Lost and Found

Good news for all art lovers, Edvard Munch's The Scream has been recovered, together with Madonna, the other painting that had been stolen with it two years ago:

Two masterpieces by artist Edvard Munch have been recovered two years after they were stolen from an Oslo museum.

The Scream and Madonna were found in a police operation. "We are 100% certain they are the originals. The damage was much less than feared," police said.

They had been missing since two armed men ripped them from the wall and threatened staff at the Munch Museum in the Norwegian capital in August 2004.
[...]
The Scream, painted in 1893, is one of the world's most recognisable paintings.

The artworks will now be examined by experts to establish what effect their two-year disappearance has had on their condition.

I love this painting.

On This Day...

in 1997, Diana, Princess of Wales, died in a car crash in Paris. She was 36 years old.


From Wikipedia:

An iconic presence on the world stage, Diana was noted for her high-profile charity work. Yet her philanthropic endeavours were overshadowed by her scandal-plagued marriage to Prince Charles. Her bitter claims, via friends and biographers, of adultery, mental cruelty, and emotional distress visited upon her by her husband and the royal family in general, and her own admissions of adultery and numerous love affairs riveted the world for much of the 1990s, spawning books, tabloid newspaper and magazine articles, and television movies. During her lifetime, Diana appeared on the cover of People more times than any other individual.

From the time of her engagement to the Prince of Wales in 1981 until her death in a car accident in 1997, the Princess was arguably the most famous woman in the world, the pre-eminent female celebrity of her generation: a fashion icon, an image of feminine beauty, admired and emulated for her involvement in AIDS issues, and the international campaign against landmines. During her lifetime, she was often described as the most photographed person in the world. To her admirers, the Princess of Wales was a role model - after her death, there were even calls for her to be nominated for sainthood - while her detractors considered her to have been mentally ill (possibly with Borderline Personality Disorder, e.g. Bedell Smith, 1999) long before her marriage and regarded her life as a cautionary tale of how untreated psychiatric problems and an obsession with publicity can ultimately destroy human beings.

As of 2006, the inquiry into her death by British police continues. A report is expected to be issued in 2007.

I still hold her memory very dear. Hearing of her death was heartbreaking.

A Quote By:

Hannah Selinger, a Raw Story columnist, about Dick Cheney's tactics to once again scare the voters into voting Republican on the eve of the midterm elections:

"For those of us who were here in New York - and you can exclude the vice-president from that group of people - the city changed that day. What we had always taken for granted, that we could be safe and happy in our own neighborhoods, was no longer the case.
[...]
The problem is that the world is different. It will always be different, and the current administration has only stalled us in time and space, rather than attempting to correct the problems that caused the tragedy in the first place."

The Wedding, by Nicholas Sparks

What a wonderful book! I probably read it at the right time, just when Ray and I are getting ready for our wedding, but still, I thought it was wonderful.

Read very well by Tom Wopat (of The Dukes of Hazzard fame), it tells the story of a couple that after thirty years of marriage is facing a declining and stiffening relationship when their daughter tells them she's getting married.

I immediately started feeling like I had known the characters for years. I cried and laughed with them throughout the whole book and I really felt like I was part of their lives.

I don't think I ever felt like that about any other book, and it's a wonderful and very intimate feeling. To make a reader care like that for people that don't even exist clearly is a tribute to the author.

I actually have another book of his to read, and I'm looking forward to it. He's also the author of The Notebook, which was turned into a sleeper-hit movie last year (I now wish I saw it).

The tone is romantic and nostalgic, and love of all kinds pours out on the reader from every page.

I definitely recommend this book if you like this genre.

Grade: 9.5

Technology at its best

And reason #1 why Bush's veto of a bill allowing stem cell research a few weeks back is wrong. Technology can work wonders at curing the worst diseases humanity is afflicted by:

Scientists have found a way to trick cancer cells into committing suicide. The new synthetic compound, which removes a molecular safety catch that activates a natural executioner in the body's cells, could lead to better treatments of cancers including those affecting the lung, skin, breast, kidney and colon.

The body has several defences against cells growing out of control and into tumours - one is to cause defective or dangerous cells to commit suicide. This natural process of cell death, called apoptosis, involves a protein called procaspase-3. When activated, procaspase-3 changes into an enzyme called caspase-3, which begins the cell death. In cancers, this mechanism is often faulty and cells can grow unchecked. Many types of cancer are resistant not only to the body's own signals for cell death but also to the chemotherapy drugs that try to mimic it.

