"When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."
- Lev 19:33
Monday, February 25, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Wesley’s 3-minute 1-song Oscar Blog
It was at the moment that the last song from Enchanted was performed that I thought, "I really don't think there is any way that Glen Hansard and Markéta Irglová can NOT win this!"
Truth and beauty win out!
When Colin Farrell started crying when presenting their performance, and then they knocked it out of the park...I knew if they didn't win, people were going to feel very stupid.
If you didn't see the performance and acceptance speeches (maybe my favorite ever), I will post it here when it goes on YouTube.
"Make art! Make art!" - Glen Hansard
Wait a sec, I wrote a blog on Once at least a month ago urging you all to see it... and I'll bet none of you took me up on the recommendation. Maybe NOW you will! It is going to end up being one of the top stories to come out of the Oscars....
Unless Juno wins Best Picture...ARG! I am sick of hearing about it already.
[At the risk of sounding nasty, those Enchanted songs further validated my comment in the last blog...that 3 out of 5 noms is ridiculous. The song about cleaning was total crap of a nomination. Again, one of Eddie Vedder's songs for Into The Wild would have been nice.]
Truth and beauty win out!
When Colin Farrell started crying when presenting their performance, and then they knocked it out of the park...I knew if they didn't win, people were going to feel very stupid.
If you didn't see the performance and acceptance speeches (maybe my favorite ever), I will post it here when it goes on YouTube.
"Make art! Make art!" - Glen Hansard
Wait a sec, I wrote a blog on Once at least a month ago urging you all to see it... and I'll bet none of you took me up on the recommendation. Maybe NOW you will! It is going to end up being one of the top stories to come out of the Oscars....
Unless Juno wins Best Picture...ARG! I am sick of hearing about it already.
[At the risk of sounding nasty, those Enchanted songs further validated my comment in the last blog...that 3 out of 5 noms is ridiculous. The song about cleaning was total crap of a nomination. Again, one of Eddie Vedder's songs for Into The Wild would have been nice.]
Wesley’s 5-minute 3-movie Oscar Blog
So I have seen 3 of this year's "Oscar movies", although one of them was severely slept on and only got one nomination.
So first, the 2 Best Picture nominees that I feel, without having to see any of the others, represent the polar opposites of the category. The best, and the worst. Not that the worst is bad, but it just doesn't compare. It's like saying License to Ill is the worst Beastie Boys album. A classic, indeed. But trumped time after time with every new album.
Anyways, these 2 movies are No Country For Old Men and Juno.
No Country For Old Men is, hands down, the best movie to come out last year and probably years before that. It is uncharted territory. It requires multiple viewings, and at the risk of sounding like a total braggadocious douchebag, I have seen it 5 times. It is just that good, and just that deep. You could choose not to read into it, walk away with an opinion, and never watch it again. But it deserves to be studied.
Michael Clayton and Atonement seem all well and good, but I don't even have to watch them to know they don't walk on the same ground No Country does. There Will Be Blood, on the other hand, I cannot speak for. It probably embodies the same scorchingly original filmmaking that No Country does. It is P.T. Anderson, after all. I just hope they don't cancel each other out.
On the other hand, you have Juno. It is a great movie. But it just doesn't deserve to be nominated for Best Picture. OK, deserve is a sketchy word. But when you look at the movies that didn't get it, something doesn't add up. It got the token indie-comedy-nomination. The Little Miss Sunshine nomination, if you will.
One of the movies that got the shaft so Juno could...no, wait...Juno DID get the shaft! Ohhhh! Thank you, I will be here all week.
Anyways, the movie that got robbed is Into The Wild. Sean Penn didn't even get an adapted screenplay nom! We just saw it the other night, and it was powerful and haunting, among many other things. The one nomination it did get, is Hal Holbrook for Best Supporting Actor. It will be tough for anyone to beat Javier Bardem in No Country, but I am thinking Mr. Holbrook deserves a second look. If only because he enters the movie at its' most pivotal point, and is the most important character that Chris McCandless crosses paths with.
You know why this movie got ignored? Because it stands for everything that Hollywood is not. It tells them that their tuxedos and red carpets are illusion, and anyone that desires such material excess is living anything but truth.
