Thursday, November 07, 2013

Libertarians are Useless...A New Chapter

Regarding the doomed "51st State" movement that's been occupying some of the least populated areas of Colorado, Reason magazine, a Libertarian mouthpiece, offers this advice:
A wise move for the secessionists would be to forge an alliance with the D.C. statehood movement...
No, no, no.

A wise move for the secessionists would be to grow the fuck up.

According to this Denver Post story, there were 37,765 votes in favor of forming a new state. Assuming these beliefs are sincere and not some kind of childish protest (not a safe assumption, if you ask me), that is a comically small number of people.

Indeed, take all 37,765 of these voters and throw them in Sports Authority Field, you'd still need another 40,000 people to get a capacity crowd for a Bronco game.

These people feel outnumbered, and they should. They are. There are over two million people in the Denver metro area. According to the Post, 57 people in Yuma county supported secession. In the whole county. 57 people.

There are more than 57 people that live on my block.

We are literally talking about a few cranks whose fealty to democracy is tentative at best. (Yeah, it sucks, but sometimes in a democracy, you lose a vote. Deal with it.)  But hey, that's the secessionists.  No one should expect them to be reasonable.

What's Reason's excuse?

The "DC Statehood" movement at least has a legitimate grievance.  Unlike residents of the states, the residents of DC have no representatives in Congress and no way to get them.  

The residents of northern Colorado, to the contrary, do have representatives in both the House and the Senate.  They may not like the Senators we're sending to Washington, but they should --in theory-- like the representative they sent to the House. After all, no one in Denver is voting for the 4th district candidate. 

Same thing for the State legislature.  The folks in these counties not only have representatives, they picked them themselves.  How is this analogous to the DC situation at all?

It's not.  But I can see how Libertarians are confused about this one.  They're confused about a lot of things....

Wednesday, November 06, 2013

Cis-Gendered Hetero Stupidity

We all know that I'm a pretty progressive dude.  I voted for Obama twice.  Full tolerance of gays is non-negotiable with me.  I don't hate labor unions or welfare or black people.  I'm a liberal and I make no apology for it.

But I can't get on board with this nonsense.
I haven’t seen Ender’s Game. Frankly, I’m not sure I’m going to because I’m still trying to process how I feel about seeing a movie based on a book I loved that benefits a notorious bigot, no matter how indirectly.
...and I'm off the bus.

As we have seen so many times over the years, refusing to yield to the limits of your political ideology can cause problems. That's how we got the government shutdown, and that's how we get well-meaning liberals conflicting themselves over stupid shit like this.

So, Well-Meaning (but stupid) Liberal, you loved the book...but you can't figure out "how you feel" when it comes to the movie. Not because of any particular quality of the movie --you haven't even seen it yet-- but because you haven't figured out to properly separate the artist from the art. And hey, I get it.

That can seem confusing, especially in a world where graffiti is instantly considered "fine art" if Banksy was the one holding the spray cans, but it's quite easy if you follow this one simple rule: Focus on the art.

Card is not the first reprehensible human being who wrote a good book. That list is long and goes back centuries. But even then...

What kind of moral quagmire have you created for yourself where you are able to read and enjoy the book, every word written by Card himself, but are unsure of how you feel about the movie he had no involvement in?

Seems like this is a dilemma that can be easily fixed by clicking your heels three times and admitting to yourself that there is no actual dilemma. Go watch the movie. See if it's as good as the book. If it is, feel free to enjoy it. If not, feel free to pan it.

But don't judge a book based on the politics of its author. That's not very smart. regards to the piece I'm quoting from, I'm glad I encountered this sentence towards this end:
I feel obligated to observe that it’s easy for me, a cis-gendered hetero male, to talk about this.
If this guy lead with that, I'm not sure I would have made it to the end.

You're not a "cis-gendered hetero male." You're a straight dude. And you seem to kind of feel bad about it, like you're hetero-maleness makes you less of a person, like you're not entitled to form an opinion.

This I cannot abide. My version of "equality" means never having to worry that you might be a member of the wrong demographic.

Tuesday, November 05, 2013

More Melvins

Here's an interview with King Buzzo from the Melvins.  Bonus points for an acoustic performance of Revolve.

I was listening to an interview with Stewart Copeland the other day and he said he never gets tired of playing the old songs over and over because they take on a kind of ritual quality.

Having that thought in my mind, this live set from the Melvins --especially the intro-- made much more sense.  The first few minutes reminded me a bit of a drum circle with guitars.

And seriously...two drummers!