First.

The thumbnail kind of spoils the impact of the image, but oh well…

november-4-2008.jpg

Via twitter, but I can’t remember who!

Anti-CD/DRM Pledge

‘I will pledge to never purchase a CD contaning any form of Digital Rights Management (DRM),’ - PledgeBank

Deadline to sign up by: 6th February 2006 3,745 people have signed up (3245 over target)

Buy Danish!

History News Network: “Buy Danish” There’s apparently been somewhat of a furore over some Danish cartoons allegedly portraying Muslims in a not so favourable light. Various Muslim countries have called for a boycott. Various groups are calling for an anti-boycott. Since Danish furniture is pretty much “teh sh1t”, and we have just bought a Hans Wegner day bed, I’ll pretend it’s all part of that.

McDonald's trials family job share

[Oddly Enough News Article Reuters.com]1, via Boing Boing

The world’s largest restaurant chain said Thursday it had begun trialing a new scheme in Britain whereby two people from the same family who worked at the same branch could cover each other’s shifts without giving any prior notice.

All your family are belong to us. Hey, hang on one second:

McDonald’s said the first users of the new “Family Contract,” which it believes to be unique in Britain, were two sets of twins.

What’s wrong with them just lying as to which one they are? Who needs new contracts for that?

A Church's Lethal Contract

A Church’s Lethal Contract This is a must read for anyone who wants to know anything about the evil, underhanded way the Church of Scientology handles itself. Kate Ceberano, I want you to read this.

10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong

  1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
  2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
  3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
  4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
  5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
  6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
  7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
  8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
  9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
  10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

Re-post this if you believe love makes a marriage. (Shamelessly poached from http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/por/102351114.html)

Dumsfeld the Brave

Donald Rumsfelf is in town. You wouldn’t know it, not by the number of police floating around the Central Business District. Motorcycle cops on the corner near Adelaide High School. Other cars driving around the streets. And I haven’t even been down North Terrace yet… I am more than a little annoyed that we have been forced to virtually shut down the hub of our city, for a man that has been involved in several of the evil regimes that have run the USA in recent decades. Clearly, Bumsford is a smarter man than his current boss (but I can’t think of too many people who aren’t, just quietly), but he has had his fingers in some pretty seriously smelly pies. In 1976, Ruttfield was instrumental in ensuring the US was safe from swine flu. He urged the president at the time to instigate a vaccination process. The US was safe from swine flu - but 52 people died from contaminated vaccine. Unfortunately, now the US is governed by swine. It’s a shame the vaccine didn’t work against Bush. Oh well. The biggest irony of Roomseld’s career is that he was a significant contributor to Saddam Hussein’s build of military might. During the Iran-Iraq war, Rumbleford was, according to Wikipedia, “the main conduit for crucial American military intelligence, hardware and strategic advice to Saddam Hussein.” _So Rimspot was at least in part responsible for helping to create the regime he and his mate’s son have now worked so hard to bring down. Or rather, try to bring down. (Chop off the head and the serpent falls? Doesn’t seem like it to me.) I think the scariest thing about Roamstick is that he seriously believes that he, a member of _Team America, really is part of the World Police. Now, it scares the heck out of me that those guys from _Southpark _are just right on the money. America! Fuck Yeah! Update: My sub-editor tells me his name is Donald Rumsfeld. Sorry for any inconvenience or misunderstanding caused. P.S. The whole idea for the spelling games was a typo the first time I wrote his name. Not that funny, I know…

Miserable Failure

Donald Rumsfeld is giving the President his daily briefing on Iraq. He concludes by saying: “Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed.” “OH NO!” the President exclaims. “That’s terrible!” His staff wait, stunned at this display of emotion, nervously watching as the President sits, head in hands. Finally, the President looks up and asks, “How many is a brazillion exactly?”

One Man, One Vote?

The Conservative Philosopher: One Man, One Vote I don’t normally read conservative websites, but I cam across this one as part of some fault-finding I was doing for another Blogsome user.

Suppose you have two people, A and B. A is intelligent, well-informed, and serious. He does his level best to form correct opinions about the issues of the day. He is an independent thinker, and his thinking is based in broad experience of life. B, however, makes no attempt to become informed, or to think for himself. He votes as his union boss tells him to vote. Why should B’s vote have the same weight as A’s?

I think it’s interesting the term “He votes as his union boss tells him to vote.” It shows the clear bias in this piece: that uneducated people are unionists (and implies vice-versa). Would the article read differently if it read: “He votes as the radio shock-jocks tell him to vote.”

It is self-evident that B’s vote should not count as much as A’s.

No, it is not self-evident. It is self evident that you believe that less educated people are lesser human beings. I am all for education: I am a teacher, and believe that education is the key to most of societies ills, but disenfranchising people who are less advantaged than you is not the way to democracy. With ‘lesser people’ not being able to vote, the balance of political power stays firmly in the hands of those who are already advantaged, and will never leave. Why should they vote for someone who wants to educate the poor? It will cost them more than it costs the poor, and it’s all money they wouldn’t otherwise have to pay, since they are sending their children to a private school already. Ideas like this entrench inherited poverty. I used to teach at a less advantaged school, and taught many students from lower Socio-Economic Backgrounds who showed more intelligence than their ‘richer’ counterparts (like those I went to school with, incidentally), and who showed far more moral fibre. Without a reasonable public education system these students would not have had the opportunity to attend university: and most of them are doing far better in their first degree than I did. Now for some straw man:

Comment Policy I (KBJ) have configured the PowerBlogs software so that only those who have (1) registered and (2) been approved (by me) may post comments. Please note that comments do not appear immediately, even by approved users; they must be approved individually. My aim in adopting this policy is to discourage incivility. If you want your comment to appear, it should be civil, coherent, and relevant to the post to which it is attached.

I had a quick read of the site and some comments, and I think the author may only allow comments that (a) support his views on the subject or (b) he already has a rebuttal prepared for, so he can answer straight back.

More on the Monthly

I read every word in the first issue of The Monthly. I must say, having read it, and looking back, there aren’t many advertisements in that magazine, it is mostly articles. And some of the articles were great! I hardly ever watch Enough Rope with Andrew Denton, but after reading the article on him and his interviewing techniques I may start to. If I can ever get my ABC reception better then the crap it is now. Speaking of the ABC, there was an article on how the culture of this great instution has changed over time, and how it may change in the future. And then in the Australian yesterday, I read how funding has reduced the number of hours of local drama created to an all time low of 21. Twenty-one hours of local drama created in one year, by the corporation that once created greats like Brides of Christ, and Love is a Four Letter Word. I’m also looking for a CD, I am a bird now, by Antony and the Johnsons, based on a review in the Monthly. Maybe it’s just me wanting desperately to be an intellectual (or, as the dopey tart in Big Brother [now that is quality drama. NOT] said: “an intellect”), but I may just start regularly reading this magazine.