Exciting new ideas in disenfranchisement!

During the 1980's, a popular meme was that the left has no new ideas and the right was the ideology moving forward. Of course, the main idea of the right is very old.

"We hate government. If you let us run government, we promise you will soon hate it as much as we do."

I suppose when you have an idea as catchy as that one, you really don't need new ideas. Most of the weirdest ideas from the Tea Party crowd are obvious variations on that theme.


Where can we find exciting new ideas? Why, Hollywood, of course!

Enter Pat Sajak, deep thinker, connoisseur of ceramic dogs, every bit as good at math as Vanna White is good at spelling, which is to say he can read numbers off a teleprompter. Writing in the National Review Online, Pat puts forward the exciting new plan to take the vote away from public employees. After all, public employees want to keep being paid, so doesn't that mean they have a conflict of interest whenever an issue would mean less revenue is taken in?

To be fair to Mr. Sajak, he doesn't want to take my entire right to vote away. He doesn't want to put public employees in the same boat with ex-felons. He just thinks the 240,000 people like me who are California state employees shouldn't vote on measures where we have our livelihoods at stake. I expect he feels the same way about local government employees voting on local bond measures. Extend that to everyone who cashes a government check that isn't federal and we are talking about millions of people across the country.

As a public employee, lemme 'splain, Pat. I don't have a conflict of interest. I have an interest. You have an opposing interest, an interest in paying as little in taxes as you possibly can. You are right that it's easier to win an argument when you don't let the other side speak, but here's the chance of this little ploy gaining traction. Zero. Even if this nonsense got on the ballot somewhere AND more than 50% of voters thought it sounded like a good idea, the courts would kill it. You don't get to take away people's citizenship rights just because they work for the government.

I first heard about this over on the progressive website Talking Points Memo. Most of the commenters went with jokes that were some variations on "Pat, I like to buy a _____." Instead of ending with a gag, I'll end with a brag. This is yet another moment when I'm proud to say I won my money on Jeopardy! and not on your crap show, Pat.

You should stick with the prize packages. This "thinking for a living" gig is harder than it looks.

Maybe We Could Write Letters

Yesterday, Padre Mickey posted a song from A Cruel Hoax called God In The Doorway, which he has posted up on The You Tubes. This made me realize I should stop being so damn lazy and post some of the songs I recorded back in the day up on The You Tubes as well.

This first song is titled Maybe We Could Write Letters. I went all Prince and stuff in the recording studio and played all the instruments, except well... I'm not Prince. The bass line is "borrowed" from Booker T. and the MG's Time Is Tight and the lyrics are kinda sorta like Prince's When You Were Mine, which is to say it's kinda sorta a clean version of Cee Lo Green's F*#k You, except when it's not, and it was recorded twenty five years earlier, so at least Mr. Green can't sue me.

All modesty aside, I'm proud of this and I'd like to know what y'all think. I'm going to put it up on Facebook as well.

A story on for profit colleges in The New York Times.

I've done some teaching at for profit colleges. That industry is now in the news because Congress is investigating it. I didn't teach at either of these schools for very long and I would have to think long and hard about going back to a for profit school. The pay isn't as good for the instructors and the students are charged much more for an hour of instruction than they are at community colleges. This link to an op-ed column in The New York Times by Jeremy Dehn from Denver, sent to me by my friend Ken Rose. Many of Dehn's experiences are similar to mine and he has seen some things I didn't see and investigated the industry more deeply than I have.




The most telling numbers are that for profit schools have 12% of all students in post-secondary education and those students account for 23% of all the student loans. They are also twice as likely to default on those loans. Admissions policies are as lax as they are at community colleges, but failing at one of these schools is a much more expensive proposition, leaving students with a lot of debt and nothing to show for it.




The part of the equation I wasn't aware of was who invests in the for profit education industry. Dehn brings up that his school, the Art Institute of Colorado, is one third owned by Goldman Sachs. The people with the most skill at gaming the financial systems realize that there are ample methods to milk money away from the government in the form of student loans and into the pockets of Big Finance, spending a short time in the hands of overcharged consumers who will be liable for picking up the tab should anything not go as planned.

I have an in-law I deeply dislike who decided to see if he could convert some of us to the glories of the free market over Thanksgiving dinner a few years back. He told me that private industry could do a much better job of educating people than the state schools currently do, and that I would be a happier and more productive worker in such a system. He was disappointed that my life experience was more convincing than his belief in a libertarian paradise where the profit motive would reward all conscientious workers and only punish the lazy and dishonest.

He doesn't show up to Thanksgiving any more. It's a much more pleasant holiday now.

Rare (and not so rare) events and the calendar.