Oh, and Enchanted gets 3 out of 5 nominations for Original Song?! Once gets ONE, and Eddie Vedder gets NONE for Into The Wild!? Bullcrap!
So first, the 2 Best Picture nominees that I feel, without having to see any of the others, represent the polar opposites of the category. The best, and the worst. Not that the worst is bad, but it just doesn't compare. It's like saying License to Ill is the worst Beastie Boys album. A classic, indeed. But trumped time after time with every new album.
Anyways, these 2 movies are No Country For Old Men and Juno.
No Country For Old Men is, hands down, the best movie to come out last year and probably years before that. It is uncharted territory. It requires multiple viewings, and at the risk of sounding like a total braggadocious douchebag, I have seen it 5 times. It is just that good, and just that deep. You could choose not to read into it, walk away with an opinion, and never watch it again. But it deserves to be studied.
Michael Clayton and Atonement seem all well and good, but I don't even have to watch them to know they don't walk on the same ground No Country does. There Will Be Blood, on the other hand, I cannot speak for. It probably embodies the same scorchingly original filmmaking that No Country does. It is P.T. Anderson, after all. I just hope they don't cancel each other out.
On the other hand, you have Juno. It is a great movie. But it just doesn't deserve to be nominated for Best Picture. OK, deserve is a sketchy word. But when you look at the movies that didn't get it, something doesn't add up. It got the token indie-comedy-nomination. The Little Miss Sunshine nomination, if you will.
One of the movies that got the shaft so Juno could...no, wait...Juno DID get the shaft! Ohhhh! Thank you, I will be here all week.
Anyways, the movie that got robbed is Into The Wild. Sean Penn didn't even get an adapted screenplay nom! We just saw it the other night, and it was powerful and haunting, among many other things. The one nomination it did get, is Hal Holbrook for Best Supporting Actor. It will be tough for anyone to beat Javier Bardem in No Country, but I am thinking Mr. Holbrook deserves a second look. If only because he enters the movie at its' most pivotal point, and is the most important character that Chris McCandless crosses paths with.
You know why this movie got ignored? Because it stands for everything that Hollywood is not. It tells them that their tuxedos and red carpets are illusion, and anyone that desires such material excess is living anything but truth.
Oh, and Enchanted gets 3 out of 5 nominations for Original Song?! Once gets ONE, and Eddie Vedder gets NONE for Into The Wild!? Bullcrap!
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Why we avoid childcare!
You can't go through life not trusting anyone, but when it comes to someone watching Claire, we are going to be much more paranoid and cynical.
Exhibit A: The babysitter, with the glowing references, in this video. This is a recent news story running the local news circuit.
Exhibit A: The babysitter, with the glowing references, in this video. This is a recent news story running the local news circuit.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Adventures in Art-Making
Some of you may have seen the pictures I posted, including the one below. This work I put up in the hallway was for a UCF Art scholarship competition, the scholarship money put up by a group called the Altrusa Club (who is independent of UCF).
Well, the results are in, and I received a call today to inform me that I won. I believe the 32 students that entered were voted on by the entire UCF Art staff. I will be attending a ceremony/reception put on by Altrusa, with winners from other colleges and UCF majors. I am pumped!
Over the weekend, while eagerly awaiting the results, I was working on a life-size self-portrait for drawing class and gave myself a giant wound. For good light, I have a lamppost with an exposed light bulb, no lampshade, and it had been on for hours. I was listening to The Hard Sell, which happens to feature quite a few De La Soul beats, and I started housin' in place. What can I say, I was moved. In my clumsy caucasian flailing of the arms, I knocked over the lamppost and the bulb landed right on my arm...for about a split second on its' way to the floor. My skin immediately came off my arm. It was pretty gnarly. But the pain didn't start for about 5 minutes. This one might scar!
Well, the results are in, and I received a call today to inform me that I won. I believe the 32 students that entered were voted on by the entire UCF Art staff. I will be attending a ceremony/reception put on by Altrusa, with winners from other colleges and UCF majors. I am pumped!