But Paul Hergenrother, a chemist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, has found a way around the natural biological process that kickstarts apoptosis - a synthetic molecule that directly activates procaspase-3. "This is the first in what could be a host of organic compounds with the ability to directly activate executioner enzymes."

Let's hope he's right.

Kids are not China dolls

The movement to treat kids with velvet gloves and shield them from any possible disappointment is growing in this county at an alarming pace.

I think it's completely ridiculous not to allow kids to experience some kind of letdown, frustration, or failure. The latter word has virtually been banned by schools across the country, for fear that kids hearing it might think of themselves as failures and get depressed or feel crushed.

Just consider the ridiculousness of this article:

Gone are the days when a kindergartner dropped a handful of party invites in the classroom cubbyholes of their closest buddies. Today, if anyone is excluded the invitations can't be handed out at school.

The idea that protecting kids from rejection is crucial to safeguarding their self-esteem has gained momentum in recent years.

Take Valentine's Day: At some schools, a second-grader can't offer paper valentines or heart-shaped candies to a short list of pals and secret crushes anymore. They give cards to everyone or no one at all.

Or sports: In many towns, scorekeeping no longer happens at soccer or softball games played by kids under 8 or 9. Win or lose, every player in the league gets a trophy at the season's end.

That's so wrong. And on so many levels. Why can't they invite only the people they like to their party? Why do they have to invite everyone or no one? Yes, they can hand out the invitations outside the school setting, but that's where the kids see each other every day. They can't just "hook up later" or something.

And what's the benefit of giving a medal or trophy to anyone participating in a sport event? All that does is diminish the importance of the reward itself. Kids are not stupid. They might not think much of it at first, but once they realize that everyone is getting the same prize, that prize will lose its luster. They will see that the kid who didn't work hard at all got treated the same way as the one who worked the hardest. The net result will not be to spur the lazy one to work harder. It will be to induce the hardest working kid to loosen up and do less. After all, why bother?

Here's someone who agrees with me:

"You try and do things gently when they're little because it is still hard," says Grossman, who is raising two teenagers while teaching preschool. "But I think this is a problem, and it's a growing one, because kids grow up and have this inflated sense of self-worth. Whether they earn anything, it's always a trophy. They have no sense that you have to work hard for some things."

And here's someone who doesn't:

"When we went to school, people were bullied. Now we know kids have a much greater instance of suicide and depression when they've been bullied," she says.

The fact is, kids are still going to be bullied, whether they are shielded from disappointments or not at an early age, and all this smothering just worsens the effect of the bullying that they might endure later on.

Here's an expert's take:

Rather than imparting self-esteem, some experts believe this gives kids an unhealthy sense of entitlement.

"Self-esteem comes from those feelings you have about yourself for a job well done, for when you have achieved something," says Dr. Georgette Constantinou, administrative director of pediatric psychiatry at Akron Children's Hospital in Ohio. "It's not something you pour into your children."

She feels that many parents aren't equipping their kids to manage basic challenges.

"How do you expect them to handle life's big bumps if they haven't experienced the little ones?" she asks.
[...]
Critics of the trend worry about a generation of kids who haven't experienced rejection or failure -- especially compared with countries such as China and Japan, where a focus on competition defines the lives of many children.

Learning to compete, says Nichols, is vital. "It sets them up for real life things like a job," she says. "It helps people develop their skills."

I so agree with that statement. Ray and I enrolled the kids in basically the best daycare center in our town and are very pleased with the curriculum and the teachers. Recently, however, we realized that the school has no policy on disciplining kids beyond talking to them when they do something wrong and just asking them not to do it again.

Now, I certainly don't want a teacher to resort to physical punishment, but not even a time out? C'mon, what child has ever suffered lifelong scars from having been in time out? It's ridiculous.

Just yesterday we got a note saying that our son was throwing CDs. The note said he was told FIVE TIMES to stop, at which he'd just laugh. Eventually, they removed him from the area and made him sit quietly alone. But this only after we insisted with the school to take such measures whenever one of our kids misbehaves. Unfortunately, the "drastic" action came too late, in my opinion, since it should have been taken after the first CD was thrown, not the sixth.

And this one takes the cake: a teacher actually asked us to start calling "time out" quiet time or something like that at home, so as to keep it consistent with how they call it in school, since they're not allowed to call it "time out" at all!!

