Surrender Monkey

2003-05-30T02:15:00.000-07:00

this blog is now on indefinite hiatus

It's the new hip thing to do, you know.

I am soon leaving for Taurinya, the village pictured above. I will have no access to internet. I will spend my time sleeping, playing music, hiking, and feeding hay to my favorite catalan donkey Saturnin. He is a nice donkey.

I will leave this page active, and will return to it when I can.

Visca Catalunya Lliure i els Catalans!

Visca Jesse Lliure!

2003-05-28T04:38:00.000-07:00

hey you shameless law theory-nerds out there! Did you know there's now a blog just for you? If you're as much into legal issues as I am, then you'll love the legal theory blog.

And don't forget about the tax blog! All the tax-policy you could possibly handle, and more.

I think it's now official, blogs have reached the mainstream.

--later--

I know my tone was a bit sarcastic there, but that legal theory blog is actually ~~hella~~ pretty cool.

--even later--

and now: the political theory blog!

2003-05-28T04:30:00.000-07:00

My internship is now very close to over. It turns out I won't be able to do the Ponts this week, so I'll actually be working on Friday as well. I'm too lazy to send a mass email thing, so please note that my work address will no longer work after that, so please use the hotmail one posted on this site. that's about it. It's very warm here and i think i'm gonna go to the beach with my folks tomorrow. I haven't been to the beach in a very long time, so it should be fun. Did you know that I live in the surf mecca of Europe? It's true. French surfers are very, very funny looking, by the way. They look like theyre trying to be all chill surfer-like, but can't escape their fashion-conscious, white-sneaker/turtle-neck wearing nature. Hilarious.

2003-05-27T07:03:00.000-07:00

alright, so I originally wanted to post this in my 'random' section, but Blogger seems to be going crazy today and i can only access my template from three months ago. i don't get it.

The NY review of books has a wonderful article (yet again) looking back on this administration's record in these eventful last few months, particularly on Iraq. It's not so much an exercise in Bush-bashing, as an effort to clearly identify our government's real policies and actions (as opposed to those stated), and their consequences up to now, as well as those possible for the future. It does a good job pointing out certain events that have not gotten a lot of press in the US, particularly on the French-American rift. Just for that, it's worth reading. It mentions an article written by Anne-Marie Slaughter, and published in the Washington Post on April 13th 2003, which shows how the US government decided to force France into a showdown over the second UN resolution, for instance. This decision was quite unnecessary, and extremely costly, both for Franco-American relations and international organizations like NATO, the EU and the UN. Interesting stuff.

2003-05-27T05:12:00.000-07:00

the young hipublicans

please, please, please go read this article, and then tell me if you felt like laughing or crying. It reminds me so much of this cartoon.
god damn, look at those pictures. These guys are pissed: conservatives with an attitude, for sure. and they're soo whitey! I thought they would add at least one token black/hispanic guy in there. No, i guess those guys are too busy fighting wars to worry about proselytizing on college campuses.
The tone of the article is pretty heinous as well, although i do dig the use of the word youthquake. Of course, there's the now standard "..and even at UC Berkeley" line. Somebody shoot me.

--later--
I like you guys so much I even tracked down the college conservative paper mentioned in the article. the website is pretty nice, to boot. I don't know about you, but it's the conservatives go shooting page that really does it for me. Nothing screams 'compassionate conservative' like a guy with an AK 47.

2003-05-27T01:40:00.000-07:00

win their hearts with chocolate chip cookies

god damnit, they're at it again. When are these people gonna stop trying to convert everyone? Can you imagine what an evangelist world would look like? Probably a lot like Texas.

it reminds me of this super-christian asian girl i met when i was in DC last summer. We were talking politics, and she calmly explained that she would always support Israel, no matter what, because it was only once the Temple was rebuilt that "Jesus would come back" (her words). I wanted to tell her that maybe the israelis wouldn't be too cool with that, since -after all- at that point they would either have to convert to christianity or suffer in hell, but i kept quiet. How the fuck do you argue with that kind of logic? It boggles my mind.

2003-05-26T01:57:00.000-07:00

Alright, so here's a bit more from salon.com on media ownership rules deregulation. The vote is being rushed to June 2nd, as it seems that the american public is waking up to the issue a bit. Sadly, the FCC isn't exactly known for its open and democratic decision-making process. It's hard to find a better example of interest-politics at work, as the May 23rd salon link sadly demonstrated. FCC-chairman Micheal Powell (yes, Collin's son), appointed by Bush in 2001, seems hell bent on deregulating the media market, at least as much as he can get away with.

Interestingly, the article points out a number of groups that one (that I) didn't expect to speak out against this project, including the NRA, out of all people. I guess they are nervous about those dirty 'anti-gun' liberals taking over the media. I don't think they've been following the evolution of media ownership too closely, otherwise they'd probably shut the hell up. The article also gives the refreshing anecdote of the FCC's own web-questionnaire, in which an overwhelming 97% of answers were critical of further deregulation. Although encouraging, this is a bit inconsequential as the Senate Commerce Committee chairman, a certain Sen. McCain, has rejected motions to table the issue long enough to bring powell to testify there. It seems that, once again, a vital piece of legislation will be rushed through while most eyes are looking elsewhere, and that the American public will be kept mostly in the dark about it-until it's too late.

I encourage all of you to go here and sign the petition, if anything to ease your conscience a bit. So even if we can't keep Rupert Murdoch from taking over the universe, we can at least let the apparatchiks know that some of us are not ok with that.

for Action McNews(tm), signing off.

2003-05-24T02:45:00.000-07:00

god, i'm so tired of working..tiredtiredtiredtired. To paraphrase a friend of mine, my life in the past month has basically been:
writewritewrite/sleep three hours/wake up, dash to the office/workworkwork/dash home/writewritewrite.

and next Tuesday i finish my internship. I'll be done. over. then all i have left to do is witewritewrite. i feel better already.

2003-05-23T13:04:00.000-07:00

get em here, folks

these shirts are awesome. well, maybe 'awesome' isn't the word i'm looking for. maybe just 'funny'. or just 'kinda cool'. whatever.

i'm obsessed with this great blog this feature that blogger offers now. If you see anything you like on the internet, you can just right-click onto 'blog this', and a little window will pop up allowing you to add posts with great ease. I really have no excuse for failing in my blogging duties anymore.

2003-05-23T05:30:00.000-07:00

as you may know, the English version of the Al-Jazeera website is still not working (surprise, surprise..), but cursor has a good number of other arab-world related news links. I particularly enjoy the BBC's Middle East service. Cursor also seems to be getting all of Al-Jazeera's mail, which is understandable since their site is always getting shut down by hackers (read:CIA). It makes for interesting reading.

i really like this one:

Subject: AMERICA WINS HOO RAA FOR THE USA,

YOU WILL THANK US LATTER I AM SURE.

On another topic, if you thought the effects of telecom deregulation were already bad enough (cf. clear channel), well it looks like it's about to get worse. Also, here's an interesting article as to why you might not have heard about it (reminder: to read the whole article, just go through the free daypass process. It's annoying, but it doesn't take too long).

2003-05-22T06:02:00.000-07:00

i'm really turning into a lyd fan...
you gotta read this, but don't read it at work! I did and just started laughing histerically. Then i realized all my office co-workers where looking at me with that 'the fuck?!' look on their face. So yeah. you've been warned.

I put on my robe and wizard hat..

2003-05-22T00:48:00.000-07:00

the LifeLog program

from cursor.

find out what the pentagon's up to these days. don't worry, they promised to use to for good, never for evil.

2003-05-21T00:36:00.000-07:00

blog army

i know blogs talking about blogs are a little passé (I think jane called them "blahgs"..), but i'll be brief. You might have noticed that tom tomorrow, among with an army of fellow bloggers, has been following the press coverage of the Bush tax plan nationally, and found that many, many papers where publishing the exact same reader-response letter, everytime under a different name, celebrating the plan for "creating jobs and fostering economic growth" (verbatum everytime time).
He believes the letter to be written by GOP spin doctors, and i would tend to agree. Of course, this is nothing new to American politics (especially to this administration), but it's nice to be able to pin-point some specific examples of this brain-washing machine at work. So i'm joining this army of bloggers and making the truth be known. Here's one example of the letter, as published in Time magasine under the name Thomas J. Stokes (scroll down). If i find more examples of this letter, i'll post the links here. It might be fun.

---later---

here's one from the Huntsville Times, under the name Corey O'Connor. And another from the Kalamazoo gazette, this time signed Norman Root. How the fuck do they come up with these names?

---even later---

and another one, this time signed Joyce Lemmon (i'm not making this up, people) and from our very own Chronicle (scroll down). Same exact words, every single time.

2003-05-19T07:26:00.000-07:00

more required reading

this declaration in support of renewing the transatlantic partnership came out in Le Monde a couple days ago. A shitload of people have signed on already, including Madeleine Albright (one of the co-authors), Warren Christopher, Bob Dole and James Schesinger. It warms my little heart. Seriously though, you should read it. It's interesting. The only problem is that i can't seem to find the english version. here's the French version as published in Le Monde. Maybe you'll have more luck in googling your way to the original (English) version. It might also be a good way to work on that HS French. What's that? You took Spanish instead? Well tough shit there, pendejo.

---later---

ok, I found it here. PDF format only, sorry. Enjoy!

2003-05-16T01:56:00.000-07:00

going back to Paris today. Third weekend in a row. I think i'm close to making up for 20-some years of 'under-parenting'.
I'm developping a turtle-like ability at keeping my essentials packed and ready to go at any given time. I packed at 6:30 this morning in about 15 minutes. Maybe it's more of a hobbo-like ability at not having anything to pack. heh. I love travelling.

you guys should check this out. i love the onion.

