« Archives in May, 2012

Official Juniorbird.com Primary Election 2012 Endorsements

May 22, 2012 / posted in Politics / No Comments

It’s primary election season again, and that means it’s time for me to make my endorsements again. You may scoff, but remember: if you’d listened to me, you wouldn’t have elected Noguez as County Assessor! Where possible, I provide endorsements for all parties.

(Also, if you’re thinking of voting Democratic, or simply live in the Bay Area, I highly recommend reading Auros’s thorough endorsements, which are close to mine but not identical.)

President

Democratic — Barack Obama

You dance with the horse what brung ya.

Republican — Buddy Roemer

When I look for someone to endorse in any position, but especially for President of the United States, I look for someone with an internally-consistent and mutually-reinforcing set of positions. For instance, Obamacare is the centerpiece of an interlocking set of policies that are designed not just to reform healthcare but also to deal with long-term budget issues and enhance business productivity, which will speed the economy and help with long-term budget issues. You may disagree with the idea, but you have to agree that, in theory, the system is consistent.

That’s been a problem with GOP candidates lately. You may not believe in climate change, but opposing alternative energy growth means that we are signing on for large ongoing military expenditures to safeguard our conventional energy sources, which are quite far away; that contradicts a pro-balanced-budget position. If you don’t want to allow immigrants from Latin America, that’s fine, but don’t complain about inflation, because you’re increasing the cost of labor and that contributes to inflation.

Buddy Roemer has a system of policies that appear to be internally-consistent and well-thought-out. That’s why I endorse him here.

Green — Roseanne Barr

American Independent – Mad Max Rieske

So long as your candidate won’t be elected, you might as well vote for Roseanne (yes, that Roseanne) or someone named “Mad Max.” Depressingly enough, nobody outside the Green party lists a Web site or an e-mail address at their own domain, which means that none of these other candidates are smart enough to figure out that it takes about $5 to have your own e-mail address for a year.

Senator

Democratic — Dianne Feinstein

It is difficult to think of a lineup of candidates that could make me endorse Feinstein, but apparently this is it. Feinstein is a lapdog for George W. Bush and big business, and I certainly plan to vote Republican in the fall so that I can at least know that I’m getting such a lapdog on purpose, but I suppose that you might as well vote Feinstein here.

Republican — Elizabeth Emken

The only real choice here is between Emken and Orly Taitz. I’m tempted to endorse Taitz on the “dance with the horse what brung ya” principle that I used to endorse Obama above, but she’s clearly too much of a nutjob to actually apply herself to legislating once elected.

US Representative, 37th District

Karen Bass

Bass, who is running unopposed, has fortunately been a good rep for this district.

State Assembly, 54th District

Holly Mitchell

Mitchell has been effective in her freshman term in Sacramento — actually introducing and passing bills — and sees the 54th as a center of green business, which is both laudable and realistic. I do however doubt her ability to vote for the cuts in state spending that we so clearly need (to go with the new taxes we also so clearly need).

District Attorney

Jackie Lacey

Lacey is running against Carmen Trutanich, who’s done a nice job as City Attorney. However, “Nuch’s” skills seem to be most as a courtroom presence and effective administrator, which is what the retiring Steve Cooley brought to the office. When Cooley was elected, we needed someone to stabilize things and make the office work; Cooley succeeded at that and now we need to move forward. Lacey seems to have the kind of vision we’d need for that. She’s been central to the establishment of a number of alternative courts in the LA area, an advancement that should help better deliver justice; cut costs; and speed the criminal process.

County Supervisor, 2nd District

Mark Ridley-Thomas

Ridley-Thomas is running unopposed. County Supervisors rarely seem to be opposed. Strange, that.

California Measure 28

Yes

Term limits have been disastrous in Sacramento, creating a set of politicians who are best-served not by finding a way to move policy forward but by making extreme pronouncements and blocking all progress. We’d be best off repealing them, but at least Measure 28 is a small improvement, creating some incentive for some subset of legislators to actually invest in legislating, not pontificating, by allowing them to stay in one office just a little longer.

California Measure 29

No

I’m all for an increase in the cigarette tax — it is proven to decrease smoking, which is good; it raises revenue, which we need desperately; and our cigarette taxes are low compared to other states. But this is a silly bill. There’s a tradition in California, it seems, of passing a law creating new revenue and also saying directly how that revenue will be spent. Seems a nice idea, but some estimates have us setting 70% of our budget by mandate, which is just stupid and makes it hard to fix our current budget mess (or future ones). Let’s not make another law like that.

