuclear attack to cow Iran into submission. Twice now in the past week she has failed spectacularly to distinguish herself from the militaristic Machiavellis who dragged our nation into a foolish and tragically costly war which has placed Americans in greater peril than we were in prior to its commencement.

The two instances to which I refer are last week's farce of a debate and Clinton's appearance on Countdown this evening in which she stated unequivocally that the United States must threaten to respond to Iran's currently non-existent nuclear weaponry with "massive retaliation." Piercing my feelings of horror and dismay, I feel that a particular element of Clinton's newly emerging foreign policy position needs to be thoroughly and immediately explored: her decision to model the United States' treatment of Iran and the Middle East after the Cold War foreign policy of the post-war world.

In her conversation with Keith Olbermann today, Hillary Clinton made the following chilling statement:

"Well what we were talking about was the potential for a nuclear attack by Iran, if Iran does achieve what appears to be its continuing goal of obtaining nuclear weapons, and I think deterrence has not been effectively used in recent times. We used it very well during the Cold War when we had a bipolar world, and what I think the President should do and what our policy should be is to make it very clear to the Iranians that they would be risking massive retaliation were they to launch a nuclear attack on Israel."

There are two fundamental problems with Clinton's unfortunate decision to use the lens of the Cold War to frame our current relationship with Iran and nations in the Middle East. The first is philosophical in nature and the second is strategic; both are disturbing and to use Obama's terminology, "wrongheaded."

I'll begin with my philosophical objection. The Cold War was one of ideology, pitting the capitalist West against the communist East (oversimplified for the sake of a larger point). The goal of each contender was not to achieve some sort of conciliatory understanding or peaceful coexistence; the explicit goal was to crush the other ideology and its faithful adherents.

In framing the growing tensions between the United States and Iran through this "with us or wiped from the face of the Earth" lens, Clinton affirms the worst suspicions of U.S. foreign policy — that we not only view Western ideology (Christianity) as superior to Eastern ideology (Islam), but that we understand the goals of each "side" to be the utter destruction of the "enemy ideology." Clinton's A-bomb rattling is precisely the sort of language that incites the spread of violent extremism, and is very, very dangerous.

There are also two strategic issues that arise from modeling U.S. foreign policy towards the Middle East after the Cold War.

First and foremost, the Cold War consisted of a stand-off between two nations that already had nuclear weaponry. In an attempt to assure that neither party deployed that weaponry, both sides engaged in a mad and costly arms race. The goal was not to prevent the other side from developing nuclear weapons; the goal was simply to have bigger, better, faster, more weapons ourselves.

This is a very bad model to use in our dealings with Iran for the obvious reason that the objective is very different: currently, it is in our best interest to convince Iran that they do not need nuclear weapons at all. Threatening to use our already existing nuclear arsenal against them is likely to accomplish the opposite. Granted, Clinton claims that "what we were talking about was the potential for a nuclear attack by Iran." But how is it wise to base our current foreign policy and choose our current words towards Iran on the assumption that they will already do the thing we are hoping they will not do? Is it not wiser to adopt an approach, a message, that will entice Iran into believing that we do not want to bomb the bejeezus out of (or perhaps into) them?

There is a second strategic problem with using the Cold War as a template in approaching the Middle East. While it was a conflict of ideology, the Cold War was fought on two physical fronts — the military and the economic. Not only did the proxy military confrontations between the United States and the so-called Evil Empire(s) result in wasted lives and resources, they were ultimately ineffectual in ending the Cold War. It was the economic front that resulted in the West ostensibly winning. The Cold War worked as a war of attrition; through effective use of embargo the United States was able to, for all intents and purposes, starve the Soviets into submission. They had nothing we wanted (well, needed), and we were more than able to thrive economically absent the USSR as a partner in trade.

