There is Hope.

I just got back from running the American Cancer Society Relay for Life. My family drew the unfortunate slot of 1 am to 2 am. It was a humbling experience. For those of you who missed out on this worthwhile venture, you can find all the information you need here.

The relay took place on the local track. The track was marked with paper lanterns, each one commemorating someone who struggled with cancer. Each one marked someone's father, mother, brother, sister, son, or daughter. On the infield, the Relay teams set up tents in the ragamuffin style that is so very quaintly Port Townsend. They had a projector running Grease and later Big Fish, and a popcorn machine.

Walking out there for an hour was an enlightening experience. This is something bigger than any one of us, yet it touches so many of us in profoundly personal ways. Anything we can do to fight it is worth it. I have lost a grandparent on each side of my family, an aunt, and a cousin to the disease. Both my parents have had to struggle against it. I've seen how it can destroy people. But I will say this, when it comes for me, I'll rip its damn head off.

On the Hunt.

Deutlich has brought up another debate.

I'd like to know your take on hunting.

Is it a perfectly legit sport? Do you think it's all right so long as the animals killed are eaten? Or do you think it's just completely wrong?

What about the hunting of nearly extinct animals to make ends meat (no pun intended)? Pandas, Elephants, Tigers and the like are slaughtered for various reasons in some regions of the world, often due to extreme poverty.




I consider myself a conservationist, of the Theodore Roosevelt variety. I am not a preservationist, there is a difference. I enjoy the outdoors. While I don't hunt very often, I understand the place it has in our society.

Hunting is a culture, and at times a necessity. It is a legitimate sport, as it requires skill, physical ability, and discipline. People hunt for food, for profit, or for trophies. All three are valid reasons. However, I feel it must be a fair and sporting event. I detest canned hunts. Go and track, stalk, and take down the animal yourself, don't have someone tie the creature down so you can pull the trigger.

As a conservationist, I understand that rules must be in place and enforced to regulate the use of the land, lest jackasses screw it up for the rest of us. For the most part, hunters have been at the forefront of conservation efforts. Hunters founded conservation groups like Ducks Unlimited and the Safari Club International, they also pushed for congress to pass the Wildlife Restoration Act and the Federal Duck Stamp Program.

As for the hunting of Endangered Big Game, I believe that the populations should be closely monitored, and only a certain number be allowed to be hunted each season based on the recent population estimates. Each kill must be reported to ensure accuracy in the next estimate, and people who poach, should be punished severely. Poaching is essentially stealing from the next generation of hunters, and you know my stance on that.

Strangling the Student Athlete.

For those of you who don't follow college baseball very closely, the NCAA has implemented a new policy this past season, known as the "Compressed Schedule".

The compressed schedule is simply the NCAA not allowing teams to start playing baseball until February 22nd, a full 3 weeks after the old opening day of February 1st. What really hurts the schools is the NCAA's unwillingness to push the end of the season back, leading to said compression. What makes this system completely unbearable is the fact that the NCAA requires teams to play at least 56 games, and now, they require it to be done in 86 days.

As this article by Mark Schlabach attests, this is killing the student athlete. The rigorous requirements of the NCAA has some teams going on stretches where they play 15 games in three weeks. That's 3 weeks of class, just gone. You can't survive something like that.

The intent behind the rule was to allow for more equality between southern schools, and their northern compatriots who might not be able to play home games so early in the season do to weather. It's a nice idea, but it puts unrealistic strain on the athletes. You throw in rain delays, and things get even more cramped.

Here's the real problem. College sports schedules are not standardized. Some teams are playing exactly 56 games, some teams are playing well over 60. Some teams have 26 home games, some teams have damn near 40.

The solution is to standardize the schedule. Start the season on February 1st, and every team will play 56 games, 28 home, 28 away. The Southern Schools will host early in the season, and the Northern Schools will host latter in the season. This way, all things are balanced, and we can still carry on the season at a reasonable rate. It eases up on the athlete, and allows for a fair measurement when it comes time to select teams for the post season.

In Service of the People.