If anyone should feel the urge to email, please use the alternate address.

2003-05-15T06:26:00.000-07:00

a lesson in modern journalism

check out Paul Krugman's analysis of some of the causes of media bias in America, and compare it to a Fox anchor's rebutal. fair and balanced, yo.

2003-05-15T03:08:00.000-07:00

I'm sick. It sucks. I'm working on my indep study all damn day + night (when i'm not wasting times on blogs or friendster), and sleeping 3 hour nights. ugh.

I wanted to talk about something, although I'm not sure this is the right forum for it. I'm just a little sad/disappointed about something. Through the wonder that is friendster I got a hold of an old 'gf' that I had really fucked over and decided to just send her a note, say hi, etc. Most of you know what i'm talking about (not princess blog blog blog), so again i don't know if writing about it is such a good idea, but whatever. I didn't really expect anything, and certainly not forgiveness, renewed friendship and the likes. At least not at first. To be honest, i had of course hoped for these things. To be in conflict is not part of my nature, and it makes me severely uncomfortable. I realise that in many ways it was a very selfish, conscience-driven thing to do, but it fits with this new 'redemption' phase that I'm going through.

Anyway, she never wrote back, and neither did her friend I tried to contact as well. Sucks. We have so many friends in common, and I hate the awkward moments/looks at parties and various gatherings. When i saw the friend at a party, he still said hi, asked how i was doing, etc. I had mistakenly taken that for an invitation to reconnect. I guess it was just politeness. I hate all that shit. Is it too much to ask to just drop all the formalities, the nice words? I'm not asking for forgiveness, just normalcy.I want to straigthen shit out, one way or another. If she hates me 4 ever, then fine. I can live with that, i guess. I deserve it. The worst thing is that i like the girl + the friend just fine as individuals, and really woudn't mind getting to know them again. Am I mistaken in thinking that we've all experienced lots of things since these fateful events (it's been a few years, after all), and probably (hopefully) evolved as people, gained some maturity perhaps? Maybe it's the eternal optimist in me. This feeling I can't seem to shake that things will just get better with time. I really should know better. My initial reaction is to forget about it and leave it at this status quo, but my initial reaction are generally wrong, so I don't know. I'm tempted to write again, see if they'll answer this time. Maybe I said the wrong things, used the wrong words last time. Any thoughts on the subject? I know i'm asking a lot because some of you are friendly with both me + them, so if it's too much, just ignore this post. thanx.

much, much later
she wrote back. heh. i might have over reacted just a tad bit. all is well.

2003-05-11T06:31:00.000-07:00

so my mum just got back from a humanitarian trip to Cameroon yesterday. It sounds like the trip went well. Her school has some kind of cooperation deal with the school in Bafang, near Bafoussam. She had her students digging wells and installing solar-powered pumps. Pretty cool stuff. She also brought back about half of Cameroon in two huge bags.

That's the problem with large catholic families: If you go anywhere, you really, really have to plan shit out so you can bring back a little something for the kids, sisters+brothers (i got 4 aunts+uncle), parents + cousins. Of course, in the mediterranean areas you only have to come to dinner once to be considered 'cousin'. My grandma still asks me how that nice boy Paul (O'keefe) is doing these days. He stayed at my grandma's 3 years ago...3 years ago!. Last time i saw my (slightly senile) grandpa, he asked me 3 times when i would be done with school and start a "real job". After skillfully dodging the question twice with nice platitudes ("oh, I need to further my studies a bit more"), I finally broke down and told him that I didn't know, that I really didn't have any set plans/ career goals. He seemed very confused as to how someone my age could not know what they wanted to do. Then he sighed and poured me a glass of muscat. I think he thinks I'm nuts.

2003-05-11T05:40:00.000-07:00

More on the affirmative action case, from the NY review of books. This piece is called The Court and the University, and it's a good analysis of the other end of the debate, the legal and constitutional grounds. Highly recommended reading for anyone slightly interested in this sort of thing.

And another thing: our leader action figures.

2003-05-07T06:50:00.000-07:00

I've been reading a few pitchfork reviews lately (ah, the procrastination-potential of the internet truly astounds me..) and I must say I'm quite amazed at the creativity of some reviewers in their use of the english language. It's quite spectacular. I mean, 'singalongable' ? Come on.

If I didn't know better (and if my cousin tyler wasn't there to prove me wrong), I'd be tempted to argue that small east-coast liberal arts college=bad writing.

On another topic, I'm leaving for Paris tomorrow, so won't be able to open my work email. during that time, you can reach me here though.

2003-05-06T02:08:00.000-07:00

heh. This is too funny. Some of it is kinda true, actually.

2003-05-05T23:50:00.000-07:00

the subversive agenda of seinfeld

back to that irony thing. Reading the NY review of books the other day (which I strongly suggest to everyone), I stumbled on a review of a book by Jedediah Purdy, author of For Common Things: Irony, Trust and Commitment in America Today. Some of the reviews I read really bash the book, but it does fit nicely in the irony-generation discussion. For a more condensed version of his analysis, you can go here for an article he wrote for prospect.org. Let me know what you think.

In other news, I'm neck high in my independent study, so I won't have much time for blogging. I'm taking advantage of the "pont", or bridge, which means that in a week where the Thursday is a holiday (such as this and last week), you can traditionally take the friday off. So basically I'm going to work 6 days in 2 weeks. Are you jealous yet?

2003-05-01T07:46:00.000-07:00

The Low-Fidelity All-Star: he was born with the cool, and it's totally natural. He runs the gamut from Hipster Supreme (only they can ingest as much coffee as he) to the geeky hipster
You are the Low-Fidelity All-Star. You were born
with your cool, and it's totally natural. You
run the gamut from Hipster Supreme (only they
can ingest as much coffee as you) to the geeky
hipster (Mario Kart, anyone?).

What Kind of Hipster Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

yup. That's me alright. Notice the import cigarettes... classy

2003-04-30T04:06:00.000-07:00

after spending ~~a good amount of~~ way too much time on craigslist trying to find housing for the fall, I've come to the following conclusion. It is god-damn near impossible to find a room in the Bay Area if:

-you are currently abroad or cannot physically make it to the Bay Area before August.

-are not a quiet, christian asian girl.

-are not a white gay male, or GWM to use the craigslist vernacular.

-you would rather not live in a 'Socially Engaged Buddhist Collective ', do not 'smoke budz' or dislike the smell of patchouli.

-are not employed at the time of the search.

-have less-than-perfect credit.

-you eat meat and/or happen to be a boozer and smoker.

this is a call for help! If there's anybody out there who would not mind a smoking, drinking, occasionally swearing (but otherwise very considerate) roomate for the fall, I beseach you, please e-mail me. Thank you.

2003-04-30T02:29:00.000-07:00

finally, it comes out. Nothing but lies, lies, lies...

2003-04-28T07:08:00.000-07:00

Herman Goering, at the Nuremburg Trials:

"Why, of course people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece?

Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

*shiver*

2003-04-28T01:29:00.000-07:00

Alright: something for you wanabe-philosophers out there.

One of the most bizarre things about being in France during this past year has been watching the local press try and intellectualize everything. Every new event or policy is analized and debated in great detail in the press and in the streets, something that I would normally commend, except that there seems so little to intellectualize about in recent American policy. Watching French university-types on TV trying to comprehend the recent flairing of anti-french sentiment is somewhat entertaining, but they seem to be missing the point: There is no subjective or valid reasons (in my opinion, granted) for how hateful the response to the French gvt.'s actions has been. Personally, I can only understand it as the result of a deliberate smear campaign, an emotional reaction, not a 'cognitive' one. Whatever the reasons though, watching them use logic and historical precedents to analyse and understand such phenomena, only to end up more confused and befuddled, is hysterical.

That leads me to my next point. There was an interesting article in Le Monde a little while back about the hawks at the White House. The author was trying to trace back the philosophical and academic roots of the neo-con like Perle and Wolfowitz. He finds a few common threads, in particular the work of Leo Strauss, a German philosopher who fled before Hitler came to power and tought at the New School of Social Research in NYC before founding the Committee on Social Thought in Chicago. I guess Strauss criticised the 'moral relativism' which appeared in the 60's, a theme dear to neo-cons like Alan Bloom (U. of Chicago) who see it as the root of the now-prevalent PC ideology.

Does anybody know anything about this guy? I'd like to find out more about him, try and understand it a little better. I look forward to any insight you guys might have. Here I go, 'intellectualizing' again. Maybe I am pretty french after all.

2003-04-25T06:10:00.000-07:00

this is kind of scary (scroll down-you're gonna need pdf to read it). It's a report from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), an organisation started by, among others, Lynne V. Cheney and...Joseph I. Lieberman. Are you sure this guy's a democrat?