It seems to me there is a rather massively glaring difference between that situation and our present economic position vis a vis the Middle East today. I'm more than supportive of a decrease in our dependence on foreign oil (or oil in general, for that matter), but I think it is foolish to assume that our Middle Eastern rivals (if we insist on constructing them as such) will spend 30 years glaring at us from afar and them implode.

And again, the underlying philosophical assumption if we adopt this Cold War model would be that upon the imploding of our "Islamo-fascist" enemy, our "winning" would result in replacing their problematic ideology with our superior version. There is no scenario in which a Cold War strategy of "deterrence" as thusly described results in a peaceful, long-term relationship between the United States and Iran.

Today Hillary Clinton has succeeded in validating every worst suspicion of United States foreign policy and the Middle East. God help us if she wins — and I don't care which one.

Bigfoot Sightings

In honor of Earth Day on April 22, I will be devoting several of this week's posts to environmental issues. Today I'd like to talk about your shoes. No, not the fact that you've chosen to wear charcoal grey slacks with brown dress-tennies (although that's also a problem). Rather, I'd like to talk about your footprint — your carbon footprint.

Your carbon footprint measures the extent of the adverse impact you have on the environment merely through virtue of your existence in a modern industrial society. The measurement is based on the estimated amount of CO2 emissions you produce each day. The less "green" your lifestyle, the greater your carbon footprint.

The Environmental Protection Agency offers one of many Carbon Footprint Calculators (although they call theirs a Personal Emissions Calculator because if they used the parlance of the people their collective head would explode). According to the EPA, the average two-person household produces about 41,500 pounds of carbon emissions over the course of the year. My husband and I came in at an estimated 33,500. That's better than average, but given the consumption averages of the stereotypical American, that's like saying we're funnier than Jamie Kennedy.

Another fun calculator is at Carbon Footprint. Their calculator allows for more detailed information in terms of dietary habits, travel habits and so forth. My carbon footprint there came out to 7.654. That just a little over one-third of the average American's carbon footprint (20), about two-thirds of the average First-Worlder (11), but almost twice as much as that produced by the average human worldwide (4). I suppose for an imperialist swine I'm doing pretty well (I suspect not eating meat has a lot do with it), but given the worldwide target of 2...

My feet hurt.

But the news isn't all tragic! According to the EPA, if my husband and I replaced six light bulbs in our home with energy-efficient bulbs, it would reduce our annual carbon shoe size by two percent. Done and done.

Click here to see what you can do to quit kicking the planet in the face.

Blur Had the Right of It

I somehow found myself sucked into a looking glass conversation about gender-separated public education. Here's what I had to say:

I teach in an urban high school in Southern California. In my classes of 40 or more human beings, I have teens who are Latino, white, black, Asian, English learners, recently declassified English learners, students with learning disabilities, students from military families, students from single parent households, Catholic students, Jewish students, secular humanist students, gay students, straight students, students with physical disabilities, and yes, students who are male and female.

The notion that simply separating males and females would remove the need for me, as a teacher, to employ every education technique (sensory, social, or otherwise) in my extensive arsenal is patently absurd. Nor would such a separation create an environment wherein students' most fundamental needs are being met; I find that the education needs of many of my students are far less defined by their gender than by any number of other factors comprising their unique situations and identities.

There are any number of ways we could divvy those students up "for their own good." But as I teach them world history, I think it's ever so valuable to have all of their wonderful voices and perspectives in our conversations — and make no mistake, a good teacher makes sure all of those voices are included. Period.

In earning my MAE, my coursework included extensive study of neurology as it pertains to adolescent learning, and I am more than familiar with the bio-essentialist arguments. They have many grandfathers, all equally well-intentioned, and all equally specious. I fundamentally object to the notion of pedagogical biodeterminism based on "the latest research" (which is always inevitably revised by even latest-er research). I do not object to the usefulness of science in honing education; I do object to rendering it as the only criterion.

Being a teacher means teaching every mind in the room, regardless of which of the myriad subgroups of humans each student happens to fall into. It is a noble task which can — and ought — to be done.

