Blogging has been a little light lately, and will continue to be so for the next few months.

I do have a couple of entries on tap, in response to posts from other bloggers, but sadly that will have to wait a while.

So, as I settle into a school-induced semi-hibernation, I'd like to thank all the people that make their way to this blog and see something interesting in the digital-thinking-out-loud that makes up these pages. I'll attempt to punch in once a week and keep up with the blogospheric fray.

Sore

I've been rather tired and sore the last few days. I've started a new exercise program I recently dug up. It's apparently a 50+ year old bodybuilding program, from the days before steroids became the norm (think Steve Reeves as opposed to more recent ripped-to-the-point-of-freakishness lifters).

The program is supposed to pack on about 25 pounds of muscle in 8 weeks, as well as dramatically increase strength, thanks to some intense and targeted routines. For the sake of any others interested in achieving the Grecian ideal, I'll post my results in a few weeks.

I've already got the beard and hair; might as well go for the complete authentic look.

Say again?

International observers will be monitoring the upcoming US presidential election?

Does this news make anyone else a little anxious?

The article says 13 House Democrats were the first to push for international observation, citing civil rights violations in 2000. Never mind that no one has ever backed those allegations up. It's simply a convenient club to beat the President with.

The article also says the US signed a document 10 years ago asking the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to monitor our elections. That would have happened in President Clinton's tenure, wouldn't it? Just another piece to his internationalist agenda, I suppose.

When Western Europeans sacked Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade, they did so at the prodding of a pretender to the Imperial Throne, who needed outside help to usurp power. Similarly, the Turks were able to penetrate Asia Minor and eventually sack the Great City and bring the Great Empire crashing down because traitorous scum sought to enlist their aid in amassing power (this is one of many examples I used to know in greater detail).

The Democrats are, for the sake of winning an election, willing to sell their nation out to internationalist forces. Imagine, outside observers will be monitoring a US election. Since when did America become a banana republic? Since when did the US need its hand held during an election? We might as well concede our sovereignty now, since truly sovereign countries manage their own internal affairs without external meddling.

What happens if the next election is very close? Would the Democrats prefer it if some non-American body picked our next president? They continue to complain about the US Supreme Court "selecting" President Bush (nonsense, all of it), but I have a feeling they wouldn't be at all upset if the OSCE were to install Senator Kerry.

It looks like some Democrats would do anything for power. However, as they continue to debase America, will they ever realize that their actions are self-defeating? They may achieve power thanks to their machinations, but will the USA still be a country worth leading?

It's getting hot in here...

So blame it on the sun.

Perhaps Mr. Burns' foray into cartoonish super-villainy wasn't so ill-conceived after all. Once again, the man was ahead of his time.

Gaffe?

This isn't much of one.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we," [President] Bush said.

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

He clearly meant that the US, in the spirit of crafting a solid defense, must ascertain our weak spots and the places terrorists might attack us. In a boxing match, a fighter must think of ways that his opponent will harm him. Will my left hand cover his jab? Are my elbows in tight? To do otherwise would be foolish.

The President's statement was awkwardly phrased, but far from a Bush-ism.

A Night Out

Last night I went to a local Mexican-themed bar to have a few drinks with some fellow employees after a Board Meeting and dinner. I'm significantly younger than the others and not terribly close to anyone at work (save my boss, perhaps), but thought it would be interesting to interact with them out of the office.

[Truth be told, I stayed at the bar mainly because I'm a skinflint. One of them was supposed to give me a lift home after the meeting, but decided to go to the bar with some others that attended the meeting. There was no way I was going to take a cab all the way home, which would have cost at least $30. I ended up taking a cab anyway, several hours later than I intended, because my ride flaked on me.)

It was really odd to see some of the guys "in action," so to speak. I get a very odd feeling in my stomach (nausea, perhaps?) when I see tipsy middle-aged men being way too friendly with middle-aged women in a bar, especially on a Wednesday night. My co-workers were all at an age where they should be married, at home with the wife and kids. Instead they were carrying on like awkward frat guys.

It really was quite sad to see, especially when I looked into their eyes. They reminded me of children; not in the good, innocent sense but in the stick-crayons-in-your-eyes-stupid sense. Have you ever seen an unattended child's dietary habits? A kid will eat nothing but candies and sweets all day. The junk will provide a momentary bit of pleasure, but almost as soon as the desire is satiated hunger begins to set in again. Candy is empty, after all. More than that, it's destructive when eaten in excess. Yet the bone-headed child will gorge on sweets and sink deeper into a slovenly torpor.

My co-workers seems to be the same way. There they were, grown men, picking up chicks in a bar on a Wednesday with no interest in any sort of meaningful relationship. But the more they satisfied themselves, the more they starved themselves, and it showed. To pick up the candy metaphor again, rather than enjoy a dessert at the end of a satisfying meal, in its proper place and according to the proper proportions, they stuffed themselves silly and got progressively sicker.

It's rather awkward to be caught up in such company. One co-worker repeatedly tried to set up a tryst for me, acting as some sort of broker in a rather perverse exchange; he was trying to find me as many women as he could since I'm young and "need to enjoy myself." Not being the philandering type, I tried to play his suggestions off with a bit of humor, and eventually steered the conversation to some other topics. Morality aside, I also simply have no desire to get to know middle aged women, whether or not they were models in their youth.

So yes, a very awkward evening all in all, I hope to never repeat. There was but one bright spot in the day, before the Board meeting started--much earlier in the afternoon: I briefly spoke to a young and attractive woman (still a few years older than me). The discussion turned to my employment at the company, which I'll be terminating very soon to pursue my studies. She asked it I had a wife or kids that might make the transition difficult, in a not-so-subtle attempt to see if I was attached. When I responded that I had only commenced all too recently and that marriage was a relatively far off prospect she stammered, abruptly put an end to the conversation, and shuffled off. I had a good laugh at that.