It's called "Defending Civilization: How Our Universities Are Failing America and What Can Be Done About It". It basically argues that Universities (or 'Ivory Towers' as they are lovingly refered too) have become intolerant of opinions contrary to the pervasive PC ideology. It supports this thesis with examples of recent events that have taken place in Universities accross the US -not least of which Cal- which are supposed to prove this closing of the American mind. Stolen newspapers (sound familiar?), prof. making 'anti-american' remarks are all cited, and contrasted with other remarks and polls supposed to represent the true American majority. Bush is quoted multiple times.
-continued bellow-

2003-04-25T06:09:00.000-07:00

-continued-
Now, while I'm all ready to scream about the New MacCarthyism, I will acknowledge a couple things. First of all, some of the events brought up as 'evidence' are indeed unacceptable. Stealing newspapers with which you disagree, for instance, should not be tolerated and go unpunished, for any cause. Freedom of speech and press are essential to our democracy and should defended vigorously. But conversely, so should the professors' freedom of speech be protected! To be fair, the report does acnowlege the need for such freedom of speech--I'd be pretty shocked if it didn't. These are not new arguments, and I'm sure all of you have heard them all before. The most baffling, to me, is the author's claim that this is primarily the result of a profound shift in campus culture over the last 40 years. In particular, he blames the emergence of what I would call 'third-world' studies at the detriment of western history and culture. I feel that he fails to deliver compelling and substantive evidence of this shift. His proof rests on media accounts of students feeling constrained and sometimes bullied for their opinions. These accounts are not detailed and complete enough to show a clear case of institutional bullying though, outside of a few exception. I'm also always weary of students' claim of getting bad grades because the prof. 'didn't like my ideas'.

Perhaps my own bias makes me blind to these kinds of pressures though, and our poor American conservatives are really being bullied by the PC liberal police. Or maybe this is just a product of the profound anti-intellectualism in American society, a phenomenon I have never really understood. When our 'best and brightest' are telling us something is wrong, shouldn't we listen to what they have to say? Maybe I'm just crazy.

2003-04-24T01:44:00.000-07:00

on affirmative action

Enough with the consensual BS, lets go back to that fighting spirit. I don't really know why I'm tackling this while still in jet-lag mode, but mark brought it up and, well, I just couldn't resist. here's an interesting article from the economist on the current situation of affirmative action in America (roll over the economist link for the password). Again, I find myself in complete disagreement with their views. A suit for discrimination has gone up to the supreme court over some white kids' being rejected from the University of Michigan. I suspect that the pro-affirmative movement will defend the somewhat-weak plea for 'diversity', and the anti-camp for the even weaker 'fairness' argument. I don't know much about the legal arguments for each side, so I won't get into it too much, although feel free to give me some insight. This is a topic that I don't know much about, and understand even less, so I'm ready to be educated.

I guess that as a true lefty, I tend to fall more in the 'mend it don't end it' side of the debate. Although I understand the need for 'fairness', I don't particularly think of affirmative action as unfair. To think that we now have a level playing field, making AA anachronistic and unfair, seems like a streched argument at best, and a bit dishonest at its worst. Anybody in a major US University should realise that a majority of the kids there weren't accepted because of their incredible intellect (major understatement), but rather because of outside factors: Going to better schools (often times private HS, or in better neighbourhoods), or having their parents pay for after-school SAT tutoring. We also can't forget about Bourdieux's work on the cultural baggage. Kids from middle- and upper-middle class families generally test better because of an education that stresses certain cultural elements (such as art and 'intellectual' endeavors) which put them at an advantage. That was certainly the case in my family. I'm a grateful I got into Cal, but I don't feel especially deserving of getting accepted.
-continued bellow-

2003-04-24T01:43:00.000-07:00

-continued-

I guess the issue at hand is wether these kids that didn't get into Michigan are victims of discrimination. I can see two points of view. The first is that they are part of that 'privileged' class, but still didn't manage to get good enough grades to get in. In that situation I tend to think, well, tough shit, they should of worked harder. A second viewpoint would be, I guess, that they weren't specifically at an advantage, and the fact that they were white is what hurt them. That indeed would not be 'fair', and I feel bad for the justices who are going to have to make that call. Whatever the outcome, it's seems clear to me that the definite variable should be more than just race. As the anti-AA has carefully noted, the notion of 'minority' is an increasingly murky one, and being defined as one does not always translate in a disavantage in your educational chances. As a true lefty, I would then argue that any AA legislation should focus on this variable: Although defining what counts as a 'difficult' or 'disadvantaged' background would be a huge hassle for any legislator, it seems like the only fair thing to do. I imagine a mixture of background info, including the average results of the HS the student went to and socio-economic background could do the trick.

Of course, that basicaly means taking class into account. And I realise that it is taboo to talk about class in America, much less base legislation on it, but I see no way around it. I tend to view the call for 'diversity' as a bit of a cop-out. The American educational system is profoundly unfair (to think otherwise is to be seriously misguided or misinformed) and AA should strive to remedy that, not defend some mushy ideal of diversity. In the end, I guess it depends on wether you think there should be a fair chance for everyone in society, and at what cost. But if you are going to believe and fight for the american myth that everyone should have a fair shot at success, then I don't see how you could be against some form of a system to rectify the odds.

*much, much later* here's a NY review of books article about this case. It's much better than mine, obviously.

2003-04-24T00:04:00.000-07:00

Back in Bordeaux

Back in France, but a bit later than originally planned. It feels like summer here in Bordeaux. The weather is in the 70's and I'm starting to realise that I don't own any summer clothes. I've had this problem before. I think after living so long in the "temperate" nor-cal weather, it's hard to adjust to having real seasons. I've had to buy a whole new set of clothes for the winter, and now it looks like I'll have to do the same for the spring and summer. You just can't wear the same jeans and jackets all year long here. I'll stop complaining, it'll just take some getting used to.

I also want to apologise to those I didn't get to see while I was back in Cali. I guess I had just too much planned for such a short stay. I'll have to make it up to you all. My thanks again to my hosts, Rem + the 38th street crew. It's a shame you guys are going to leave that house this summer, it's a nice place. Oakland fucking rocks.

One last little thing: I listened to the mix CD Randy + Liz made me all the way back to Bordeaux, and I must say it's pretty funny to listen to that Thin Lizzy song ("I'm just a cowboy..") while in Bdx. Even though TL are Irish, I guess, that song is so damn american that it felt a little bit like I was breaking some law by listening to it in a French surrounding. Or maybe like I was part of some secret "rock" cult. I don't know if that makes much sense, but whatever.

2003-04-18T13:24:00.000-07:00

ahhh..the pleasures of noon sproul shows on the beautiful UC Berkeley campus. I had forgotten just how much of a "have you seen me in my cool indie-rock clothes" these things are. I saw this winy ass white boy playing his winy ass songs. I forget the name of his ensemble, but it was pretty un-spectacular anyway. Emo-core is sooo out, didn't this guy get the memo? I'm just kidding, I just feel like being a little bitch today. Maybe it has to do with hanging out with Kai so much these days. Speeking of which, yesterday we went to Pub Quiz at the Mad Dog in the Fog and then went to some other bar on Polk street. These two very underaged girls dropped a note off for him there with their phone number, it was hilarious. Made fun of him all night. heh.

Tonight we're going to see The Minds at Gilman. They're so not So-Cal, you'd have to be a grade-A morron to think that. I'll let you guys know how that went. I'm leaving soon and that makes me sad.

2003-04-15T09:51:00.000-07:00

-next stop, Balboa park-
The J church is inching along, sliding up and down the slippery hills of Noe Valley. It is raining hard. The punk-rock girl and the fat man step inside, look left and right and then sit down solemnly.-next stop, Dolores- It curves left and the small victorians part like the sea. It dives between them into one of those holes of the city I had never known was there. I stare out and see those strange trees and shrubs that look so foreign and yet so familiar. -next stop, Montgomery- I breath in deeply. That's my stop.

2003-04-13T20:56:00.000-07:00

keep on blogging in the free world

The eagle has landed. I just got in to SFO earlier today and I'm staying with my friend Rem until tomorrow. It's great to be in the Bay Area.

A couple anecdotes, though: After landing at Heathrow saturday, I checked into my way overpriced hotel. I decided I was too "knackered" to go into London, so I just stayed to eat at the hotel. I swear to god I thought the whole british food thing was just a stereotype, but it turns out it's (somewhat) true. My entree was asparagus drenched in a kind of cheddar-bechamel sauce. Ugh, it was disgusting. On the other hand, British pints seem to be larger than American pints. I don't really know how that's possible (I mean, isn't a pint a pint?), but it is so.

And finally, I just want to say that young children should not be allowed to travel, especially in crowded transatlantic charter flights. They seem to be genetically programmed to start crying and screaming as soon as the plane takes off, generally making everybody's life a living hell. That's all for now.

2003-04-12T05:16:00.000-07:00

blogging from the airport, yo.

I'm in Charles De Gaulle Airport, the crappiest airport in the world. I'm leaving for Heathrow in a little bit. I'll keep you posted.

2003-04-11T13:55:00.000-07:00

Oy! I made it through the first leg of the trip. I'm typing away from my mom's computer in beautiful Dammarie-les-lys, in the 'burbs of Paris. I gotta bail already and go meet my friend Ben in town. I'm gonna spend the night at his place, I'll be that much closer to the airport tomorrow morning.

Just a quick word, though. French bullet trains. Wow. Fucking fast. We so need some of those in California. I just did the equivalent of SF-Bakersfield (maybe even more, I forget the distance) in under three hours, downtown to downtown. It's awesome. Of course, I'm not sure why anyone would be in such a hurry to get to Bakersfield, but that's besides the point really. Also: I had a french thug spotting earlier. They're so funny with their pitbulls, lacoste sweatpants and fannie packs. I wonder if they're aware how ridiculous they would look walking down Harlem like that?

Alright, gotta go.

2003-04-11T01:38:00.000-07:00

I'm just getting the last little things ready before I go. Not much time for blogging. I am going to try to make this a blog-friendly trip however, if I can find internet access along the way. Since it's going to be spread over three days, I think you can probably count on some of those funny airport anecdotes I was talking about in my earlier post.

Until then, I bid you all adieu.