Over the weekend, while eagerly awaiting the results, I was working on a life-size self-portrait for drawing class and gave myself a giant wound. For good light, I have a lamppost with an exposed light bulb, no lampshade, and it had been on for hours. I was listening to The Hard Sell, which happens to feature quite a few De La Soul beats, and I started housin' in place. What can I say, I was moved. In my clumsy caucasian flailing of the arms, I knocked over the lamppost and the bulb landed right on my arm...for about a split second on its' way to the floor. My skin immediately came off my arm. It was pretty gnarly. But the pain didn't start for about 5 minutes. This one might scar!
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Clone Clone Clone Clone Clone
In searching for various positions on the cloned food debate, and to make sure people were actually talking about it (because it is embarrassingly, and mysteriously, absent from the election's hot topics), I came across this argument for cloning (the article below). I fear that the points raised in this article will be the "well..DUH!" mantra for supporters of cloning, and many of you will nod your head in agreement. At times it reads as if the student was paid off by the local corporate farm, at other times it sounds like the corporate farm wrote it. The student really shows naivity in his/her age (no author listed)...this quote in particular...
As the youth of this country, we must all strive to be forward-thinking, not necessarily as a cure for recession or world hunger, but generally as a cure for the closed-minded, Christianity-induced thinking of older generations.
First off, I don't see much world hunger in the bellies of America, the world's fattest country. Maybe the world's food supply could be less concentrated before claiming that cloning will save the world. After all, corporate farms aren't going to give away cloned cows. They don't fall off a cloned-cow tree. Although scientists would probably make one of those if they could.
It is quite ignorant to align cloning with progressive thought, and that those against cloning are all creation-crazy Christians living in the stone age. Quite ignorant. Firstly, the idea of morality is not exclusive to those that believe in a higher power. I am quite sure that atheists adhere to every one of the common-sense Ten Commandments that is not God-related. And if cloning humans is immoral, then why is cloning animals OK? Supporters of the cloned meat say, "We should have firm laws that strictly forbid the cloning of humans." Really? Because to me, they got the snowball rolling and it will only be a matter of time. Especially if our selfish, Humanist desires call for it. Those laws will change in a heartbeat.
There is a great contradiction in Science, with the capital "S" meaning it is indeed a body of people with their own religion. The pre-history of the world, the size of the "ever-expanding" universe, and the beginnings of mankind can never be proven and are all theory, also known as faith. If the world of Science wants to call things theory, which is unproven, they should probably stop touting it as fact. Because they believe in it so fervently, with no observed proof, then it should be called a faith!
Back to the contradiction, and it can be applied to the cloning of animals. Science, and the ever-so-clever people with the Darwinist "fish with feet" on their cars, yet the Christian fish symbol represents Jesus Christ and has no affiliation with Genesis or the creation debate (despite what a fundamentalist will tell you)...they are in love with everything Darwin, evolution, and natural selection. He is their Clubber Lang in the corner versus creationists. However, isn't cloning just a slap in the face of Darwin's natural selection? Doesn't stem-cell research go against everything he taught? How can there be natural selection when we use science to keep people alive longer than probability has determined they should live? I have never read Darwin's books, but from what I have read, it sounds like he was a total naturalist, and that creating life in Petri dishes has nothing to do with Charles Darwin. I am sure there are naturalist Darwinists that do not bow at the feet of Science, but they aren't as loud.
There is as much, if not more, arrogant zealotry in Science and atheism than there is in any fundamentalist branch of any religion. Despite what various media would have you believe, religion has been the minority for hundreds of years. Not people that say they believe in God to a Gallup poll, but those that live it. Especially since the Enlightenment (the namesake has nothing to do with a move away from religion), secular Humanism is the mainstream. As many would have you believe, Christianity has never been the source of the untold amounts of violence through history. It was the secular governments who used Christianity as a political binder to meet their needs. (The questionable, violent, overtly political, and heretic, activities of the Roman Catholic Church are another beast.) Everything Jesus said in the Gospels implies anarchy, a peaceful absense of flags, borders, and government [not chaos]. For every 100 midguided soldiers that bore crosses, there was a solitary, stinky, hippie monk that read, prayed, and never bore arms. One of them follows the Gospels, one does not.
So yeah, cloning is a dark, dark, path...not "forward thinking" as the author implies.