Pathetic. If a child misbehaves and is simply told not to, good luck with getting results. It might work for a while, or for some kids, but not for the vast majority. I can't believe those teachers just stand such behaviors from their young students all day long.

Daydreaming...

What a wonderful image:


I can still dream, right?

Superman Returns

This movie signaled the rebirth of the superhero in the tight blue suit after years of development-hell (twice the studio started its pre-production, pouring around $40 million into sets and scripts that lead to nothing).

Finally, Bryan Singer, the director behind The Usual Suspects and the first two X-Men movies, signed on and delivered a good epic whose only flaw, I thought, was its resemblance, at times, with the original Superman's storyline. For example, in both Superman faces off against Lex Luthor, who is betrayed by his female assistant.

Besides that, however, the movie was very good. The visual effects were superior, and the score appropriate and soaring. The script was leveled and the cinematography engaging.

The casting was good, and Brandon Routh more than proudly fills the shoes that Christopher Reeve left empty almost 20 years ago. Honestly, I saw the original two Superman movies (I won't even mention #3 and #4, since their combined worth is less than that of a wad of gum) so long ago, I can't even remember how Reeve was, therefore, making a comparison between the two is totally impossible. I do think Routh was good as Superman though. Believable, strong, handsome, trustworthy, and wholesome.

Kevin Spacey as the recently released from jail Luthor is mischievously good. He obviously had a jolly good time playing the villain with unlimited resources to spread his badness around. Great choice to replace the awesome Gene Hackman and another memorable role for Spacey to add to his resume.

Kate Bosworth was fine in the role of the "woman with the wounded heart who must learn to trust again," although not spectacular (she sure attracts the most gorgeous of men...). More effective in her role was Parker Posey, as the ditzy bitch with a golden heart that would love to screw Superman and ends up royally screwing Luthor.

The visual effects do deserve to be brought up again. They are Oscar worthy. The airplane scene, the collapsing Metropolis, the emerging continent, all were magnificent, and totally 'real.'

Unfortunately, the movie hasn't (and probably won't) even break the $200 million mark, which is particularly troubling considering it cost $20 million more than that (without considering the costs the studio had already incurred and that are unfairly tagged to Singer's budget figures).

The reasons can be several: superhero movie fatigue, a sequel-tired audience, a darker movie not appreciated by the franchise's most orthodox fans, or even the fact that there is a Superman show on TV alive and well that might have dispelled some of the excitement and the anticipation to see the Man of Steel back in the multiplexes. Who knows.

And who cares? I enjoyed the movie (and watching Brandon Routh flexing his muscles for over two hours) and Singer has already announced plans by the studio to have him direct the next episode of the franchise.

I'll be there.

Grade: 7.5

I guess Mr. Olivier did play on both teams...

SIR LAURENCE OLIVIER's widow DAME JOAN PLOWRIGHT dodged a question about the late actor's rumoured homosexual affairs yesterday (27AUG06) by simply recalling he had "demons".

Plowright was asked on BBC Radio 4's DESERT ISLAND DISCS show whether there was any truth in reports Olivier had relationships with actor HENRY AINLEY in the 1930s, and with actor DANNY KAYE.

She replied, "I don't think there is any need to defend his memory. His performances, his greatness as an artist are there. If a man is touched by genius he is not an ordinary person. He does not lead an ordinary life. He has extremes of behaviour which you understand and you just find a way not to be swept overboard by his demons. Such men are also normally attended by demons. And he would fight to overcome those demons. Sometimes he would and sometimes he wouldn't."

Olivier died in 1989 aged 82.

Well, that's not very nice, Ms. Plowright (and to think that she looked like such a sweet old lady...). Didn't your mommy teach you it's rude to call people names like that. Demons. What demons? More like boyfriends I'd say, or maybe... lovers, yes, that's more like it.

Of course, Ms. Plowright, Olivier's art and performances are all there for us to admire, but that has nothing to do with whether he liked to entertain men as well as women.

Yes, he was a genius, and certainly not ordinary, and I'm sure you had to understand and adapt a lot, just as much as I'm sure he plenty enjoyed his "fights" with his demons, especially in the bedroom... where you were clearly NOT invited.

Oh well, I guess it's hard not to grow bitter when you get rejected like that.

My Son is a SOLDIER

That's the sticker I saw this morning on the back of the car in front of me. I was listening to my audio book, and suddenly, I read that and I had to pause it.