Today is the tenth of October, 2010. No matter if you think of putting the day first or the month first, numerically this is 10/10/10. This doesn't happen very often. Obviously, it happened in 1910 and will happen again is 2110. Also, if you are looking for triple dates like this, they happen in the first twelve years of a century and the last one we will see for a while will be December 12, 2012, unless those silly New Age types who put stock in those pesky Mayans are right and the world comes to an end on the Winter Solstice. That would mean 12/12/12 two years from now will be the last triple date ever.

Don't make book on it. Or more practically, don't buy stuff you can't afford on credit assuming you won't have to pay it off.

So, triple dates. xx/xx/xx only happens twelve times a century. There will also be dates like 6/6/66 or 9/9/99, but those are a little different. So far, so good.

I've also had friends and blog buddies send messages to this general effect.

"This October will have five Fridays, five Saturdays and five Sundays. This happens every 823 years..." or some other equally impressive number.

Impressive, but not even remotely true.

For a month with 31 days, having five weekends in a month like this month is exactly equivalent to saying the first of the month falls on a Friday. Look at the calendar above if this isn't clear. This happens about 1/7 of the time. Because of leap years, Friday, October 1 does not happen every seven years. It happened last in 2004 and will happen again is 2021.

I'd like to say this is just "common sense", but I know plenty of clever people who don't have a reliable numerical sense. Just like an aptitude for music or for draftsmanship, it seems like the most natural thing in the world to people who have it and a daunting task to people who don't. I wrote about this back in August, and I'd like to say I've had a wonderful breakthrough and know exactly how to solve the problem of giving everyone mathematical common sense through education, but that would be a lie. I know if I get all Socratic on a student and ask the right questions, I can get a interested student to see an idea like this with only a tiny amount of prodding. The trick is to get that person to have a little voice inside his or her own head that will ask the right questions.

I have that voice. I can't shut the little bastard up. A lot of people don't have that voice in their heads at all.

Random 10, 10/8/10

I Got It Bad (And That Ain't Good) Ella Fitzgerald and Duke Ellington
Let Down Radiohead
Deep Dark Truthful Mirror Elvis Costello with Allan Toussaint
Suavecito Malo
Texas Girl At the Funeral of her Father Randy Newman
Little Wonder David Bowie
A Porter's Love Song (to a Chambermaid) Fats Waller
Jesus Was Way Cool King Missile
The Masochism Tango Tom Lehrer
God's Away On Business Tom Waits

I have a boatload of songs by Elvis Costello, Tom Waits and Fats Waller on my computer, so it's only a matter of time until all three show up on the same Random 10. I also have a passel of David Bowie and Tom Lehrer, but if I was tempted to stop this Random 10 because it just wasn't going to get any better, I would have stopped in at the Radiohead tune, which I love like crazy.

What's playing where you are?

I agree with Anderson Cooper.Either "The Dilemma" re-shoots a scene or there should be a boycott.

Anderson Cooper was on the Ellen Show and said he saw a trailer for a movie that had a character saying "That's so gay" in a derogatory way, using "gay" in the place of "stupid" or "lame" or "uncool". He said he hated that use of the language, but he did not name the movie.

I saw the same trailer this week. The movie is called The Dilemma and it is directed by Ron Howard and written by Alan Loeb. They should be ashamed of themselves. I'm not saying the phrase should never be uttered by anyone on screen ever, but the writer and director should know that when a character says that line, a large part of the audience will hate that character, assuming correctly that the character is mean and stupid. This line was put in the trailer in the mouth of the alleged hero of this alleged light comedy, played by Vince Vaughn.

The movie comes out in January. There is still time to re-shoot the offending scene. If Howard and Loeb have even a shred of dignity between them, they will bite the bullet and do the right thing. If not, let me be among the first to ask people of goodwill not to see this movie, which looks pretty damned stupid even without the pointlessly offensive scene in the trailer.

Yet another reason to love Princess Sparkle Pony.

If you know about lolz and you know about Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell and her anti-masturbation views, this joke kinda sorta writes itself.

Well, I know about both those things, but I didn't write this.

Peteykins, the artist formerly known as Princess Sparkle Pony, wrote this.

This is yet another reason to love Princess Sparkle Pony's Photo Blog.

You should visit sometime. Seriously.

My first post to The You Tubes

Last week, I had a song stuck in my head that I hadn't heard in years, Ghost Riders In The Sky. While I concede it's a little corny and old fashioned, I like it a lot. I'm not sure what brought it to mind, but I think it might be that it's similar in rhythm to an old folk song named Buffalo Skinners, which I have on my iTunes list sung by Raphael Boguslav, a folk musician in the 1950s and 1960s who went into calligraphy as a profession. You can see his calligraphy work on The You Tubes through this link.