Fug or Fab?**

Forgetting Sarah Marshall will be:

A. One of those movies that looks like it will suck but then doesn't after all.
B. A mediocre excuse to consume inexcusable amounts of sugar and salt.
C. The final nail in the coffin of the art formerly known as Kristen Bell's career.
D. The largest piece of crap ever to be released from the bowels of the American film industry.

** Credit where it's due!

I'd Like to Meet a Lapel Pin Voter

Here are the four things that ABC moderators attempted to hammer Barack Obama on during the first half of tonight's Democratic debate in Pennsylvania:

- Not wearing a flag pin on his lapel (curiously, Hillary Clinton's bare lapel somehow eluded notice);
- Reverend Wright;
- Being "elitist"; and
- His so-called connections to a domestic terrorist group that was active in the 1960s (although strangely they neglected to ask Clinton about her connections to the same group, even though her husband pardoned two of them).

Here are four things that were not brought by the moderators at any point during the debate:

- The plummeting value of the U.S. dollar;
- Today's Supreme Court decision that use of lethal injection does not constitute not cruel and unusual punishment;
- Admissions this week that Still-President Bush was actively aware of his administration's approval of torture techniques; and
- Education, environment and the economy (okay, technically that's three, but they're linked — especially somewhere like Pennsylvania — and not one of them was brought up anyway).

But I suppose considering the fact that one of the moderators was former Bill Clinton advisor George Stephanopoulos, I should settle for being pleasantly surprised that they didn't ask Obama if his wife's status as a Marxist Islamo-fascist baby-eater would adversely influence his presidency.

And Road Runner for Veep Veep?

Apparently Obama has offered the Treasury Secretary position to Hannah Montana. I can only say that she's bound to be a step up from the current guy.

Out of the Frying Pan into the Popper

Problem: Reliance on foreign oil.

Solution: Fuel cars with corn instead.

New Problem: Rapidly spreading global famine leads to accusations that biofuels constitute a human rights violation.

New Solution: Given our proclivity for invading four-lettered nation-states that begin with the letter I, move that we invade Iowa and nationalize all arable land.

Or, we could always do that potato famine thing again.

I've Changed My Mind about the Bosons

So regarding that whole god particle machine I was writing about — I would like to hereby issue a retraction regarding its coolness factor. Because apparently while the vaunted atom smasher might indeed open tiny little windows into brave new worlds thereby revolutionizing science and faith as we know it, it may instead give birth to a star-system-gobbling black hole. No joke. According to an article in the New York Times, critics (read: other people with PhD's in astrophysics) assert that the machine may well create a black whole that will instantly suck the Earth, all of its inhabitants, and possibly even Arthur Dent into it.

Um, hello, bad? Not only because I'd rather my skull not be condensed into the size of a nanobot, but also because if that doesn't happen, do you have any idea how many terrible faux-fi movies this will spawn? Seriously, deearthification might actually be preferable.

Retrieved a Nothing

In what I consider to be an unqualified success of a day, I spent the afternoon consuming, cover-to-cover, a full four of the 25 heretofore unread magazines decorating my coffee table. I read one each of Harper's, The Nation, NEA Today and California Educator.

Of the many excellent paragraphs I read today, the most fabulous by far was located in the "Findings" section of Harper's:

"A sex hormone was found in the drinking water of San Francisco, and anti-anxiety medications were found in the drinking water of Southern California. Prozac was revealed not to work, researchers demonstrated that placebos are more effective if the drugs for which they stand in are said to be more expensive, and a Scottish study determined that roughly half of a person's happiness is due to genetics. Physicists stored and retrieved a nothing."

Do Not Collect 200 Gajillion Dollars

And I quote: "Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation is in talks with Microsoft about joining in its contested bid for Yahoo, according to people involved in the discussions."

Okay, first of all, "people involved in the discussions." "People" involved in the "discussions." What does that even mean? My husband and I are presently people involved in discussions. According to us, Dick Cheney's skin is made of calcified American cheese that hardened during his journey from the Death Star to planet Earth. Think the much-vaunted New York Times will pick that one up?