_______________________________________________________
FDA embraces changing standards
2/7/2008
We have played with the possibilities of cloning for decades in our imaginations, shown in all kinds of media. But ever since the Food and Drug Administration gave the okay last month for food and milk obtained from some cloned farm animals our brains have stopped in their tracks.
This means the United States might be the first country to sell food from cloned animals in grocery stores.
This also means that the United States might be the forerunner in stopping world hunger and at the same time combating obesity with healthier foods.
So, why are people still searching hectically in their minds for a reason not to clone? Instead, why are they not putting the issue of cloned foods up there with global warming and the war in Iraq?
Although it may sound strange to put cloning in those same categories, we should think about our country's recession.
This is a whole new trade embargo that could secure the safety of America's economy.
As the youth of this country, we must all strive to be forward-thinking, not necessarily as a cure for recession or world hunger, but generally as a cure for the closed-minded, Christianity-induced thinking of older generations.
In other words, people for cloning should not be thought of as "playing God."
Change is not all bad and scientific research should not be postponed simply because people are not ready to accept higher standards of responsibility.
Cloning farm animals is just another type of artificial insemination.
But instead of thinking of cloning as a normalcy, people are turning away from the idea of cloned foods, because it sounds "weird."
This is the same as not trying some food on your plate because of its color or texture.
According to an article in the New York Times, the International Dairy Foods Association surveyed women, the main household decision makers on dairy products, and found 14 percent of them would turn away from cloned dairy products.
At the same time, farmers are drinking the milk of their cloned cows so as not to waste it and pour it down the drain.
The biggest caution to the FDA, it seems, is consumer's unwillingness to accept the new commodity, despite the fact that they know little or nothing about cloning.
Cloning involves creating a new organism by copying the genetic material in a different organism. The DNA is then placed in a liquid culture, containing nutrients.
An unfertilized egg is taken from a female and its nucleus removed.
The DNA is then placed in it, creating an embryo that is then placed into a mother of the same species. This genetically makes an identical copy.
The point is to keep an open mind, do the research and think about the possibilities this science has to offer.
Who knows? Maybe when you are older, cloning might save your life.
As the youth of this country, we must all strive to be forward-thinking, not necessarily as a cure for recession or world hunger, but generally as a cure for the closed-minded, Christianity-induced thinking of older generations.
First off, I don't see much world hunger in the bellies of America, the world's fattest country. Maybe the world's food supply could be less concentrated before claiming that cloning will save the world. After all, corporate farms aren't going to give away cloned cows. They don't fall off a cloned-cow tree. Although scientists would probably make one of those if they could.
It is quite ignorant to align cloning with progressive thought, and that those against cloning are all creation-crazy Christians living in the stone age. Quite ignorant. Firstly, the idea of morality is not exclusive to those that believe in a higher power. I am quite sure that atheists adhere to every one of the common-sense Ten Commandments that is not God-related. And if cloning humans is immoral, then why is cloning animals OK? Supporters of the cloned meat say, "We should have firm laws that strictly forbid the cloning of humans." Really? Because to me, they got the snowball rolling and it will only be a matter of time. Especially if our selfish, Humanist desires call for it. Those laws will change in a heartbeat.
There is a great contradiction in Science, with the capital "S" meaning it is indeed a body of people with their own religion. The pre-history of the world, the size of the "ever-expanding" universe, and the beginnings of mankind can never be proven and are all theory, also known as faith. If the world of Science wants to call things theory, which is unproven, they should probably stop touting it as fact. Because they believe in it so fervently, with no observed proof, then it should be called a faith!
Back to the contradiction, and it can be applied to the cloning of animals. Science, and the ever-so-clever people with the Darwinist "fish with feet" on their cars, yet the Christian fish symbol represents Jesus Christ and has no affiliation with Genesis or the creation debate (despite what a fundamentalist will tell you)...they are in love with everything Darwin, evolution, and natural selection. He is their Clubber Lang in the corner versus creationists. However, isn't cloning just a slap in the face of Darwin's natural selection? Doesn't stem-cell research go against everything he taught? How can there be natural selection when we use science to keep people alive longer than probability has determined they should live? I have never read Darwin's books, but from what I have read, it sounds like he was a total naturalist, and that creating life in Petri dishes has nothing to do with Charles Darwin. I am sure there are naturalist Darwinists that do not bow at the feet of Science, but they aren't as loud.