2003-04-10T06:09:00.000-07:00

This actually happened to me today:

happy-go-lucky jesse, typing at his computer, wistling 'winds of change' - Boss comes in

BOSS: <french>So jesse, have any big plans for this weekend?</french>
ME: the fuck?! <french>Well,..., I'm sorta leaving for California for a week, remember?</french>
HIM: ...
internal monologue #1: ohmygod..did I tell him? DID I FORGET TO TELL HIM I WAS LEAVING?! AHHHH *panics*
ME: <french>You know, to see my professor and such.</french>
HIM: <french>Oh, of course. How silly of me. Well, I'm off! Have a good time, I'll be in Brussels all week.</french> *nonchalantly walks away*
ME: *falls of chair* *dies a cruel death*

2003-04-10T01:21:00.000-07:00

the journey ahead

Ugh. I'm in full stress-mode, preparing my trip to the Bay Area. I can't believe I'm going through all this for 10 days. I'll be super-jetlagged the whole time there, but I know it'll be worth it. I lucked out because my dad gave me his frequent flyer miles for the trip. It's costing me nada. zip. Pretty sweet.

Only drawback: how fucking long it's going to take me to get there. I'm leaving friday afternoon from Bdx to get to Paris. I'm spending the night there and leaving for London Heathrow around 3 in the afternoon. I land there around 3 in the afternoon (I love time zones..) and have to find accomodations for the night, although it's so expensive that I'll probably end up sleeping in the airport. I leave the next day for the US of A, with a nice 3 hour stop in beautiful Newark, NJ. I'm gonna be pretty beat when I get there.

I gotta say though, I do enjoy airports. Not so much the actual flying part, because I'm convinced that airplanes are designed for midget-sized people (no offense to midgets intended). I think of myself as fairly 'average' both in size and wait, and yet a 12 hour flight in coach is the closest thing to torture that I've ever been through. I can't imagine what someone obese or over 6 feet tall must feel like. But I do enjoy airports. They're like alter-reality zones. I always meet the strangest folks in airports, the biggest freaks. Especially in the smoking lounges. Remember that Seinfeld episode when Kramer end us gambling with the crazy texan about which airplane is going to be late next? That's a perfect example of airport-induced insanity. Someone should really write a book about the airport micro-society. I'd read it.

Another good example: flight-friendships. When you go on long trips alone, you inevitably end up talking to someone (well, I usually do) to break the monotony. It usually happends in the 6th or 7th hour of the flight, when my CD player runs out of batteries and I get such a bad migraine from the AC that I can't read anymore. I usually end up talking with the grandma/looser dad/random dude next to me and always have the strangest conversation. I think because people know that these are flight-friendships, they don't mind talking to strangers. There's a kind of solidarity that forms after so many hours passed locked inside of a small, defined space. It's interesting to see how quickly that familiarity fades as soon you set foot on the ground. You might still talk to him/her at the customs, sometimes even at the baggage claim, but as soon as you're out in the 'real world', you barely even bother to say bye. Well, those were kind of random thoughts, but whatever.

2003-04-09T01:32:00.000-07:00

tales from an expat

Yes, this will be your typical the-people-here-are-so-strange rant, so if you're tired of this sort of thing, please ignore this post. Go ahead and wander on over here and here.

so, last saturday I was invited to the 'gala' of the political science school here in Bordeaux. It's basically a formal, except it takes place in a huge castle and it's mostly French people. Everybody gets drunk, hops on a bus and is taken to the said castle. It had a moat. Moats are rad.

the gala was alright, really. Not really my kind of music or people (lots of preppy boys smoking cigars *shrug*), but I mostly hung out with my friends and had a good time. What I meant to talk about is when, as an expat, you meet other exiled countrymen. Despite the much-propagated lie that each and every person is unique and 'beautiful in their own special way', these experiences have yielded pretty tangible evidence that this is not so. Basically, Americans abroad fall into two broad categories:

everything spoken in english except when otherwise noted - X represents the person by which we're introduced - I have, of course, ~~completely made up~~ embellished these conversations

#1: Your typical frat/jock/redneck guy. This specimen seems to react in somewhat similar ways to meeting other expats. It ~~usually~~ always ends up sounding like this:

X: <french>(to HIM)..and this is jesse, he's from the US as well</french>
HIM: dude, you're from the US?! That's sooo cool. Where are you from? I'm from California/New york/the Midwest/whatever.
ME: I'm from Berkeley.
HIM: ...
ME: You know, in California.
HIM: Oh right, right. So, what are you doing here? The chicks are pretty fine, huh *winks repeatedly*
ME: um, yeah. I'm doing an internship at this..um..retirement..bank..thingie
internal monologue #1: what are you saying, you dum' bastad!
internal monologue #2: why does my internal voice sounds like it's from Jersey?
HIM: um, cool. Bye.
ME: ...

#2: Everybody else:

X: <french>(to HIM)..and this is jesse, he's from the US as well</french>
HIM: ...
ME: ...
HIM: (looks as ambarrassed as me) This is fucking lame, huh. Wanna get a drink?
ME: Yup.

2003-04-09T00:45:00.000-07:00

real-time censorship testing

Find out if your favorite site/blog has been banned from the People's Republic!

Thanks to the kind folks at Harvard Law for this invaluable tool in our struggle against tyranny. In an odd way, I was kind of disappointed to find that surrender monkey had not been banned. Makes you feel kind of insignificant. Or maybe they took my previous post a little too literally. I'll have to work hard to correct this injustice.

Zhao Ziyang is a pawn of the oligarchy who will never let true freedom and democracy develop in China!

Chairman Mao was a big fat baby!

That'll teach them.

2003-04-08T01:45:00.000-07:00

backlash to the backlash (meta-backlash? J/K)

OK, so I'm seeing more and more comments and articles complaining about the anti-war movement these days, and I thought I should probably weigh in on it in. Of course i'll try to stay as fair and completely objective as I have been in the past. hum. *cough*

-My first point is as follows: everybody hates snotty little college kids that think they know everything (wait..did I just dis myself?..). No surprise there. Thus, to me, it shouldn't matter much that they be for or against unilateral action in the Middle-East. Now, I haven't been in the US for a while and acknowledge that slogan-pushing demonstrators can be a bit annoying sometimes (although frankly it's their constitutional right to do so, so everyone should just deal with it), but I don't believe that all of them are bratty know-it-alls. To claim that the anti-war movement itself is single-minded and dogmatic is unfair. We can agree that there is probably as much ideology and simplistic rethoric in the pro camp ("no blood for oil" v. 'love it or leave it, motherfucker!'), so criticism should be focused on the content of the debate, not the individuals. If debate there really is. It doesn't really look like it from here.

-Secondly: On the anti-war camp's alleged habit of 'monopolizing' the media/streets/debate. Again, that seems a little ludicrous in the age of Fox-ification of the American press, but I'll acknowledge that media-bias is highly controversial and that pretty much everyone claims that their side is treated unfairly by the press. If anything, this controversy shows how hard it is to quantify media bias, but some things are pretty sure: you just can't claim that the pro-war views/opinions are severely underepresented on TV, newspaper columns, and -of course- by the White House press corps. I say they have a pretty fair shot at getting their voices heard (probably more than fair, but I digress).

-Last but not least: That the anti camp is somehow misinformed, being lied-to and manipulated by socialist-dark-lords-from-hell-that-want-to-come-and-eat-your-babies-bllaargg!!. That sounds about right. Still, that's better than believing this clap-trap, in my book.

ok now children, repeat after me: ALL HAIL MARX!

or else..

2003-04-07T06:46:00.000-07:00

war on Iraq: the impossible dialogue.

2003-04-07T06:18:00.000-07:00

Oh.my.fucking.god.

Check out the new Christian Crusades.

Here's a few quotes:
"(we) hope to plan churches in Baghdad once the regime of Saddam Hussein is deposed.(...) (our church) has made substantial contacts with Iraqi Christians living in Toronto (and they) say their homeland is ready for the gospel. (...) With this apparent window of opportunity coming, we want to jam that window open with a pipeline and go in there so we can see churches established in Baghdad.'
'We're wanting to at least establish some sort of a network (...) and God has given us favor in some pretty high-level circles to give us an entrance into [Iraq].'

-Jeff Christopherson, pastor of the Sanctuary of Oakville, a Southern Baptist-affiliated church just outside Toronto, Canada.

and my personal favorite:
'Planned Parenthood's lack of integrity truly knows no bounds! (...) The Iraqi people are embracing the prospect of real freedom from oppression, yet Planned Parenthood wants to wage its own war on Iraq's pre-born children through its dictatorial regime of abortion and contraception.'

-Jim Sedlak, Executive Director of American Life League's STOPP International.

...

2003-04-07T01:21:00.000-07:00

a roadmap for the american left: preemptive cringing for 2004.

two recent articles in the American Prospect illustrate the awkward situation faced by democrats today. With the war well under way, and a presidential election coming up, what position to defend? The first article argues for what the authors present as a 'constructive' tactic, while the second ( a response to the original article) pushes for one more 'rejectionist' of the Bush doctrine.

It's tricky indeed, because it is the just the kind of situation when the realities of electoral politics (in all of its glorious crapulence) go against the beliefs of many on the Left. Should the dems keep to the moral high ground at the risk of getting shafted in 2004? Should they take a "realist" approach at the risk of further alienating many on the left already desperate for a different leadership than the Lieberman/Dashle crowd?

Of course, in the end this is a non-debate. The vast majority of the folks on the Left, even those not 'confortable' with this war, are perfectly happy to accept it now that it has started. Indeed, the situation before the war was probably much more difficult for moderate liberals. Now they can try to built a platform against Bush based on critiques of his tactic/methods (i.e. a bigger role for the UN and multilaterism in running the interim government in Iraq, more ressources for the humanitarian effort, etc.), rather than on the substance of his policies. So much in politics is based on pragmatism and settling for the 'possible', that I can't really blame them. Still, I tend to think that this kind of position will not give them the white house, and more importantly could hurt their moral and political credibility in the long run.