LA County Measures H

LA County Measure L

Yes

Both of these simply continue existing taxes. With all the County’s financial troubles, now is no time to go cutting revenues; and it’s not as if hotels in, say, Marina del Rey are made uncompetitive by this tax.

So go forth and vote on the 5th! On to victory!








Compromise & Consistency

May 19, 2012 / posted in Politics / No Comments

A lot of us liberals were disappointed, although not surprised, to see the threat of a default over the debt ceiling trotted out again. I mean, it seemed to us like the deal was: pass a budget, get the ability to stick to the budget. Apparently not.

So I was annoyed, wondering, like many lefties, why compromise has suddenly become a code word for “why don’t you accept nothing while I just get my way,” when I realized, duh, there was nothing sudden about it.

We started to hear about the evil of flip-flopping back in the ’88 election, and that’s when we should’ve realized that our opponents weren’t talking about what they thought but, rather, what they believed, and that belief was on its way to replacing opinion.

And where’s the room to meet in the middle on belief? Meeting in the middle with belief means giving up on the fundamental truth you believe in. “Jesus is the son of God” vs. “There is no God”: where can people on either of those ends compromise without selling out their fundamental beliefs?

With today’s policy debates now faith-based – “trust in me and after we’re austere enough the capital-holders will reward us with growth” – why should political compromise be any different?

No, the answer is that there’s no room for a deal, because the basis for negotiation never changes. And that’s ok: we can work with a consistent meaning of compromise, whatever that meaning is.








Dark Shadows Review: Just the Tim Burton (and Johnny Depp) You’re Looking For!

May 13, 2012 / posted in Reviews / No Comments

It’s really my fault that my mother wanted to see Dark Shadows for Mothers’ Day. Back in Junior High, we had this family tradition of setting the card table up in front of the TV and all watching a show with dinner on Sunday nights. Somehow I convinced my parents to choose 21 Jump Street over 60 Minutes. I much preferred Douglas Penhall to Tom Hanson at first, and thought Dennis Booker a great improvement — mostly over jealousy that, despite being moody and cranky, I couldn’t pull off the brooding bad boy — but clearly the rest of America disagreed. I’m not sure if it was then that my mother decided she liked Johnny Depp, but it was certainly no later than Edward Scissorhands.

Which is why we watched Dark Shadows today. Now, Dark Shadows has received some tough reviews. “Lack of concern for story and drama”; “the movie means to have isn’t all that funny”; “the plot hits a series of dead ends.”; “the truth is that it doesn’t really go anywhere at all”. But all of this misses the point, I think: Tim Burton has never really made movies, he’s made pictures that happen to be shown serially. These pictures include emotion, pathos, beauty, and real characters; but they’re linked more by the fact that they’re shown adjacent to each other than by any “plot.” It’s like a Bosch tryptich, but a millionstych.

Dark Shadows is an excellent Bosch tryptich. There’s enough plot that you never wonder what’s happening or why, so let’s not get worked up over that. The scenes are beautiful, like you’d expect, but interestingly enough not in the standard overblown Tim Burton style; he’s moved beyond the big color blocks and on to texture. Like a proper Tim Burton movie, the thing has few enough sets, it could be a play.

And the acting’s quite good. Johnny Depp is, of course, outstanding playing a parody of a period character. Unfortunately — and surprisingly, given the team — Helena Bonham Carter kind of disappears; maybe making her up as a redhead took away her mojo. Michelle Pfeiffer reminds us all why she used to be the biggest thing out there, as she dominates the screen at every turn. Everybody’s talking about Eva Green, but for my money the big surprise is Chloe Grace Moretz, who nails the disaffected teenager with a secret thing perfectly and turns a small character into someone worth watching. Everybody’s also calling out how Gulliver McGrath (great name, by the way!) plays David Collins just like Damien from The Omen, but I was more struck by how he learned to move just like Danny Lloyd from The Shining, which frankly makes more sense given the character.

Okay, but is it good? Well, by now you should know what kind of movie Tim Burton makes, and you should know what kind of movie Johnny Depp makes, and you might even know what kind of movie Helena Bonham Carter makes. So let’s not get into some metaphysical discussion of “quality” here — this is a cinematic product aimed at a certain slice of the market and made by people who are proud to make that kind of product. If you’re in that slice of the market, then you’ll love it. If not, you’ll feel about it the way that a driver with a flat tire feels about a Kit Kat: it’s a lovely candy, but who cares, where’s the spare?