There is as much, if not more, arrogant zealotry in Science and atheism than there is in any fundamentalist branch of any religion. Despite what various media would have you believe, religion has been the minority for hundreds of years. Not people that say they believe in God to a Gallup poll, but those that live it. Especially since the Enlightenment (the namesake has nothing to do with a move away from religion), secular Humanism is the mainstream. As many would have you believe, Christianity has never been the source of the untold amounts of violence through history. It was the secular governments who used Christianity as a political binder to meet their needs. (The questionable, violent, overtly political, and heretic, activities of the Roman Catholic Church are another beast.) Everything Jesus said in the Gospels implies anarchy, a peaceful absense of flags, borders, and government [not chaos]. For every 100 midguided soldiers that bore crosses, there was a solitary, stinky, hippie monk that read, prayed, and never bore arms. One of them follows the Gospels, one does not.
So yeah, cloning is a dark, dark, path...not "forward thinking" as the author implies.
_______________________________________________________
FDA embraces changing standards
2/7/2008
We have played with the possibilities of cloning for decades in our imaginations, shown in all kinds of media. But ever since the Food and Drug Administration gave the okay last month for food and milk obtained from some cloned farm animals our brains have stopped in their tracks.
This means the United States might be the first country to sell food from cloned animals in grocery stores.
This also means that the United States might be the forerunner in stopping world hunger and at the same time combating obesity with healthier foods.
So, why are people still searching hectically in their minds for a reason not to clone? Instead, why are they not putting the issue of cloned foods up there with global warming and the war in Iraq?
Although it may sound strange to put cloning in those same categories, we should think about our country's recession.
This is a whole new trade embargo that could secure the safety of America's economy.
As the youth of this country, we must all strive to be forward-thinking, not necessarily as a cure for recession or world hunger, but generally as a cure for the closed-minded, Christianity-induced thinking of older generations.
In other words, people for cloning should not be thought of as "playing God."
Change is not all bad and scientific research should not be postponed simply because people are not ready to accept higher standards of responsibility.
Cloning farm animals is just another type of artificial insemination.
But instead of thinking of cloning as a normalcy, people are turning away from the idea of cloned foods, because it sounds "weird."
This is the same as not trying some food on your plate because of its color or texture.
According to an article in the New York Times, the International Dairy Foods Association surveyed women, the main household decision makers on dairy products, and found 14 percent of them would turn away from cloned dairy products.
At the same time, farmers are drinking the milk of their cloned cows so as not to waste it and pour it down the drain.
The biggest caution to the FDA, it seems, is consumer's unwillingness to accept the new commodity, despite the fact that they know little or nothing about cloning.
Cloning involves creating a new organism by copying the genetic material in a different organism. The DNA is then placed in a liquid culture, containing nutrients.
An unfertilized egg is taken from a female and its nucleus removed.
The DNA is then placed in it, creating an embryo that is then placed into a mother of the same species. This genetically makes an identical copy.
The point is to keep an open mind, do the research and think about the possibilities this science has to offer.
Who knows? Maybe when you are older, cloning might save your life.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
The Meat the Kids Eat
If you haven't seen this in the news, here is a link.
What is amusing is how this is portrayed as an isolated incident. A few "downer" cows that slipped into the food supply. "Whoops. Our Bad!" Total bullcrap. No pun intended.
Like the man says in the video, meat processors will use every animal. They don't have an incinerator for animals that don't pass the test. They ALL pass the test. The cattle costs money until slaughter, and the cattle makes money after slaughter. This is the meat that school kids have been eating for years... Only the company just got busted. And it is only a matter of time before they start again, because no one cares.
It also needs to be said that the government agencies responsible for feeding children at school are in bed with food industry lobbyists, notably representing the categories of Junk and Meat. Coke machines don't get in schools by accident, and because "the kids love soda", when it is one of the top causes of childhood obesity, which is an "epidemic" we are supposed to be fighting. This partnership is well-documented and information is ubiquitous.