Furthermore, I find myself suddenly in the grip of a most terrible fright. If Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch breed, what will their children look like? Will there be horns? Glasses? Horn-rimmed glasses... that eat babies? Run, little Yahoo, run! Get thee to a nunnery!

Or at least a nice partnership with Papa Google. Although here again I am baboozleplexified by the odd lack of journalistic... journalism. Yahoo's own website is carrying a story that claims the company views Google as a potential alternative to the Microsoft buyout, but that very story contains the following quote: "A Google spokesman declined to comment, saying he was not aware of the story." So Yahoo is, what, floating the story in the hopes that the gods of Google will shrug and assume that they must not have noticed the Yahoo merger amidst all of their other corporate congealments?

All I know is that if I have to start typing my search queries into the image of Bill O'Reilly's gaping maw, I am going to officially become a Luddite.

Let There Be Bosons!

Scientists believe they are on the brink of discovering the intriguingly monikered "god particle" through a process of smashing atoms to bits with Mike Tyson's fists a very large machine. While the prospect of finally bringing to light what makes light, well, light, is indeed fascinating, I can't help but wonder if the millions of dollars allocated to the project might not have been better spent creating a machine that would bring to light socks that disappear in the dryer.

I'm just saying.

Death by Domesticity

Today's favorite headline: "Men Create More Housework for Women". According to the article, married women today spend an average of seven more hours per week on housework than single women. Conversely, married men spend an average of one hour less per week on housework than their single counterparts (although apparently they do more housework than they did in 1976 — hurrah).

As I sit here typing this, I am looking at not one but two empty glasses and a half-consumed can of Coke left scattered on the coffee table by either malicious gnomes or my husband.

Being liberated sure is awesome.

Gadgetastic

I have a new favorite toy — Google Reader! It's basically a ridiculously easy feed reader type thing with Googly goodness. Today I effectively smooshed The Huffington Post, Go Fug Yourself and my friends' blogs all into one gmail-inspired contraption.

Truly, internet, you are extremely diverting.

Give Me That Old Time Social Stratification

This just in: 80,000 jobs slashed in March! Unemployment rate surpasses five percent! Even Ben "Just Go Buy More DVD's or Something" Bernake admits recession is all but inevitable!

But for those of you who had the good fortune to be on the friendly end of the government's recent bailout of your imploding multinational corporation and find yourself with a few extra million to throw around, may I suggest a diamond-studded thong? With its 518 brilliant-cut diamonds and 27 white gold tassels, really, it's quite tasteful.

Speaking of government bailouts, Bill Maher made a good point — why is it that when we socialize corporate profits it's the Attack of the Red Menace, but when we socialize corporate losses it's good business? And why aren't we socializing Homeowner Joe's losses?

I think it's time for the man behind the curtain to start singing for his supper.

Spin Me Right Round

Today NBC announced that The Office is going to have a spin-off. I decided I'd like to have a spin-off of my life. It could star my dogs, my husband, and a bunch of random people he works with. Or whatever. The point is that when my life became too odious to bear, I could randomly drop into the spin-off and play a bit part in some story entitled "Cole and the Mystery of the Misplaced Sheet Music".

Someone, make this happen.

Sometimes My Brother Emails Me Things

Things I learned today from The Internets:

1. There is a Russian YouTube. Awesomely, it is called RuTube.

2. Russians are into some pretty weird stuff. And I'm not even talking about the fact that their alphabet looks like sneezes.

3. That weird stuff includes a two-legged dog who walks on her own hind legs. I'm not even kidding.

4. The first hit produced by a Google image search for "Russian culture" is a picture of a set of traditional hand-painted Russian nesting dolls. The first hit produced by a Google image search for "American culture" is a lawyer joke cartoon.

5. The seventh hit for both searches is a shirtless person.