On a completely unrelated topic: someone beat me to the punch for this URL. The bastard. The pictures are funny, but why did he/she have to make the site so ugly?! Not that mind is that much better, mind you.

2003-04-04T00:41:00.000-08:00

"don't call it a comeback": the Patriot II act

-more cut n' paste blogging-

Alright, so I don't mean to be a little bitch here or anything, but what the fuck is America thinking?! As if the prequel, which was rushed through congress only 7 weeks after 9/11, wasn't scary enough, John Ashcroft seems determined to finish the "fascist-isation" of the US.

Here's a good read on what will soon be known as "The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003" . *shiver*
For those of you to lazy to click, here's a quick list, which sadly is by no means exhaustive:

1) Americans could have their citizenship revoked, if found to have contributed "material support" to organizations deemed by the government, even retroactively, to be "terrorist."

2) Legal permanent residents (Tom, this means you), could be deported instantaneously, without a criminal charge or even evidence, if the Attorney General considers them a threat to national security, or even if they commit minor, non-terrorist offenses. Habeas what? Habeas who?

3) Authorities could wiretap anybody for 15 days, and snoop on anyone's Internet usage (including chat and email), all without obtaining a warrant.

4) The government would be specifically instructed not to release any information about detainees held on suspicion of terrorist activities, until they are actually charged with a crime.

5) Businesses that rat on their customers to the Feds – even if the information violates privacy agreements, or is, in fact, dead wrong – would be granted immunity.

6) Police officers carrying out illegal searches would also be granted legal immunity if they were just carrying out orders.

I give credit when credit is due: my thanks to alternet for bringing this to my attention. It is truly mind-boggling. PLease note that we wouldn't even know about these plans if an alarmed Justice Department staffer not leaked the draft to the Center for Public Integrity. I guess Ashcroft was waiting for someone to burn down the Reichstag before bringing this to the floor, thus ensuring the same kind of calm and reasoned debate in Congress that brought us Patriot I.

*sigh* It really sucks being German in the 1930's.

2003-04-03T01:42:00.000-08:00

To go back to media bias a bit, I finally found the word I was looking for to describe a particular phenomenon in modern journalism, in an article about the press' coverage of Gore in the 2000 elections, published in Rolling Stone. The term is metanarrative (no joke). The author explains:

Last year, a review conducted by two nonpartisan groups, Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Pew Research Center, found that a stunning seventy-six percent of the Gore campaign coverage in early 2000 centered around two negative themes: that he lies and exaggerates, and that he's tarred by scandal. "We call it the metanarrative," says Tom Rosenstiel, director of Project for Excellence in Journalism. "Journalists are looking for a story line, a narrative device, that plays out over weeks and months, and there's nothing wrong with that. The problem is if they let the narrative overwhelm the facts, then it becomes a distorting lens. It can lead journalists to ignore and mischaracterize facts as they try to fit them into the story."

Damn, I love it when I find the words to fit my thoughts. Check out the article, it's pretty good.

2003-04-03T00:19:00.000-08:00

why can't the democrats get tough

And now for some shameless cut and paste blogging. heh.

I bumped into this great article on a topic that I've been thinking about quite a bit. I've been meaning to write something about it, but have been unable to get my ideas straight. I teeter between compassion for those poor dems, to anger and resentment. How can they fuck up so badly. Don't they have any balls (please excuse the incredibly sexist comment used only for stylistic purposes)? The author Paul Glastris, editor in chief of the Washington Monthly, tries to look at this sad evolution of the donkey party and to make some sense of it all.

He takes the 2000 Florida debacle as a starting point and analyses the differences in tactics used by both sides of the ideological battlefield. He then dives deeper into the history of both parties to show that, in fact, the democratic party has never failed to act ruthelessly in the past. What makes this article particularly interesting is his analysis of this change. He goes beyond the "9/11 changed everything" argument and pinpoints other causes. I'll let you discover them.

Although I don't agree with everything mr. Glastris writes (I have a very hard time with the 'poor democrats' schtick. To me they're just stinkin' politicians like the rest of them), I respect his argumentation. He is especially right in calling our attention to a certain pattern of complacency towards the republican White House that desperatly needs to be addressed if democrats are to have a fighting chance in 2004.

2003-04-02T00:50:00.000-08:00

happiness is a warm gun, or so they say.

You may not believe me, but I didn't intentionally set out to write a politi-blog. I was so stirred by everything in the news that I needed an outlet, and this was the best way I found to do that. Lately though, I've just been tired of all this. Tired of war, of destruction and redemption, protests and counter-protests. I feel alone and useless, like disconnected from a world I no longer comprehend, that I no longer recognize. I'm sorry to be so emo-core, but if I bring this up it's because I feel that its actually a feeling many of us share right now. I'm not talking about your gen-x apathy either, this is something different.

So what to do when your country marches gaily into the pits of hell? When it seems that your value system is at the polar opposite of that of your countrymen? When you're pretty sure the whole world has gone utterly insane? I don't really know what you're supposed to do, but I'm fairly sure you have to start by thinking long and hard about how lucky you are not too be Iraqi right now. Then you might think about the G.I.s, especially those 18 year olds who joined after 9/11, and who only know about war through video games. I still remember seeing some of them on French TV a day or two into the invasion complaining that there wasn't enough "action" for them yet. Poor bastards. They're in for a rude awakening.

In the end, of course, there isn't much we can do, except feel bad and go to a couple demonstrations to ease our conscience. I just hope that in 20 years I won't be one of the hypocrites who pretends to be shocked when he finds out that people were tortured in Gantanamo bay, or that his country was responsible for yet another tragedy. I hope I won't play the outraged citizen then, when I was unable/unwilling to do it now--when it actually matters.

2003-03-31T00:36:00.000-08:00

a night at the Mega Macumba

The Peugeot 206 is racing down the silent suburban road, the crap Euro-techno blasting from the speakers and only making the pounding in my head feel worst. As I'm clutching my seat nervously, I'm thinking about how in hell I got talked into this, and more importantly if I'm going to survive the drive. "How far is this place again?" I ask my driver --and co-worker, whose slightly frowned face makes her look strangely like a cracked-out speed racer. "Not too far, it's just behind the airport". Why the fuck would you build a nightclub behind a the airport I'm thinking to myself, but by now I'm trying to keep my mouth shut.

When last week they invited me to go out for this girl's birthday, I really didn't know what I was getting into. I guess I had felt bad about always declining their previous invitations, and I guess it wouldn't be so bad. I mean, I work with these folks everyday, so I might as well be friendly. It's only later that I learned we would be going to the Mega Macumba.

2003-03-31T00:35:00.000-08:00

-continued-

In the land of cheesy, oversized European nightclubs, the Macumba is king. It was everything I had expected it to be, and so much more. We pull into the giant parking lot and look for parking. On my right there are a few rugby-types that look like they're going to start a brawl. There's a huge line to get in, but since we reserved a table, we are hushed in by large men. There are metal detectors in the entrance lobby, and it feels more like an airport than a club. I feel like an extra in Saturday Night Fever. Yes, that's exactly what this place makes me think of. One of those big clubs that the 'locals' go to every weekend and see the same people they see every other day of the week, except here they can drink and dance. The average age seems to be 18 and I suddenly feel very old and tired. I go to the bar and order a Jack and coke from a bartender wearing a purple cowboy hat. Wait, there all wearing cowboy hats. Creepy. My back to the bar I glance at the dance floor. It's freaking huge. There must be a couple hundred people dancing there, and there are two other rooms just as big. I suddenly understand why this room is called 'croisière', or cruise. It's a fucking "love boat" room! I have died and gone to Kitsch heaven.

The rest of the evening is pathetically predictable. By the time 5am rolls around, I've heard the same shit songs that I hear on every radio stations, the DJ keeps heckling the crowd and doing those annoying fade-outs during which everyone sings along to the said songs, I've danced a combined total of 15minutes and made a drunk fool out of myself. Of course, no evening would be complete without the obligatory debate over American foreign policy. *sigh*

I get home and slide into bed, exhausted. I'm lulled into sleep by the pounding techno beat still ringing in my head. I think about those fateful lines: I feel like shit, the morning after.... It's going to be a long, hard Sunday.

2003-03-28T00:51:00.000-08:00

hallelujah

Richard Perle, also known as the prince as darkness, resigns as chairman of the Defense Policy Board, an independent group that advises Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. he leaves the post because of a reported conflict of interest since he took a consulting job for the bankrupt telecommunications firm Global Crossing Ltd., which is trying to get the government to approve its purchase by a joint venture of two Asian firms.

Sadly, he will still be on the board. He is one of the most influential --and neo-conservative-- people in Washington. The Nation wrote a great article about him, detailing his incredible influence as well as some of his alleged shady deals. check it out.

To me, he is representative of the pervasive elements that have formed a sort of shadow government around this administration, a loose coalition of think tanks, lobbies and other groups guided by ideology alone, rather than the American people's best interest. ugh.

2003-03-27T06:52:00.000-08:00

the irony generation

Remember when they said irony was dead after September 11th? I think someone might have jumped the gun a bit. This is a post I've been meaning to write for quite a long time, and is inspired by conversations with many of you, especially those living or having lived in Europe.