I thought of the woman in the car in front, probably going to work, like me, on a regular day, no biggie. Meanwhile, her son is probably on the other side of the world, fighting a war for oil based on lies, risking his life every minute of the day.

How does that knowledge impact her day? Where does she find the strength to keep going. How?

It just hit me how we don't really feel the fact that we are at war at all. Every day flows by like the other, and if we didn't watch or read the news, we wouldn't even know there are people dying at this very moment.

It was just so sad. I tried to imagine how she must feel when she gets up in the morning. How she must feel going to work all day, and then going back home. All the while knowing her son could be gone at any moment.

I can't imagine how she does it. And like her, the thousands of parents, husbands, wives, and children across the country.

How do you go by your daily life when your loved ones' lives are constantly on the line?

It was just so sad.

The biggest victim of corporal restructuring ever: Pluto

Last week we lost a planet. Not that we misplaced it or anything like that, it was just 'downgraded' to a lower status than the other eight planets in the Solar System:

Astronomers have voted to strip Pluto of its status as a planet.

About 2,500 scientists meeting in Prague have adopted historic new guidelines that see the small, distant world demoted to a secondary category.

The researchers said Pluto failed to dominate its orbit around the Sun in the same way as the other planets.

The International Astronomical Union's (IAU) decision means textbooks will now have to describe a Solar System with just eight major planetary bodies.

Pluto, which was discovered in 1930 by the American Clyde Tombaugh, will be referred to as a "dwarf planet".

I have to say that it's partially sad, but definitely warranted. Pluto is so small and its orbit so different from all the other planets' that it couldn't really be considered a planet, especially if you consider that a larger object has recently been discovered farther away.

Here's a scientist's take:

"I have a slight tear in my eye today, yes; but at the end of the day we have to describe the Solar System as it really is, not as we would like it to be," said Professor Iwan Williams, chair of the IAU panel that has been working over recent months to define the term "planet".

The need for a strict definition was deemed necessary after new telescope technologies began to reveal far-off objects that rivalled Pluto in size.

Without a new nomenclature, these discoveries raised the prospect that textbooks could soon be talking about 50 or more planets in the Solar System.

And that would have been preposterous. So this is the new definition of a planet:

The scientists agreed that for a celestial body to qualify as a planet:
* it must be in orbit around the Sun
* it must be large enough that it takes on a nearly round shape
* it has cleared its orbit of other objects

And this is why Pluto is suddenly out:

Pluto was automatically disqualified because its highly elliptical orbit overlaps with that of Neptune. It will now join a new category of dwarf planets.
[...]
Pluto's status has been contested for many years. It is further away and considerably smaller than the eight other "traditional" planets in our Solar System. At just 2,360km (1,467 miles) across, Pluto is smaller even than some moons in the Solar System.

Its orbit around the Sun is also highly tilted compared with the plane of the big planets.
[...]
The critical blow for Pluto came with the discovery three years ago of an object currently designated 2003 UB313. After being measured with the Hubble Space Telescope, it was shown to be some 3,000km (1,864 miles) in diameter: it is bigger than Pluto.

So long Pluto:

Named after the god of the underworld in Roman mythology, Pluto orbits the Sun at an average distance of 5.9 billion kilometres (3.7 billion miles) taking 247.9 Earth years to complete a single circuit of the Sun.

A Quote By:

Christina Aguilera, a gay marriage supporter:

"I'm shocked that it's a big deal! I'm shocked that people are shocked. I think it's really unfair that there has to be some kind of standard for marriage. Marriage should be about celebrating two people's love for each other. It shouldn't have anything to do with someone's sexual preference. Europe is a lot more open when it comes to sexuality. I think that with the history of European culture, there is a lot more openness to being provocative. I'm just all about no judgment and (having) equal rights."

I can't believe blacks are more anti-gay than whites

After all, they've been through enormous civil rights struggles to earn the freedoms they now enjoy, and despite that, they are still victims of racism, whether openly or not. How can they not see that gays and lesbians are victims of prejudice as much as them?