I guess I’m in that market. And, happily on Mothers’ Day, so is my Mom. Happy Mothers’ Day, Mom, hope you enjoyed Dark Shadows like I did!








Hey Internets: Which Mac and Windows Text Editor Should I Try for Web Dev?

May 13, 2012 / posted in Mac, Tech / 3 Comments

So about six months ago I tried switching to Vim. At first I loved it: all the customizations I could do! Then I hated it: all the customizations I needed to do! Now I’ve realized: all the customizations I’d need to do to get to the level of productivity I want to have! I really need something that I find delightful to use as close as possible to the minute I launch it. Any suggestions?

Here’s what I want: something nice to work with. And by “work” I mean “work with Javascript — chiefly jQuery and Google Analytics stuff — HTML, CSS, and (mostly WordPress) PHP.” and by “nice” I mean “I’ve spent years working in GUIs, and the rest of my workflow is in GUI apps that use things like the system clipboard, and I need whatever I’m working in to play nicely with both my existing reflexes and the other apps I work with. Seriously, Command/Control-C and Command/Control-V aren’t optional.”

Oh, and it would be great if it’s cross-platform, so that I can use it at home (Mac) and at work (Windows). But that’s not required: I’ll do one app in one place and the other in the other, if that’s what it takes. I’ll buy something commercial, too, particularly to make it so that I’m really, really happy doing my hobby coding at home.

I’ve done some poking around, and here’s what I’ve figured out:

So, internets, any thoughts on those tools? Any other recommendations? And, yes, please feel free to flame over me dumping Vim/snubbing Emacs.








Towards a More Perfect Union

May 9, 2012 / posted in Politics / No Comments

It’s hard not to be sad about North Carolina’s double-banning of gay marriage; but it does make it clear that very many of us disagree on very many things. Perhaps the right is right: perhaps a little more federalism would be a good idea here.

Fundamentally, the people on each side of today’s major politico-social questions are making broad statements about what will make a better world: “the US will be stronger without Mexicans,” “allowing gay marriage makes our society better,” etc. The big problem here is that nobody’s challenged to back up their grand proclamations. Imagine for a moment that we had one place that allowed gay marriage and another place that didn’t; we could observe them over time and see where, for instance, marriage was stronger. If we could run such little experiments, well, wouldn’t almost all of our conflicts resolve in time as we saw the actual consequences of our choices?

Oh look, we do actually have one place that allows gay marriage and one that doesn’t: New York and North Carolina. Maybe these two differing states can be an example of how we should handle our problems: by letting a thousand flowers bloom. We have 50 states; why not try 50 experiments and see what works the best? Then we can all eventually adopt the options that make us the richest, freest, safest, happiest, and whatever else-ist we think is important.

Oh, but what about people and their rights, you ask? Well, that’s reasonable. After all, our experiments can’t negatively impact the rights of individuals; that would be inhumane. No, just like we should all be held accountable for the consequences of our choices, we should also be held accountable for the costs imposed by those choices.

If we can’t impinge upon the rights of individuals (after all, that’s what our country was founded on), and we’re determined not to give them those rights (that’s our experiment), well, we have to find someone else to give them their rights. If North Carolina doesn’t want to give gays the right to marry, well, then, North Carolina needs to pay for these individuals to go elsewhere to marry. Don’t want gays at all? Pay to relocate them!

This can go both ways: believe that having a diverse community makes your state stronger? Pay to import those same homosexuals that North Carolina wants to get rid of! Imagine how the whole country will work when every different demo- or psychographic group lives in places that wants them! Nobody in Tennessee need worry about Sharia law, because Michigan will have accepted their Muslims with open arms. Heck, Michigan could implement Sharia (all the conservatives are always talking about how the 1st Amendment doesn’t stop states from establishing a religion), and everyone who doesn’t like it can get relocated by the state to a place friendlier to them. It’s worth a try; nothing else seems to be working for Detroit.

The big gotcha here is minimizing the impact of relocation on any given individual. Since we’re being rights-focused in thinking of relocation, we definitely can’t allow involuntary relocation: that is, if you’re gay and want to live in North Carolina, well, you’re all stuck with each other. (Hint: the state should probably offer a bigger bonus to leave! Solve it with the free market, right?)