The absence of this disaffected youth culture of irony is perhaps one of the strangest and most interesting phenomena that I have experienced here. It sometimes seems that everything we do/say/think has become tainted by what I would call the "wink" factor: Yeah, I like cheesy metal bands, but you know, in that "wink", "I-know-that-you-know-that-I-know-that-I'm-just-kidding" kind of way. It's everywhere, and permeates much more than just music and clothes. Some would call it postmodernism, but I think that we often use this term as a handy umbrella tag to bunch this kind of disaffection without ever trying to understand it. It is even more blatant in advertising where it is now being used as a tool to reach an increasingly difficult generation to market too. Since they know that we know commercials are trying to trick us (ouch, my head hurts), they have to use a similar technique: it's the "we know that you're smart enough to see past this commercial", "you get the joke, so now GO BUY OUR PRODUCT"! The Wink factor is everywhere.

Well, almost everywhere. It seems remarkably absent here in France, a society that is just as developed and consumer-oriented as ours. Why is it so? Again, commercials are telling: they are often funny, sometimes strange, crass, sexist or all of the above; but I have rarely seen this kind of Wink approach. I just can't seem to understand it. If anybody has thoughts on this, I'd be curious to hear them.

-continued bellow-

2003-03-27T06:48:00.000-08:00

-continued-

On the other hand, surrealism is alive and kicking. This was published in Le Monde yesterday (my translation).

The American People deserve to be freed from Tyranny.

Ultimatum from the international surrealist movement. Telegram to George W. Bush, president of the United States of America.

Sir,
Considering that:

1) Your power is illegal and tyrannical, since you were not elected democratically by the majority of the American people.
2) You possess weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical and biological) and refuse to destroy them.
3) You do not accept to disarm, nor to be controlled by UN inspectors.
4) You bomb and invade other nations in the name of a "Preemptive war", and are thus a menace to the entire world's population

We, surrealists from different nations, solemnly gathered in a general assembly, give you 48 hours to abandon your powers and leave the United States.
You are surrounded and have no chance of escaping.
Give yourself in and we will guaranty your safety and grant you political asylum in Afghanistan.

Le surrealisme international

2003-03-27T05:29:00.000-08:00

the new "voice of America"

This is great stuff. Apparently, as part of the gigantic PR campaign to sway the young arab 'street' into the pro-US camp, the State Department has returned to tried and true tactics. It has revamped the "voice of America" model, so influential in Europe during the 50's and 60's, into Radio-Sawa, a station that plays modern pop music (both in arabic and english) and news, and that is now present in most arab states.

Genuine information effort or barely masked propaganda? You decide. Here are some interesting viewpoints, though. One from the Oh so official State Department, and the other from a site colorfully called electronic intifada. Wether this attempt at changing the minds of the arab world through radio will work remains to be seen, but I wouldn't bet on it. It's gonna take more than britney spears for people to forget years of suffering.

2003-03-26T07:56:00.000-08:00

Bring back the Sabath! (not that Sabath, you doofus.)

Alright, I'll write about something else than politics now. I'm a little tired today, my head hurts and quite honestly I'm a little bored of death and destruction. It's sooo XXth century.

here's an article by media professor Douglas Rushkoff in which he indulges in the fantasy of having one day in the week when one couldn't buy or sell anything, much like the Sabath of old. I found the idea wonderful, although I realize how difficult (never say impossible :p) this sort of endeavour is.

A year ago I would of said something along the lines of: "you can't tell people what to do, it's a free country, people should do what they want", etc...But since then I have moved to a place that, technically, practices the Sabbath. Sundays in southern France -like in most Catholic countries- really are a day off. I mean really. No 7/11s here. Although this tradition is slowly going down the same path as the once revered nap (thanks to the US-style work ethic, no doubt), it still is very much respected, something quite remarquable for someone from the United States. Many of you have traveled and have probably experienced this, but whatever.

At first it really pissed me off, especially the inability to buy cigarettes. I couldn't understand why I, the potential consumer, wasn't greeted with the kind of service I had come to expect in the USA. "Don't they realize they can make more money?", I found myself thinking. Scary. I had a conversation with a nice French person that calmly explained that store owners already work long hours, and frankly just want to stay at home one day in the week.

In a very short time I have not only gotten used to the Sunday, but have come to really love it. Not only are you not at work, but unlike the shopping-frenzy Saturday, everybody is out and about acting like "normal" human beings. It seems that people go for walks, stay home and spend time with their families, or leave town and go to the beach for the weekend. The whole town falls into a slumber and there are very few cars in the streets. This eery something creeps into your subconscious, it's the sound of *nothing*. Marvelous.

2003-03-26T02:58:00.000-08:00

propaganda and counter-propaganda

I spent a good hour typing this post, and lost it all when I tried to publish it. Here is my second attempt.

Like most people, I have a morbid fascination with these military conflicts. Like a car crash, I can't help watching and have been spending many hours watching the news and following the developments in the press. As I watch, I can't shake this feeling that we are being lied too and manipulated by all sides. I have the advantage of having access to media from many different countries, and the discrepancies in reporting make this all the more blatant.

The reasons seem obvious enough. From a political point of view, Saddam is playing the diplomatic card, trying to present himself as a victim of US belligerence and hoping that the outcry both outside and inside the US will force the Bush administration to reconsider. It's no small feat for a dictator with so much blood on his hands to gain sympathy, so the media definitely plays a large role in his strategy. From the US point of view, they are hoping to gain de facto support for this war. Someone described it (brilliantly) as a "voila" tactic: get in there, get proof of his wrongdoing, and voila, you have support for your actions, even if it is after the fact.

From a military standpoint, the goal of a 'regime change' clearly means gaining the support of the Iraqi population. Obviously, this may prove to be difficult for the invading army, proving that, yes, the US is less popular in the Arab world than a gruesome dictator (what a shocker). Again, the media plays a very large role in this endeavour. Some of the confusion therefore comes from the intentional information and counter-information that each side is spinning for their own strategic goals. This is somewhat understandable, even if it is a little sad to see that US Cable TV seems to have just as much independence as Iraqi TV.

-continued bellow-

2003-03-26T02:53:00.000-08:00

-continued-

A more cynical eye would also point to a more pernicious reason for this confusion. Part of it seems to be very much deliberate, and the media is (again) playing a large part in this tactic. The government is putting tight restrictions on what Americans can or can't see. The example of the American POW's is revealing. Their situation is of course tragic, but watching Rumsfeld hide behind the Geneva convention is laughable. Since when does he give a fuck about international law?! That's a new one. Maybe he's betting we forgot about Gantanamo Bay. There are many much more blatant example of intentional misinformation, though: Fostering the link between Saddam and Al-Quaeda is a good one. I don't know how many times I have heard the "they got us on 9/11, so we have to get them back" argument, but it is a little disheartening. Although I have no proof, I imagine that the rumour of Saddam's death in the first air strikes wasn't neutral as well. On the other hand, it seems (from here) that Americans hear very little about other (potentially embarrassing) stories like the taped phone lines at NATO and the EU Commission. Weird.

Of course, all of this is nothing new, but by pushing the hypocrisy so far, this administration could prove more devastating to the US' standing in the world that Saddam himself. I hope it's not too late to recover whatever shreds of dignity we still have left in the eyes of the world.

2003-03-14T07:29:00.000-08:00

The 'old' West

As some of you may know, I'm writing an independent study on the Welfare State, focused on retirement reform in France. Although not the most exciting of topics (at least not at first), it has made me learn a great deal on certain issues that I was completely unaware of beforehand. It is a huge deal in France right now as successive governments have tried --usually unsuccesfully-- to reform the retirement structures in place. Currently, the vast majority of French retirement funds are pay-as-you-go, meaning that the current workers pay (through contributions) for the retired. The US social security is funded in a similar way, but represents a much smaller portion of retired workers' benefits. Most Americans contribute to Pension Funds, which invests the money in the market, and when these workers retire, the fund pays them their benefits. Such Pension Funds are practically inexistant in France right now, partly because they are judged too risky.

The big debate about retirement right now is concerned about what they call the "papy boom". The first baby boomers are expected to reach retirement age in the comming years, and naturally this will put enormous strain on PAYG system. The people are also very concerned about the general ageing trend. It's no secret that people are living longer, and according to the documents that I've read, there is no reason to believe that this will stop. Granted, the financial strain caused by the boomers will probably get better once they grow old and die (around 2040), but generally speaking, developped countries are just getting >old. Less births and people living longer and longer means that in a couple years, for the first time ever, there will be more retirement aged people than workers (some predict a 2 to 1 ratio).

I don't really want to discuss the economic impact of this evolution, and yes, alright, some immigration will probably help bring the ratio down to a more sustainable level; what is really mind-boggling is to imagine what an 'old' society could be like. Will it be more conservative (think Florida)? less dynamic? Will there be room for the young in such a society? How will our institutions be altered? The crazy thing is that we really don't know what will happend. Maybe tomorrow we will be just as dynamic at 70 as we are today at 50. It's just a crazy thought and, hey, speculating is always kinda fun.

help the aged, one day they were just like you...

2003-03-12T02:16:00.000-08:00

On Media Consolidation - part 'deux'

That last post was really depressing and didn't leave much room for debate, I guess. Damn you for agreeing with me so much. I either need more non-berkeley friends, or start defending less consensual positions. How do you guys feel about privatization of social security, anyway? School vouchers? Affirmative action policy? ooh, that's actually a good one. We'll have to touch on that someday. Nothing like an AA debate to start (virtual) fist fights.

I wanted to bring up the media consolidation thing again. I found an article by ny times (conservative) columnist William Safire that really gets to the heart of the issue. I'm sorry to say that he destroys my (not very well researched) argument that broadcast lobbies are not that influential, but I won't hold it against him.