Thankfully, somebody does understand, and she's black:

The fight for gay rights is like our civil rights struggle, however, and it's hypocritical for groups that have had to fight long and hard to win their own constitutional rights to turn around and try to deny them to the next group. We're seeing this in the descendants of immigrant groups that were despised and vilified during their early days in this country, and that now want to deny recent immigrants the means to become lawful citizens.
[...]
I won't attempt to argue with the Scriptures, other than to say they reflect the mores and biases of the times they were written. And just as there are Scriptures ordering slaves to obey their masters, cautioning women to be silent in church and submissive at home, and applauding the persecution of the Jews because they killed Jesus, none of these positions is argued by enlightened people today.

I won't dismiss the beliefs of blacks who believe that homosexuality is immoral, but I'd caution them that morality has often been used as a cloak for old-fashioned bigotry, fear and discomfort with people and behaviors that are different.
[...]
I see marriage as a civil right, and no group's religious beliefs should be allowed to deny the rights of others. And because blacks have suffered from bigotry and injustice that were cloaked by religion and morality, we should avoid doing the same thing to others.

This is what the road to a full blown draft looks like

Bush has given the go ahead to the Marines to forcibly recall thousands of Marines to active duty because there aren't enough volunteers anymore:

The U.S. Marine Corps said Tuesday it has been authorized to recall thousands of Marines to active duty, primarily because of a shortage of volunteers for duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Up to 2,500 Marines will be brought back at any one time, but there is no cap on the total number of Marines who may be forced back into service in the coming years as the military battles the war on terror. The call-ups will begin in the next several months.

This is the first time the Marines have had to use the involuntary recall since the early days of the Iraq combat. The Army has ordered back about 14,000 soldiers since the start of the war.

Well, no wonder people don't volunteer anymore. If the guy in charge of deciding whether to sacrifice your life for a good cause or a fistful of dollars is George 'Carefree' Bush, you better stay away from any recruiting center.

And what's going to happen when Bush finally decides to attack Iran, or Syria? Who's gonna fight in that war?

I'm just relieved that Ray is now beyond the age limit and Danny hasn't reached it yet (and won't for a while).

Fuck Bush's wars.

It's Over!!! Finally.

I'm talking about the school, obviously. After 8 long years, I'm finally free of books, notes, tests, and the like. It's a huge relief and I'm glad it's over. I finally don't need to worry, whenever I have a moment of free time, that instead of doing whatever I'm doing (be it working around the house or just relaxing doing whatever I please) I should instead be studying. Last night I presented my Final Project and it went well, so I'm officially done with the school. I've got my Master's Degree and I have no intention of going back for more. Period. I started going to school in 1998, so it's been a long time since I had no school nights on the horizon. I did take a one and a half year break in between degrees, but the knowledge was always there that, eventually, I'd have had to go back. Not this time. Now I'm really done. And it feels great. I'm so happy.

How's Bush thinking in terms of his legacy?

I'm asking because by the way things are shaping up... it doesn't look good at all. He messed up the US, messed up Afghanistan, messed up Iraq, and still has more than two years to go during which he no doubt will try to mess up some other country, just for good measure.

Someone else agrees:

[T]he President has never made human interests his top priority, choosing instead to pander to big business and private political interests. These decisions will invariably color his legacy and will likely prompt change from frustrated Americans who have tired of watching dry paint.

You'll have to read the whole article to get the dry paint reference, and trust me, you won't be wasting your time (it's short too).

7 past the $400 million mark

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest has passed that mark this past weekend:

The summer's biggest blockbuster, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, sailed past $400 million on Sunday, its 45th day of release. The supernatural swashbuckler became the seventh picture to ever cross the milestone, and only Shrek 2 did it in less time.

It will certainly climb one more spot on the chart, since it hasn't run out of steam yet and the next movie is just $2.5 million away (it made more than 5 this past weekend alone). After that, it's anybody's guess where it will end up, but my prediction is that it will have to make do with being number six, because I can't see it making another $30 million to pass number five.

It will probably depend in large measure by how other releases perform in the final two weeks of the summer season (according to Hollywood, summer ends with the Labor Day weekend, screw the calendar!)

Personally, I didn't see the movie. I saw the first episode of the franchise and wasn't that impressed that I had to see the second, so I guess even the third, which I believe will be released next year, is out of the question, but forecasters are already predicting a huge success.

We'll see.

How much worse off will we be when Bush finally leaves office?

I can't imagine the answer to that question, because it's too scary. One thing is certain, however. We're way worse off now than we were when he moved into the White House, and the situation is getting more dire with every passing day.