The next question in the 20SB debates comes from Vanessa Mason.


I saw in an article that Obama would like to strongly encourage community service in middle schools and high schools and give college students a tax break for contributing community service. I wanted to hear your thoughts on required community service. Thanks!


I would actually take this a step further. In nations like Israel, and to a lesser extent Brasil, there is a universal draft that requires people to commit to time spent in the military in service of the nation. Personally, I find the idea of a military draft to be a measure that should only be required in the most desperate of times, however, I find the idea of universal service a very appealing one.

I think that certain proactive rights, such as voting, holding office, attending post secondary school, and federal aid, should be earned, rather than handed out to everyone. Give back to the nation, and the nation shall give unto you.

I disagree with compulsory military service, as some people are not cut out for the battlefield and forcing them there can be disastrous. However, military service would be one way of satisfying the service requirement. Ideally, a program such as this would also offer a broad range of public jobs, from EMTs and Police Officers, to Bureaucrats, to construction. A wide range of options would not only allow for a wide range of choices, but would allow for all people to contribute in what manner they can. This would also give people valuable training and experience that could aid them in the future.

Taken to the next step, this program would also go a long way towards integrating the problems with immigration. If service guarantees citizenship, then all that is needed is for someone to report to this country, put in their time, and they can be assimilated into society.

Furthermore, it would instill a sense of camaraderie in a nation that, by dint of it's sheer size and ethnic diversity, often finds people having trouble making common ground between other citizens. All people, regardless of race, creed, or gender, would be able to point to their common service as a way to break the ice between themselves.

It's kind of a rough idea right now, but I think that Obama's idea is a good start.

Next Question...

The New Debate is up.

At first glance, I'm sure it's easy to say that, "no, stealing is never okay." Yet, when we delve a bit deeper and throw in a few circumstances this opinion may, in fact, change.

It's a bit like the Robin Hood theory of stealing from the rich to feed the poor. Let's say you're a mom of 6, your significant other has just passed away, you were laid off because of the horrible economy and have no way to sustain the lives of your 6 kids. As a last ditch effort, you begin to nab food.

Is this acceptable?

Or, let's say you're someone that happens to know a little too much about torrents and/or downloading music.

Is this acceptable?

Better yet, what if you or someone you know is just an out-right kleptomaniac? Then what?

Here's my take.

In America, there isn't poverty to the extent that thievery becomes a necessity. There are enough social programs available to take care of the poor that you can get food and shelter. It might not be pretty, but it's out there, and it's legal. You know what they say, beggars can't be choosers. There are soup kitchens, homeless shelters, and getting a job is not that hard. Getting a job that you enjoy is what's hard. If you can't put food on the table, but you think that working at McDonald's is beneath you, that's your own choice.

In Brasil, it's a different story. In the favelas, some people depend on thievery for the basics of survival because the programs that are out there are not enough. It's acceptable when you have no choice, because at that point, it becomes a matter of survival, and if you have to take from others to ensure your survival, well, then they need to protect their stuff better. But by the same coin, you are not entitled to their belongings, so if you can't take it, don't expect to be given it. In places like that, it's a state of nature, and survival of the fittest is the rule. Be glad you're not there.

With regards to digital file transfer of music, movies, or games, this is how I look at it. As art in the public domain, if the artists wish to profit from their work, they need to make it available to the public. If there's a book not being printed, a movie or album no longer being pressed, or a game no longer being produced, by all means, download it. However, if the means exist for you to obtain the work in a manner that keeps the artist in the loop, then you are obligated to take that route.

And Kleptos? Just get some medication, just because it's supposedly a disease doesn't mean it's right.

Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?

Because I know that all my readers just have tons of money lying around that they really don't know what to do with... :)

Money's tight with me too, but if you've got some spare coin that you could afford to part with, let me make a couple of suggestions as to where you can direct it.

The first is a conglomerate of non profits called Soldiers' Angels. They have all sorts of services to assist soldiers, and the people who support the soldiers, with the hardships of military service. Pretty much anything you want to do, they can point you in the right direction.