You might notice that I do a number of blogs on meat and food. One mind-numbing reason that I care so much, is how are we supposed to bring about "change" in this country and make the world a better place, when we don't even give a crap about what we put in our bodies? People are inspired to tears by political candidates, these people that are supposed to lift up America, and everyone is told to vote, vote, vote...yet the thousands that pack the political rallies can't make the simple vote to not put garbage in their bodies. Voting with their wallet, and body.
Chemicals and synthetic hormones are routinely put into our food, and in your bodies, yet no one cares. Not to mention the pitiful, filty conditions that produce animal products. To make matters worse, people who choose organic (a.k.a. - NORMAL) food are demonized by the status quo. You know who you are. Why is it bad to eat food the way God, or evolution, intended? Why do you want to eat chemicals? So yeah, I am pessimistic and consider it a lost cause. I tend to think the current status quo cannot be defeated. It is too large, too routine, too easy, and too ingrained into people's subconscious. I can only hope that anyone reading this can see themselves as outside the box, or striving to be...
In regards to the article, I also find it amusing that this is soooo unacceptable. This is where America draws the line! Yet the other cows are abused for their entire lives, but make it to dinner tables because they can muster up the strength to walk with dignity(?) to their own slaughter. Let's not forget the old and used dairy cows that dry up and become useless, that is, until they are slaughtered on the cheap to be included in your favorite fast food burger. At least while they were alive they squeezed out some calves for veal.......Wait, let me check....Oh snap! I have a video for that, too!
Monday, February 04, 2008
Joan's Endorsement
From Joan Baez' MySpace:
____________________
Yesterday (2/3/08), the San Francisco Chronicle published in their "Letters to the Editor" section, the following letter from Joan (posted here without editing):
Editor,
I have attempted throughout my life to give a voice to the voiceless, hope to the hopeless, encouragement to the discouraged, and options to the cynical and complacent. My weapons have been a singing voice and a commitment to nonviolence in both word and action. From Northern Ireland to Sarajevo to Latin America, I have sung and marched, engaged in civil disobedience, visited war zones, and broken bread with those who had little bread to break - for all of which I am richer in spirit. The experience dearest to my heart was marching with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as he led the movement to end racism, bigotry, misuse of power, and poverty. Those were times when sacrifice was an accepted and meaningful concept, before greed had swelled to the proportions it has today.
Through all those years, I chose not to engage in party politics. Though I was asked many times to endorse candidates at every level, I was never comfortable doing so. At this time, however, changing that posture feels like the responsible thing to do.
I am endorsing a candidate for the office of President of the United States. If anyone can navigate the contaminated waters of Washington, lift up the poor, and appeal to the rich to share their wealth, it is Barack Obama. If anyone can bring light to the darkened corners of this nation and restore our positive influence in world affairs, it is Barack Obama. If anyone can begin the process of healing and bring unity to a country that has been divided for too long, it is Barack Obama.
It is time to begin a new journey.
Joan Baez
____________________
Yesterday (2/3/08), the San Francisco Chronicle published in their "Letters to the Editor" section, the following letter from Joan (posted here without editing):
Editor,
I have attempted throughout my life to give a voice to the voiceless, hope to the hopeless, encouragement to the discouraged, and options to the cynical and complacent. My weapons have been a singing voice and a commitment to nonviolence in both word and action. From Northern Ireland to Sarajevo to Latin America, I have sung and marched, engaged in civil disobedience, visited war zones, and broken bread with those who had little bread to break - for all of which I am richer in spirit. The experience dearest to my heart was marching with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as he led the movement to end racism, bigotry, misuse of power, and poverty. Those were times when sacrifice was an accepted and meaningful concept, before greed had swelled to the proportions it has today.
Through all those years, I chose not to engage in party politics. Though I was asked many times to endorse candidates at every level, I was never comfortable doing so. At this time, however, changing that posture feels like the responsible thing to do.
I am endorsing a candidate for the office of President of the United States. If anyone can navigate the contaminated waters of Washington, lift up the poor, and appeal to the rich to share their wealth, it is Barack Obama. If anyone can bring light to the darkened corners of this nation and restore our positive influence in world affairs, it is Barack Obama. If anyone can begin the process of healing and bring unity to a country that has been divided for too long, it is Barack Obama.
It is time to begin a new journey.
Joan Baez
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