This is what someone who knows what he's talking about (thanks to first hand experience) and who's now running for Congress had to say about our efforts in Iraq:

Joe Sestak, a former vice Admiral in the Navy who is also running for Congress in Pennsylvania against the evil Curt Weldon, gave the Democratic response saying it's time for redeployment from Iraq. Sestak also explained how Iraq is draining the coffers instead of making us safer:

Sestak said ending the U.S. presence in Iraq would free up money and energy to concentrate on other dangers, such as nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran and bolstering homeland security protections. Two days of spending in Iraq would pay for screening all air cargo on passenger planes, while five days of Iraq costs would fund the screening of all cargo coming into the nation's ports, he said.

That's a total of 7 days of spending in Iraq. With that much money we could have fixed two of the biggest problems plaguing the airline and shipping industries.

We've been in Iraq more than 178 times that amount of time. Imagine how much safer we could have made the US with that kind of cash (including rebuilding New Orleans after Katrina and reducing crime and poverty rates and our dependence on oil from the Middle East).

How exactly is Bush making us safer? By throwing away our financial resources and actively helping recruit new terrorists?

Thanks Mr. President.

America, the land of entertainment

How else to explain the following:

Three quarters of Americans can correctly identify two of Snow White's seven dwarfs while only a quarter can name two Supreme Court Justices, according to a poll on pop culture released on Monday.

Just over 60 percent of respondents were able to name Bart as Homer's son on the television show "The Simpsons," while only 20.5 percent were able to name one of the ancient Greek poet Homer's epic poems, "The Iliad" and "The Odyssey."

Asked what planet Superman was from, 60 percent named the fictional planet Krypton, while only 37 percent knew that Mercury is the planet closest to the sun.

Respondents were far more familiar with the Three Stooges -- Larry, Curly and Moe -- than the three branches of the U.S. government -- judicial, executive and legislative. Seventy-four percent identified the former, 42 percent the latter.

Twice as many people (23 percent) were able to identify the most recent winner of the television talent show "American Idol," Taylor Hicks, as were able to name the Supreme Court Justice confirmed in January 2006, Samuel Alito (11 percent).

How sad. It really goes to show how much Americans care about anything not neatly encased between a set of opening and closing credits. Too bad there's more to life than that.

And this is all the more worrisome if you consider that the pronouncements of Justice Alito & Co. will most certainly have a much longer lasting influence on life in America than Mr. Hicks' warbling, however pleasant that might be.

1,250

That's the (up-to-date) number of days the US has been involved in the Iraq war so far, longer than World War II lasted (1,244 days total).

Unfortunately, there's STILL no end in sight:

The war in Iraq has lasted three days longer than US involvement in World War II.

Germany declared war on the US on December, 11, 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor. The US announced victory in Europe on May 8, 1945. That's one thousand, two hundred and forty-four days.

We've been in Iraq one thousand, two hundred and forty-seven days---and still the Administration has no exit strategy, no plan for victory and no clue what it is doing. In case you'd forgotten, George W. Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" aboard an aircraft carrier over three years ago.

"In the battle of Iraq," Bush said, "The United States and our allies have prevailed."

Perhaps that pronouncement was a little premature. Twelve hundred and four days later, our troops are still paying the price.

Unconscionable

The President Broke the Law

Plain and simple. At least according to a Federal judge who this week ruled on the matter, the first step in a case that will undoubtedly reach the US Supreme Court in the near future:

[T]he Bush administration's effort to monitor communications without court oversight runs afoul of the Bill of Rights and federal law.

Ruling in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and other advocacy groups in the Eastern District of Michigan, Taylor said that the NSA wiretapping program, aimed at communications by potential terrorists, violates privacy and free speech rights and the constitutional separation of powers among the three branches of government. She also found that the wiretaps violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law instituted to provide judicial oversight of clandestine surveillance within the United States.

"It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights," Taylor wrote in her 43-page opinion. ". . . There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."

That's a pretty scathing condemnation of Bush's efforts to impose his will on all people, not only in this country, but around the world (like in Iraq). He just does whatever he wants, whether it's legal or not, justified or unreasonable, WRONGLY assuming he's the King of the US and not its President.

I'm actually pretty curious to see how Scalia and Thomas will rule on the issue, since they are strict constitutionalists, that is they base their rulings on a strict reading of the Constitution, regardless of the fact that it was written 200 years ago and things have slightly changed ever since.