But, look, if California really wants more gays (and why not? they tend to be highly-educated high-earning professionals), then California needs to make a good pitch. Friendly communities, good job opportunities… and we’ll need to ensure that property rights are maintained across the relocation. If you leave North Carolina with a house, well, you at least need a nice, stable place to live in California, plus an investment that will appreciate like that house. The North Carolina Department of Relocation can help you sell your house and get a good, fair return; the Department of Relocation in California can help you understand which local communities have resources to help you move in; and the Federal Department of Relocation can help ensure that the North Carolina Department of Relocation really does get you a fair price for your property, and maybe kick in a little to help manage the drastic difference in property values between the two states.

This could even end up being cheap. Arizona doesn’t want Latin American immigrants? They can spend a lot of money trying to enforce laws the Federal government doesn’t, or they can just spend a few thousand dollars to send one immigrant, with all their possessions, to friendly California. No breaking up families or long prison terms. If California’s right, then our immigrants will make our state stronger and richer, while Arizona’s economy stalls for a lack of low-cost labor. If Arizona’s right, California’s Welfare costs will explode. Why not actually see?

The goal here is really to create a free market in values. Over time, the values that are most effective in creating the society that we want will prove themselves. Meanwhile, we’ll ensure that, for any individual, they can always raise their hand if they feel their rights are being negatively impacted, and end up in a situation in which they’re safe. Let’s embrace our differences! (And let’s also not talk about details in the comments. Obviously this whole thing falls down once you get into the details. Let’s stick to big concepts.)








Oh Dear, Oh WordPress!

May 4, 2012 / posted in Meta / No Comments

I switched to WordPress a bit casually, maybe: I knew I didn’t want to stick with Tumblr, I knew I didn’t want to go back to good old Movable Type, and there was an obvious answer out there. I figured I could get my content up and make an improvement or two every week until the site was where I wanted it. You know, agile-style. But I don’t think I truly realized the learning curve.

See, I’m taking on a bunch of projects:

  1. Move to WordPress (and try not to break too many links!)
  2. Move to a new design that makes me happy

Two simple tasks, right? Except this probably means:

  • Learning how WordPress works
  • Learning a bunch of PHP
  • Learning a bunch of jQuery
  • Freshening up my CSS
  • Making vim useful
  • Doing my first project on git rather than svn

I’m pretty sure that, if somebody at my office proposed doing this much, I’d tell ‘em it was a bad idea. Yet here I am. And I already, a la Cortez burning his ships, uninstalled Movable Type and got rid of all my old archives. So it’s win or die.

But a lot of work shouldn’t mean that this blog’s unreadable. Thus: a nice, simple prepackaged theme while we wait for me to do all that stuff. Think I’ll finish this year?








Ten Toes

May 1, 2012 / posted in Adult Problems, Uncategorized / No Comments

20120501-213912.jpg

I recently got into this whole barefoot running thing. The theory is, our caveman ancestors did a perfectly good job getting around without arch support, so why can’t we?

So far it’s pretty good. I’m running a couple of 10-minute miles during my lunch break most days, which is fun and relaxing. There’s a great little park behind my office with a couple of miles of trails and a couple of hills, so it’s definitely a fun time.

And the muscles in my feet are sore in places I didn’t know I had muscles. Actually, come to think of it, I didn’t know I had muscles in my feet at all.

Part of the conceit of barefoot running is that the muscles in our feet get out of tone because they aren’t involved in stabilizing our gait, thanks to fancy supportive shoes, leaving us open to foot injury. Makes sense since this story would be true if you told it about any other muscle group. The other part of the theory is that all these supports hide the physical cues our body would give us when we’re pushing it close to injury, meaning that injury suddenly comes on us, rather than small twinges inspiring us towards moderation a self-protection. This also makes sense.

If you buy the barefoot thing, then it’s also says that the cycle of a runner’s health, with more conventional footwear, is greater and greater investment in supportive shoes and orthotics and things like that, paired with more and more serious injury. Certainly this theory matches my past experience with running: great pain from plantar fasciitis and shin splints, followed by great investment in orthotics, followed by a small improvement, followed by even more pain.

But with my new barefoot shoes – Vibram Five Fingers that could hardly be more comfortable – I don’t have that pain. I’m running pain-free for the first time in 12 years. And I love it.

So that’s me and my wacky toe shoes. I love them. And now I’m even thinking of switching the rest of my shoes to minimal styles. We will see!