What a day. From 7:30 to 12:30 I was waiting for a building inspector, as I needed to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy.

(Related note: the Building Department rep told me I needed to be in the building from 8 or so to 3:30. What a ridiculous window! Assuming the business day starts at 8, if I'm first in line for an inspection then fine, tell me to be there are 8. If not, let's be realistic. Don't make me get up so early.)

(Second note: the inspection itself took less than 10 minutes. Either inspections generally take that long, or they don't. Either way there should be some average time out there such that, rather than make me wait for potentially 7 1/2 hours, I could wait for 2 or 3, tops.)

The weather was miserable, the sun poured heat like molten lead into a puddle of stagnant air. Needless to say, I was a little dehyrated by the time I left; I couldn't afford to run to the nearest convenience store to grab a drink while I waited; if the Building Department is thick enough to give me a 7 1/2 hour window of doing nothing, I imagine that waiting for me to rehydrate would be a little beneath them.

I have never had anything even resembling a tolerable experience with bureaucracy. Ever.

I brought a copy of Orthodoxy with me, and got through a good bit despite the heat and mounting rage. There are some wonderful quotes in there; perhaps I'll post a few.

By the way, the Lenten Period in preparation of the Dormition of the Theotokos (or the Mother of God, the Ever-Virgin Mary) started yesterday.

Do prepare for this Holy Day, and do observe this Holy Period with much fasting and prayer.

And why not read some wonderful hymns about the "animate book of Christ...[the] vessel of joy through whom the first mother's curse [was] broken."

Bonkers

Why the APA was foolish to (for all intents and purposes) endorse gay marriage.

Ignorance

A guy gets kicked off of an airplane because his T-shirt has a nude woman on it. What does he do?

Claim his constitutional rights have been violated, of course.

Listen, the 1st Amendment says "Congress shall not..." this or that. If you want to wear a vulgar shirt on an airplane, find a different carrier.

Not that the Constitution actually protects vulgar speech (I can see it now, random Founding Father solemnly rises to give speech arguing that 1st Amendment is necessary so that, one day, grown men can walk around wantonly displaying boobery on their shirts), but that's a different story.

You can do more than just "shove it"

The reporter who Teressa Kerry insulted because he asked her to clarify a statement has now been the recipient of several death threats from dolts coming to the aid of Mrs. Kerry.

My favorite quote from the piece:

As I struggled to close this column with something profound, an e-mail popped up from my oldest brother in faraway Ohio.

"From what I'm hearing on late-night radio, the liberal definition of a 'strong woman' is one who abuses anyone who asks a question she doesn't want to answer," he wrote. "A strong conservative woman would have come up with an example of how the questioner's paper had misrepresented the truth about her candidate or position."

Being "strong" is never having to say you're sorry, or justify yourself, or have even a shred of reasonability to justify your actions.

But that's not surprising. Liberals notions of "strength" are grounded in universal affirmation. Forget about challenging people to actually achieve, or calling them on their mistakes. Nope. Let's just draft a cadre of salmon-shirted official back-patters to ensure that everyone has a wonderful day. If innocent journalists get in the way of our warmth and compassion and minority empowerment and should happen to receive death threats along the way, then [expletive] them. You know how meddlesome journalists can be anyway, what with their accurate quotations and probing questions. Liberalism has no room for that nonsense.

YES!

Drudge is reporting that Speaker Hastert is on board with getting rid of the IRS!

It's about time a politican publicly announced such a move. It would be a great boon to the economy, as well as a massive step forward in reducing the size of government.

Consider: when the IRS goes, 1) a huge number of federal employees, who add nothing to the economy and instead make the lives of hardworking Americans miserable, will enter the private sector and be productive for a change; 2) an unbelievable amount of federal dollars will be freed up, perhaps to pay down the debt in the short run but in the long run this must translate to lower taxes; 3) the economy will grow at its natural rate, free of some of the stifling effects of government involvement; 4) this could be the beginning of a cultural shift, as people begin to realize that it is the market that creates wealth (as opposed to government, which can redistribute at best) and individual citizens who are best suited to spend it helping their fellow citizens.

As a related point: I picked up The Burden of Bad Ideas last night and read something very interesting. The NY Times, starting in the early 20th century, ran a feature called the "One Hundred Neediest Cases" every Christmas. It was a list of, as the title implies, the 100 worst hard-luck stories of the year; each ended with an appeal to the charity of its readers and a dollar figure that would solve the problem for this or that unlucky soul.

The feature mainained a very moralistic spin for a long time. Those who brought misery upon themselves by being thieves, drunks, etc. were not listed. The majority of the cases, consequently, were widows and orphans who struggled to make the best of their circumstances but needed a little help in the meantime. Perhaps the oldest of several children fell sick when she was the sole bread-winner of the family (as her parents were either sick or dead), and needed an operation. The people profiled in these stories were not "charity cases;" they had stumbled a bit on the rough road of life and needed a hand back up so they could continue to provide for themselves. There were always massive responses; some wealthier readers of the Times would even sponsor individual people and pay for the entire operation, or adopt the child of an unwed and unfit teen mother (back then anyone irresponsible enough to become pregnant while unwed was considered unfit, and the feature always pushed the mother to give the child up rather than bring the baby up in a broken home). Some readers even proposed marriage to widows suddenly forced to raise their children alone.

Once the 60s rolled around, the feature took on a different flavor (though that's a story for another time).

The bottom line is, why don't any conservative papers or magazines do this anymore?