Ah, and this tidbit gets the cake:

The decision yesterday could complicate efforts by the White House and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) to win approval for a bill that would allow, but not require, Bush to submit the NSA program to a secret court for legal review.

What?! So what exactly would the purpose of such a bill be, since we already have a law that allows the President to submit his program to a secret court for legal review, the FISA Act, which Bush blatantly disregarded, disregards, and will (by his own admission) disregard in the future?

He's already allowed to ask for permission. He just doesn't do it. So if the new law won't require him to actually do it, why waste Congress' time and taxpayers' money discussing it?

I hope a lot of people ask that question to Mr. Specter as he runs for re-election in the next few months. Does he know he got elected by the people of Pennsylvania to represent them and not Bush in Congress? Does he know he occupies a particularly important position in which he should exercise some oversight on the Administration, and not just try to cover up its wrongdoings?

The hubris of that man!

All Hail Mr. Livingstone!!

As in London Mayor Ken Livingstone, who spoke out in condemnation of the leaders of Estonia for failing to protect gays and lesbians during the recent violence that occurred at a Gay Pride parade there earlier this month:

"The failure of the police and political authorities in Tallinn to protect lesbian and gay citizens from violence during this year's peaceful Gay Pride parade is inexcusable. Having permitted the parade, and being aware of the potential for violence, Tallinn City Council and the city's police should have taken all reasonable steps to robustly defend the fundamental human rights of those taking part. I also deplore the violence at Gay Pride events this year in Latvia, Poland, Russia, Moldova and Romania and the encouragement given to right wing extremists by religious and political leaders. I strongly endorse the European Parliament resolution of 18 January 2006 that lesbian and gay people should be protected from homophobic hate speech and violence and treated with 'respect, dignity and protection.'"

Wow! We need more people like this in decision-making positions.

The Devil Wears Prada

I'll start by saying that this movie belongs to Meryl Streep. Without her, my favorite actress, it would be just your usual chick-flick for deranged teenagers.

I can't think of any other actress being more of a shoo-in for this year's Oscar Nominations than Meryl Streep after this movie. She chews the scenery, steals and commands each and every scene she's in, and when she's not on the screen you just can't wait for her to come back. The rest is just filler.

Now, don't get me wrong, Anne Hathaway, Stanley Tucci (superb,) and Emily Blunt are all very good, but they are merely the equivalent of satellites to the Sun Goddess Meryl. This is her movie.

The story is simple enough: Streep is the editor in chief of Runway, the top fashion magazine, and needs a new assistant. Enter Hathaway as a girl who doesn't use makeup, doesn't wear designer clothes, and doesn't know anything about the fashion world. Her transformation is slow enough to be believable, helped along by Tucci, and overall the movie works without falling into too many clichés.

I already knew Hathaway from Brokeback Mountain, and I was pleased to have my positive opinion of her talent confirmed. She's definitely someone to watch in the coming years. Blunt revealed herself to be a good actress as well, although her character was the usual token , more of a caricature than anything else.

Anyway, I liked the movie and would wholeheartedly recommend it, especially to all of Streep's fans. This is a gem.

Grade: 7.5

A Quote By:

Christopher Turner, Armistead Maupin's partner:

"My only regret about being gay is that I repressed it so long. I surrendered my youth to the people I feared when I could have been out there loving someone. Don't make that mistake yourself. Life's too damn short."

Lots of planning went into this routine, I bet

Here's my first ever link to a video on the more and more popular YouTube website.

It was just too cool not to share:

I can see! I can SEE!!!

I'm back to posting, and for the first time, without glasses or contact lenses :-D The operation went well. Virtually painless, thanks to floods of anesthetic drops, but certainly scary, since you're not only awake throughout the whole procedure, but you can see it being done, hear the instruments shaving off your eyes' top layer, and even smell your corneas being burned off by the laser. Scary enough for you? It was for me. They gave me some Valium to calm down beforehand and I gladly swallowed it. It worked to a degree, but I was still nervous. Thank god for a nurse whose job it was to remind me to relax and breathe during the surgery. That really helped. The pain afterwards was much less than I had expected. I was more sensitive to the light, but that only lasted like 3 days. Glare and haze weren't, and still aren't a big issue. The weirdest thing is actually just the fact that the vision fluctuates a little, or so it seems (so today you gain a little, tomorrow you might lose a little, and/or vice versa), which makes it impossible to predict how much you'll be able to see. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm talking minor differences here, I can always see just fine. It's just the level of detail that isn't always the same. Impressive was that, right away, I could see fine... unaided. I went from 20/400 to 20/30 virtually instantaneously, and to 20/25 after a couple days. I'm still there today, and the surgeon told me that I'll gradually get to 20/20 (or even 20/15) but it could take up to 2 months. The worst thing is that the cornea isn't smooth yet, but all jagged, still healing and rebuilding itself, and this is what causes the details to be blurred. The hardest things to read are, apropos, computer monitors and anything digital, because the letters kind of double up, melt, and spill into each other. Let me tell you, I can't wait for that to clear up!! For the rest, I see very well and my eyes don't burn like they used to, unless I'm in front of a computer (or the TV, but less), which is great because the level of discomfort had become unbearable. I'll be looking out for more and more details in the weeks to come... Overall... I'm happy :-D