Here's a famous conservative arguing, as we have in these pages, that regulation can be pro-business, and that indeed it is absolutly necessary in order to guarantee the free competition that de-regulators claim to be defending. I'm not saying that I'm surprised by this conservative fellow's views. I know many conservatives agree with him, that some of them in congress have even brought it up in hearings. What is more interesting is the fact that many of them choose not to stand up to the broadcast lobbies. Safire's analysis here is helpful.

In particular, he singles out the inherent conflict of interest that undermines any meaningful reform. He quotes Michael Copps from the FCC expressing his concern that "we're relying on institutions to cover this debate which have interests in the outcome of the debate". That seems to be the problem in many of the debates that come up in congress. For our topic, we have mainstream media shaping the debate in terms favourable to their own interests, which are clearly opposite to the public's. Sadly, he doesn't go into much more detail about where and how other conflict of interests are present. To be fair, this is probably due to the shortness of the article, and thus probably not his fault (yeah, that's it-blame the editors). Yet I think these conflicts need to be clearly defined and presented to the public at large, so as to form a consciousness of what's really going on here. It is only when elected officials start fearing the wrath of their constituencies more than the lobbyists that we will see them get serious about positive reform.

You can read the article here.

In a related story, looks like Senator Frist tried to 'prove' the american public's support for the war in Iraq by putting up a poll on his site, and quikly got a taste of e-democracy. he he...

2003-03-11T01:24:00.000-08:00

The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

I know this will come as a big surprise to everyone, but this war will happen after all. Not the demonstrators could stop it, the world opinion, not common sense nor reason, nothing. This will have a devastating impact on the future of the US. More so than 9-11. I don't kow if you can imagine the carnage that can cause thousands upon thousand of bombs falling on a city like Bagdad. American and British troops walking into street-by-street urban guerilla war in a city the size of Los Angeles, with about as many (decidedly un-friendly) inhabitants. Nothing good can come out this. Nothing.

Someone much wiser than I said the first casualty of war is truth. I hope that in time the american people will wake up from its paranoid delusion and realise that it is being lied to, tricked and coerced into this war. The mass media has played the dominant role in this, sometimes by giving it's support for this administration's agenda directly, other times (more perniciously) simply by not doing it's job. By not actively questioning and playing there role of critic, they have indirectly served Bush's agenda. We are witnessing the beginning of the first true 'media war'. As long as something is not done in the way the people are informed in the US, it will certainly not be the last. History will tell us whether the culprits will ever be held accountable for these information crimes.

I wish 'our boys' the best, and sincerely hope all of them can make it back. I just don't believe that they can -or will.

2003-03-07T08:12:00.000-08:00

Corporate radio and the payola system

-I couldn't post everything at once, sorry!-

In 1996 Congress passed the Telecommunications Act that deregulated the radio market and resulted in a rapid consolidation frenzy. 7 years later, most FM radio stations are owned by a few corporate giants. None of these is as large and powerful as Clear Channel Communications. They apparently own 1,200 radio stations and effectively controls the rock radio market. It also owns SFX Entertainment, the nation's dominant concert-venue owner and touring promoter. As if that wasn't scary enough, they don't seem to be stopping there. They are busily buying more in an attempt to achieve a form of vertical monopoly. Salon.com published a study by Eric Boehlert that you should check out here. It is incredibly informative and deals with all the ramifications of this evolution. The most nefarious of these results is the return of the payola system.
-continue bellow-

2003-03-07T03:22:00.000-08:00

-continued from above-

payola is the practice of record companies "greasing the hands" of radio DJ's to play their record. It used to be very common, but in the 50's there was a big scandal and lawsuit that (officially) put an end to it. Well in the last 10-20 years a new actor emerged in the music industry to change all that: the independent promoter (the "indies"). Don't let the name fool you, these people aren't working for matador or K-records. They are supposed to be the "middle-men" between record labels and radio stations to promote an artists' work. Like music lobbyists or something. Nothing illegal about that. But as the radio industry has consolidated, the labels have had to deal with fewer partners, who in effect had much more power in making a hit record. CC could 'make or brake' the backstreet boy's career. The stakes became very high for labels to sway companies such as Clear Channel, and indies became increasingly important. Their fees became VERY important as well. They used to just forge relationship with radio people and work as intermediaries between the record companies and radio. With the consolidation of the radio market, there role evolved quite a lot though. Boehlert explains that "Indies align themselves with certain radio stations by promising the stations "promotional payments" in the six figures. Then, every time the radio station adds a Shaggy or Madonna or Janet Jackson song to its playlist, the indie gets paid by the record label." It's at the fringe of legality, but still legal. What's happened is that big labels have circumvented the 1960 legislation to find a new way to bribe the radios. Everybody's happy. Well, except for us who have to listen to the same crap all the time, since not only do companies pay to get their new artist heard, but since so few companies own the vast majority of radios, you hear it everywhere. I don't know if you guys knew about this stuff, but I sure didn't. It's kind of a shock (I say kinda, because I wouldn't have expected anything better from corporate America), and I assume that it'll only get worse before it gets better...

2003-03-05T08:03:00.000-08:00

For a second I thought Surrender Monkey needed a book/literature page. Then I realized that was a terrible idea, for various reasons. a) I don't read books people are interested in hearing about: half of them boring history books (oh man, that John Adams biography? It freakin' rocked!), the other on french retirement reform (even better). b) most of the more interesting stuff I read is web-based, so I should just take advantage of the convenience of hyperlinks, which is what this whole blog-thing is all about, ain' it? And that's how you avoided a discussion on "la mesentente cordiale", a 700-pager on the love-hate relationship between De Gaulle and Churchill I just finished. You cheeky monkeys.

Instead, I just want to point out something very obvious. Politics, by their very nature, are not supposed to be consentual. Most of the time, most people can't agree on most things. Quite accordingly, the more an issue becomes politicized, the less a consensual compromise can be reached. um.. that's kind of a dangerous train of thought, but I'll run with it anyway.
I'm struggling a little with this point for my study. The debate on retirement reform here in france has been so politicized, been brought to such a fevered pitch, that nobody seems to agree on even the most basic numbers, or even on the tools to use to get correct figures. I'm not even going to get to the actual policy change aspect. It's a total gridlock. I guess that's just politics. A society-wide filibustering on an issue. If you can't debate, you can't move forward, right? Well, that's not exactly right, but whatever.

The issue of the liberal bias in the American press is one such politicized debate. Actors on both sides argue for their opposing views, never agreeing on very much. Usually I do my best to try and understand both sides of a story. In this particular case though, although I see both view points, I can't bring myself to accept them both. I find that the so call liberal bias is really just a ploy, and have hard time acknowledging the opposite view. I figure I must just be thoroughly brainwashed, but I'll let you be the judge of that. Check out two different viewpoints here, and here, and let me know what you think.

oh yeah, and there's a funny one, too.

2003-03-04T02:08:00.000-08:00

cool hunting

I can't believe somebody actually bothered to write this article, except that it is strangely interesting. It's on 'cool hunters', or companies that other companies pay to go in the streets and find out what's going to be hot soon, or what cool people are wearing/eating/drinking, etc. I understand that the youth market is big business, but I can't believe people are getting paid for this.

The analysis aspect is interesting, though. It mentions the 'diffusion research' approach to cool, meaning the study of how ideas and innovations spread. Basically, this theory differentiates certain actors that play a large role in trend setting. Foremost come innovators, followed closely by ‘early adopters’ of a trend. I guess the innovators are the wild and crazy ones who just do what they feel like, and the early adopters are the folks who actively observe, then alter a trend and make it their own. In the process they ‘democratize’ the trend and make it palatable for the mainstream. I guess the cool hunters' job is to spot these early adopters, observe these emerging trends and sell it to the companies. In the process, of course, the coolness of the trend is undermined because as soon as it reaches a certain critical mass, it just isn't cool anymore. Moral of the story: Cool is fleeting. It makes me wonder why anybody bothers.

It is interesting to think of these trends as this big everlasting cycle, though, because it gives me hope that if I hang on to my plaid shirts and tapered whitewashed jeans long enough, there's a chance I could be considered a trendsetter in a couple years :p

2003-03-03T12:23:00.000-08:00

Alright, so I should of probably added the following disclaimer to my last post:
"This is just one my two-cent theories, please don't take too seriously"

Furtermore, as heather was kind enough to point out, I should probably cut back on terms such as "paradigm" and "reification". There really isn't anyone I'm trying to impress, so what's the use? Other than perhaps sounding like another pretentious (ex-)berkeley student.

For my defense, I will add that I had just finish reading something by Georg Lukacs and I was really "feeling" the whole reification-thing. I mean the valuing-stuff-as-objects-thing. oh sh*t, I can tell this is going to be hard.

I guess that brings me to today topic. Earlier I read U.S. Ambassador John Brady Kiesling's letter of resignation to Colin Powell, and I thought it was the most eloquent statement against the Bush administration's position on Iraq that I have seen so far. He managed to put down in writing all that I have been thinking about this issue. It's just too long to post here, but if you email me, I would be happy to forward it to you (you can find my email address on my bio page). It makes me wonder why I bother to write down my thoughts on these pages, when it is pretty clear that I will never be a great writer. I guess I find some comfort in being able to go off on one subject or another, whenever I feel the need to vent some frustration. If anybody out there finds some amusement in reading the resulting diatribe, than all the better. If not, than it will just be like my own personal diary, minus the paper-cuts and ink-stains. I'm a very sloppy writer, you see.