Want to help soldiers wounded in the line of duty? The Eagle Cane Project sends hand carved canes to soldiers with leg injuries. First Response Backpacks provides a bag with everything an injured soldier needs in his initial days of treatment while still in country. Valor-IT gives a soldier with a hand injury a laptop computer designed to be operated with his injury.

Perhaps you want to help those left behind by deployed soldiers? Operation Outreach provides for the families left when soldiers deploy. Guardian Angels looks after the pets that soldiers have to leave behind.

For the more traditionally minded, Adopt a Soldier is always a classic. Angel Bakers is a tasty alternative. Operation Phone Home provides one thing that a lot of people don't think about as a real need, phone cards.

No matter which you choose, you can feel comfortable that your donations are going to a worthy cause. You can find all these programs, and many more, at the Soldiers' Angels homepage I linked to earlier.

The second group is the United Service Organization, or USO. While Soldiers' Angels allows you to specify what your funding goes to, the USO does it all. They give shelter from the mind numbing boredom of the airports we frequent during TDY flights. They bring out Actors, Athletes, and Musicians to keep morale high. They help soldiers put a roof over their head during overnight layovers. They offer emergency support, support groups, and even nursery care for military families. They have facilities in 21 states and 10 countries. The USO knows how to help the soldiers, better than any organization out there. They've been at it for 67 years now. Wherever the military is sent, the USO is there to support them. As the USO says, "Until Every One Comes Home."

The slings and arrows of outrageous drama.

Deutlich posted another debate on 20SB, and I find myself in desperate need to defray the neurotic pressures of the end of school. So here's the question.

Do you pose questions to your boyfriend or girlfriend's friends to figure out what to do within your relationship? Do you think it's all right to do so?

To Ask or Not?

That is the question.

Well, personally, I don't do that, but that's more a matter of my own flawed personality than anything. It seems I'd rather crash and burn spectacularly than ask for help in most things. It's irritating, and I'm working hard to improve in that respect. But that's neither here nor there, because we're arguing what I think, not what I do.

As with most topics, I fall somewhat in the middle. I think that third party perspective is one of the most powerful tools you can have, if used properly. It's a lot like a light post, use it like a traveler, for illumination. Do not use it like a drunk, for support. When you talk to a mutual friend about the relationship, don't try to get them to take your side, try to get some perspective on the situation. If you're looking for support, or somewhere to vent, get a blog, because real life is more difficult to keep under wraps. Get a blog anyways, it's fun.

The side of this debate that I have a lot more experience with is playing the part of the man in the middle. One relationship in particular, I'm very good friends with both sides, and as such, I think I know more about the relationship than either of the people in it. I like to think that I've helped their relationship survive. The key thing to remember when you get to play Henry Kissinger, is that you're being trusted with sensitive information. You need to be careful with what you say, and you will wind up keeping secrets. If you just push everything through, you will wind up alienating one, or both, of your friends. That's never fun. If you can't handle that, you need to let them know, so you can dodge that particular topic.

In a perfect world, such subterfuge wouldn't be needed. But this is far from a perfect world, and it has imperfect people in it. People present a different face to different people, so talking to another person can give you a new perspective on the relationship. Just be smart about what you do, and try to avoid putting your friends in compromising positions.

Never forget...

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.


We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
— John McCrae



I would like to take a moment on this Memorial Day, to thank my father, my grandfather, and all my brothers in arms who have served this great nation.

And to those who have given their last for our cause, I'll never forget the sacrifices you've made.

Killing time.

Well, I joined 20 something bloggers, some sort of social network, that I found somehow. At 20SB, they have a debate section, where they post a topic, and people blog their opinions on that topic.

I find myself sitting here, munching on leftover chicken alfredo, watching quite possibly the worst Crichton film adaptation ever, and nursing an unusually strong hangover. While bouncing on the site, I happened across the new debate topic, and I figured it was as good a topic as anything to blog on.

The topic is...

With that said, this week's debate is about credit card companies. Do you think credit card companies should take more responsibility for their vulture-like activity? If you've been to a college campus, I'm sure you've seen tables strewn about with promises of free gifts simply for filling out an application. Similar practices can be found in most chain stores these days too (especially clothing stores).