Thinking about Ghost Riders In The Sky running through my head, it only made sense I get a version on my computer. I mean, what's 99 cents? And 99 cents on a credit card bill seems even smaller. There are about a jillion versions, the most famous by the baritone singer Vaughn Monroe. The song is made to be dramatic and bombastic, and after Monroe made a big hit of it, every version thereafter seemed to be about virtuosity or big production values.

But then I listened to about thirty seconds of a version by Burl Ives. He was the first to record the song in February 1949 and his version is very simple, just Burl singing in his haunting tenor voice and strumming a guitar. much sparser than Monroe's big hit recorded a month later or the famous jangly guitar version by Duane Eddy decades after. I decided to plunk my money down to get the Burl Ives version.

I went to The You Tubes to see what was there. There were lots of versions, naturally, including one by Burl Ives. But it was a later recording that made a big production number of it, like almost all recordings after Monroe set the standard. I decided I would put up the Burl Ives original.


I made a "video" with iMovie. It's just a title card and pictures of Burl alternating with illustrations of the story. I thought it would be better than looking at a blank screen.

The process takes a while, but now that I know how to do it, I'll be adding more videos to my channel. For the most part, I'll stick to putting up songs of my own to avoid any copyright hassles, but I'm also thinking of putting up some of the really rare stuff I have on my ITunes collection, most especially the songs of Raphael Boguslav from his album from the 1950s Songs From A Village Garrett.

Let me know what you think, either with comments here or in the comment section of the video.

A concise review of The Social Network

There is a new movie out called The Social Network, based on true stories swirling around the creation of Facebook, or at least as much truth as you get in a deposition.

Here is my review.

It was directed by David Fincher, who also made Zodiac, based on the true story of the Zodiac killer and his crime spree that started about 40 years ago.

You should really see Zodiac.

It was written by Aaron Sorkin, who wrote the screenplay to The American President, not based on anything like a true story.

You would do well to see The American President.

This is my review of The Social Network.

You're welcome.

Endorsements on the local and state ballots

There are many races in the mid-term elections about which I have strong negative feelings. I really don't want to see Meg Whitman become governor, which means I kinda do want to see Jerry Brown win. I don't want Carly Fiorina, a dreadful class warrior and American job killer, elected to the senate. This means I back Barbara Boxer. For me, it's a little easier backing Boxer than Brown, but in both these cases, it's more about the unacceptable alternative.

Yesterday, I sent money to four campaigns because I feel positively about them. These are the candidates and propositions I wholeheartedly endorse on the ballot.

Jerry Ellis Powell is running for the at large seat on the AC Transit Board of Directors. He is a former student of mine and new to politics. He is running as an outsider who wants to look out for the interests of the people who use the bus service. I can think of no better motive to run for office and he has my full support.

Michael Nava is running for superior court judge in San Francisco. He was one of the top two vote getters in June and is in a run-off election against an appointed incumbent. My blog buddy SFMike (Michael Strickland, not Michael Nava) has written extensively on Nava's campaign. I support Nava's efforts, though his name will not be on the ballot I cast, since I live in the East Bay and his race is a San Francisco city issue.


There are several ballot initiatives I support, but none is more important to me personally than Yes on 25. Currently, it takes a two-thirds majority to pass a budget in California. Yes on 25 will make it possible to pass a budget with a simple majority, though it will still take a two-thirds majority to raise taxes. Personally, I would like to see a smaller super-majority for tax increases, but politics is the art of the possible, and the change to majority rule on a budget vote is possible. Because many of my checks are signed by the state, this issue is very near and dear to my heart.


Because it is so hard to get tax increases, we need a new revenue stream that can't be dammed by the obstructionist Republican Party. Proposition 19 would decriminalize marijuana cultivation and tax the newly legal proceeds. It's hard to say how much money this generate, but even conservative guesses say it could be substantial.

Politicians will not end the war on drugs. The people need to get out in front if anything is going to happen. I am not a big marijuana enthusiast. I've smoked, I've inhaled, but I'm not very good at smoking in general and the pleasant effects of marijuana fight against a nasty feeling in my throat. I've tried pot brownies twice, once thirty years ago and again recently, and only a small amount can put me on my ass, and not in a nice way.

I don't want to see Prop. 19 passed to make it easier for me to buy drugs. Beer and wine are my drugs of choice and it's already legal for me to get them. I don't pretend it will have no negative effects on society. I want to see us try something different with regards to marijuana because I believe what we do now doesn't work even a little bit. We jail people for no good cause. The most logical use for ample illegal income sources is the widespread corruption of the police. With the extra revenue legal pot could bring in, state workers like me might have a little more job security. That is the main selfish reason I support Yes on 19.

If you can vote in favor of any of these candidates or propositions on your ballot this year, please do so. As I said before, these have my wholehearted support.