2003-02-27T02:51:00.000-08:00

On Popular Music-

note: I couldn't post this in one piece. My apologies

Since the dawn of time, men have felt the urge to express themselves through art. The paintings from the Neanderthal epoch found in many caves of southern Europe certainly demonstrate that point. We can presume that the same can be said of music, although it's much harder to find proof because of its intangible nature.
Music has, and continues, to play an important social role: ideally, it has the power to create social links between the members of a community and thus serve a "true" social purpose on top of it's more artistic function.
However, with industrialization and the birth of the age of consumerism in the 50's, music (like most things in our modern world) has evolved into a commodity. My aim is not to fall into a cripto-marxist analysis of consumerism (yet), but to note the impact of this fundamental shift on the way we perceive and understand music, as well as its impact on the way that music evolves.
-continue below-

2003-02-27T02:47:00.000-08:00

The catalyst to this change is certainly technological: the ability to record music and turn it into an object. An object, a thing, can be marketed and sold. It is much harder to commodify something intangible like ideas and sounds (just see what happened to the dotcoms). This reification of music is a fairly recent phenomenon, although it's impact has been tremendous. Although phonographs have existed for , what, 200 years (?), the ability of playing a recording of music was only reserved to the wealthy few. It was not a society-wide phenomenon until the technology was shared by the many, starting in the 50's.
This paradigmatic shift gave birth to many things (both good and bad), most importantly the notion of popular music, in the modern sense. This encompasses any music or artist promoted by the music industry. Really, it gave birth to rock'n roll, and with it the "rock star" (the ying) and its necessary companion: the fan or groupie (the yang). The record created not only a new way of listening to music, but also new societal roles for the artists who played it and those who listened to it. The age of the troubadours was gone, here was the era of the 'pop idol' or 'guitar god'. Certainly this phenomenon has reached its paroxysm in the last couple years, as exemplified in the Britneys and the boy bands, although you could say the same about any star, Strokes included. The most recent business and mass-marketing capabilities have made this phenomenon all the more powerful. It has at the same time made very clear its limitations, by pushing it into the realm of shear absurdity. Just imagine what people will think when seeing a Christina Aguilera video in two years time, and I think you'll see what I mean.
-continue below-

2003-02-27T02:46:00.000-08:00

An important feature of reification (or "the process of regarding something abstract as a material entity" ) is that it represents the confusion of a system, which is a social construct, with the physical entity described in its terms. Until fairly recently, we understood and thought of popular music as defined by the compact disk and its packaging. Of course we listened for the music, but we couldn't really imagine dissociating the content from from the object. The reification was so complete that it acquires what Marx calls "phanthom objectivity". Furthermore, as noted by Klaus Krippendorff (prof. of communication/ U. Penn), reification in social systems is encouraged by the use of a particular language set, and underlies many processes of constructing social reality. That is interesting because it shows that like any social construct, it is anything but permanent. It's fairly easy to decommodify something. Just take those nice Sambas of yours and rip of the brand tag, paint them another color or re-sow part of it. voila, you've decommodified it. It's no longer the brand, the object, it's just assorted pieces of synthetic leather sown together for your walking pleasure by a 12yr old Indonesian boy.

And finally we get to where this whole rant of mine was trying to get at: the current MP3 revolution, and digital technology in general. My question is as follows: Am I decommodifying music by listening to MP3's instead of CD's? I think the answer is no. MP3 technology is just that: a new(er) technology to commodify music with. It's physical attribute are less clear, but exist nonetheless: the MP3 player, the personal computer, etc... but remember: "reification[...]is encouraged by the use of language and underlies many processes of constructing social reality". I think in this perspective, it's pretty clear that things are evolving, and at a fast pace. MP3's have changed the way we talk and think about music. they have shattered this "phantom objectivity". The social reality of the music biz' is changing, and it's probably the most important shift since 'Beatle-mania'.
-continue below-

2003-02-25T07:33:00.000-08:00

Yet, we shouldn't fall in techo-centrism either. It's important to note that rather than being 'outside' society, technology is an inextricable part of it. What I mean is that it isn't 'progress' that forces the changes on society from the outside (a materialist viewpoint), but maybe more how we use the available technology to change our reality. In that sense, the important shift has not been just MP3's, but also how personal computers and the home studio has given the ability to create and distribute your own music to all. It's taken the means of production out of the hands of the music industry (woh..here comes cripto-marxism again). Here we can take notice of the DIY ethos that has developed in indie and punk music, perhaps as a result of the over-industrialization of music. The technology has given a new tool for this revolution, but has not caused it. Before MP3's, people just went to local shows to see the local bands, intentionally avoiding mainstream music and commercialism. What appears clear to me is that this technology is not going to result in a decommodification of music (at least in the short-term), but certainly alter it, hopefully for the better. Perhaps MP3's will kill the video star. Maybe we can look forward to the end of the Rock God, but for that, only time will tell.

2003-02-24T04:26:00.000-08:00

Word: ju·ve·nile;adjective
Etymology: French or Latin; French juvénile, from Latin juvenilis, from juvenis young person.
Def. 3 : reflecting psychological or intellectual immaturity : CHILDISH

I feel particularly juvenile today. My inability to get shit done baffles me. I think I was an ostrich in another life. That's figurative, mind you, because I don't think ostrich actually bury their heads in the sand. Of course, you knew that already. I'm rather happy that (almost) nobody reads this site, because that gives me the liberty to write about pretty much anything I want, much like a real journal. I hear they're therapeutic, but we'll see, I guess.
Take this blog, for instance. How mature is a blog, really? Isn't the average age of the blogger around 16? Does it matter? I don't necessarily think so. Still, it puzzles me that I have gotten through close to 23 years of life and I'm still unable to fend for myself. It's like i've inadvertently switched Bon Jovi's "living on a prayer" with Pulp's "the fear" as the soundtrack to my life (fade out: "...take my hand, and we'll make it I swear, ooh-oooh, livin' on a prayer...", cue: "here comes this fear again, uh-oh-woh..."). God, even this post sounds like a f*cking teenage emo rant.
And the worst thing is that I can't even write a good song out of this. What's the point of being sad if you can't even get something out of it? Grrr.

2003-02-23T11:08:00.000-08:00

god f*ckin' damnit.

My apologies to the primitivo crew, but I was unable to hear the show. I ripped myself from bed at 6am for nothing. How sad. Somehow, it just couldn't get the streaming audio to work. Well, maybe not nothing: at least I got to call my grandma to whish her a happy 95th B-day. Yup, we Hudsons are build Ford-tough, ya know.

2003-02-22T12:30:00.000-08:00

Hey out there.

I hope all of you are going to be tuning in to Berkeley's own KALX (90.7fm) to listen to Primitivo's live show. It's tonight (Saturday) at 9:00pm (PST). For those outside of the Bay Area, you can listen to it here.
Don't miss it!

2003-02-21T07:27:00.000-08:00

very interesting article on the so called 'liberal media' here. I encourage you to read it. More on this topic later.

2003-02-20T05:33:00.000-08:00

The Blank Page

Georges Simenon once wrote that the closest thing to the act of writing is sex . Since he was quite a proficient writer, I won't dare contradict him. I will add this: if indeed it is comparable to sex, then at least it should be compared to really, really slow and painful sex, the likes of which I have thankfully never experienced.

I've been working on my independent study for months now, and although it is coming along, I'm realizing how incredibly difficult it is to just sit down and write. I place the blame mainly on three things: TV for ruining my attention span, alcohol for my inability to focus (very similar symptoms, I realize); and university for giving me the habit of waiting for the last possible minute to do something. This last one is certainly the worst, even if it is a character flaw shared by many. Come to think of it, I should probably add a fourth reason.

In my present situation, I find that I can't possibly put it off any longer, since there's just too much to do. I've tried setting dates for myself, locking myself at home... Nothing seems to work. I can't blame this site either, since I work on it during the day, when I should be doing my internship work anyway. ;p

The only thing that seems to work is to retreat to my parents' appartement and lock myself there, but I can't really do that every weekend. It's also unclear that it's worth the headache of being in such close proximity to my parents.

Well, there's really no reason to panic. Eventually, it will be the last possible minute. I'm sure that (once again) I'll finish everything right on time and that I'll be relieved, even if exhausted.

mmmm...maybe that sex analogy holds up after all.

2003-02-20T04:39:00.000-08:00

Adventures in Bushspeak

"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur." —George W. Bush, discussing the decline of the French economy with British Prime Minister Tony Blair

2003-02-19T00:24:00.000-08:00

Here's a neat-o link: it's urban 75's Slap the Bastards ! You get to punch around the likes of David Beckham, Rudy Giuliani, Tony Blair, even Phil Collins (don't tell me you've never felt like slapping that 'no talent ass-clown'). Here's my favorite: Warping Jean-Marie Le Pen's face. Don't worry, this racist 'tosser' deserves it.

Only one person missing in this index: Where the hell is Michael Bolton?!!

2003-02-18T05:48:00.000-08:00

Well, there it is. It's slowly coming along, although I suspect no one is ever going to read it, so I wonder why I even bother. I think when one starts one of these weblogs, it is tradition to first try to explain/excuse oneself.
Why write a weblog? What could posess someone to put his ideas/thoughts on the mighty internet? "How arrogant!", you might be tempted to think; "Does he actually believe anybody cares about what he thinks?".
These criticisms are well founded. In fact, I heartily agree with you (kind and gentle reader). Someone as completely clueless as me in the ways of html really has no business on the internet. No point in cluttering cyberspace with more pointless linguistic gesticulations...and yet, here I am. Think of it as merely one of my many defaults. ^_^

I tend to do things against my better judgment. Consider yourself warned.
Until next time, Ciao.

2003-02-13T03:34:00.000-08:00

I'm still figuring it out...

2003-02-13T03:32:00.000-08:00

welcome to my Blog. I know it ain't much, but we internet newbies have to start somewhere, no?