On the other side, do you feel that people should be taking more responsibility for their finances by making more informed decisions BEFORE signing up for a credit card?

I think the vulture analogy is surprisingly apt. The sheer volume of credit card applications that get sent to me is shocking. They use mass marketing to prey upon the ignorant. As evil as that sounds, that's the heart of capitalism. Pretty much every major business uses similar cutthroat tactics. It's not evil, it's simply the most efficient business model. The marketing strategies in themselves are not unethical. Nor are the standing policies among some companies that they do not explicitly include on contracts. Rate hikes, continuous interest, and a rash of other methods that some companies use to give people the shaft are vague, complex, and disjointed. You pretty much need an attorney present to figure out what you're getting into. What is unethical is the combination of the two. When they mail you an app that can net you a credit card that only requires your name, DOB, and SSN, yet they attach it to a contract that's more complex than some home loans, they put themselves in a position to profit from a person's ignorance.

However, personal responsibility is a requirement. A scheme that depends on ignorance can be defeated by education. You need to read the contract, ask about the interest system, and ensure you have the income to cover the purchase. A credit card can be a very useful financial tool, if you know how to use it. It's practically a requirement for harnessing the purchasing power of the internet. But if you don't know what you're doing, you can ruin yourself financially with one. Personal responsibility and education is a must. Before you take a card, do some homework, check with a financial planner if you don't think you can figure it out on your own. In general, just Don't be stupid about it.

Let's be serious for a minute.

I want to bring up a very serious situation right now. Sorry about spewing out the posts today, but I just got the internet back up.


I'd like to talk about Cyclone Nargis. A cyclone is a Hurricane in the Southern Pacific and Indian Oceans. Same exact type of storm, just a different location. Cyclone Nargis made land fall in Burma six days ago. Things like this make me thank God daily that I live in the US. We're spoiled.


Cyclone Nargis had peak sustained winds of 135 MPH. This would have made it a category 4 hurricane if it were in the Atlantic. Most people regard Hurricane Katrina as the worst natural disaster to hit the US in modern history. Hurricane Katrina killed 1,836 people. The death toll of Cyclone Nargis is currently at 22,980, and it's still climbing.


While the Burmese government has remained resistant to formal international aid, the initial stages for international aid have been set. The US has given 3.25 million dollars, the EU have given 3 million dollars, Canada has given 2 million, and the generous British have already pledged a hair under 10 million. But every bit helps, and anyone wishing to donate to the relief effort is appreciated. The easiest way to donate is through this nifty page that Google has set up. It has a direct donation set up for UNICEF and Direct Relief International. Please, give what you can.

Peace on Earth.

In World War Z, Israel and Palestine finally set aside their differences and united. All it took was an undead outbreak that wiped out most of life on earth. Hopefully it won't take an event of that magnitude in real life.


I had real hopes for a fairly peaceful resolution when Yasser Arafat died. I thought that his inflexibility was holding back the peace process, and with fresh leadership, significant steps forward could be taken. Then Hamas got elected... Well... shit. Add in the attacks by Hezbollah on Israel, and a chance at a cessation of hostilities suddenly seemed as far away as ever.


I think a lot of the issues that divide the people in that region are overstated and manipulated by a few influential people who want the conflict to drag on until one side or both has been annihilated. It's a real shame.


However, I find my perspective limited to analysis. Unlike Afghanistan and Iraq, I don't know anyone in Palestine or Israel. As such, I have a very limited idea of the perspective on the ground. That's changed a little thanks to this blog. Life Must Go On In Gaza and Sderot.


This blog is written jointly between two people. One lives in Sderot, an Israeli city that is frequently the target of missile strikes from the Gaza Coast. The other lives in a refugee camp outside Gaza. Together they share one common hope, for an end to the conflict that defines existence in the Holy Land.


Please visit their blog, and get a feel for their life. While there, please sign the petition asking for a one month cease fire, to allow civilians an opportunity to get out of the line of fire.