Viewing the world, unaided.

Tomorrow morning I'm scheduled for my PRK surgery. PRK is a corrective surgery for the eyes that eliminates the need for glasses or contact lenses. I'm looking forward to it, and to put this coming week behind me, but I'm a little nervous and worried, as is expected before any kind of surgery, let alone one that involves an organ as essential to one's everyday functioning as the eye. Obviously, the vision correction was a big incentive to undergo the procedure, but my main reason was to finally correct my corneal dystrophy, a condition I recently discovered, while I was looking into the LASIK procedure, in which the cornea isn't as smooth as it should be. As a result, tears do not spread out evenly, rather they stream as if in little rivers, thereby leaving portions of my eyes consistently dry and burning. The procedure should correct this problem for good, and I can't wait to see the results, since I've lived all my life with burning eyes, thinking that it was normal and everyone had them as dry as I did. Little did I know this was far from the truth. Anyway, tomorrow I'll spend most of the day in bed, sleeping, in order to allow the eyes to recover. Tuesday we'll see how I feel and how I can see, although I've been informed that it could take up to a few months before I can see "perfectly." I will, however, be able to see fairly well right away without the need to wear glasses or contact lenses, which for me is totally unheard of. I've been wearing glasses ever since I can remember. Ever since I was a little kid. Well, let's hope everything goes well and the pain is not too much. I sort of know what I'm getting myself into, since I've had my cornea scratched three times in the past couple of years, and the procedure actually consists of removing the outermost layer of the cornea in order to allow it to grow back normally, but a few scratches are probably infinitesimal compared to the whole area removed. I hope I'll be able to post something soon. Without the need to wear my glasses. Finally.

Rare Clouds Over Antarctica

A gorgeous view over Antarctica ...


... that could be a harbinger of trouble for our planet:

[B]ecause these rare, mother-of-pearl colored clouds are caused by extreme weather conditions above Antarctica, they are a possible indication of global warming.

Repackaging damaged goods

PS: for those of you who couldn't know, George W. Bush's middle initial was used extensively during the past election cycle on everything from TV ads to stickers because one of his nicknames is "Dubya" as in "W."

I'm sure this re-use of his moniker wasn't sponsored by the Republican Party though...

Wedding update

A couple pictures. Here's where the ceremony will take place, weather permitting: And this is a view of where we're going to have our reception. We think it's very charming, although the pictures doesn't tell the whole story. The place is much nicer.

Any publicity is good publicity

I said it before and I'll say again: Mel Gibson is one of the best marketers working in the movie industry. We all know by now about his latest "incident," getting arrested while driving drunk like a skunk, and we all know he issued an apology for the slurs he directed at the Jews while under he influence, but I don't buy it.

For all I can tell, this is just his latest ploy to generate publicity for his upcoming new movie, Apocalypto, for which he can't really play one religion against the other like he did for The Passion of the Christ.

So he figured, I'll get drunk, get arrested, and end up on every magazine cover, in every newscast, and in every conversation for a few weeks. Then, when the movie is released, somehow I'll find a way to milk the story some more.

I hope it backfires big time. What he said while under the influence, if not a plot to get us into movie theaters, is what's really on his mind, what he really believes. After all, alcohol lowers our capacity to control ourselves, thereby allowing our 'hidden' selves to come out. That's exactly what happened here.

The thing I hate most is that he actually asked the Jews to forgive him and to help him get through this moment and help him understand so he can get better. Bullshit. He just wants publicity. I'd love for his career to be over, and honestly, with all the Jews working in Hollywood, I can't believe they don't come down on him harder than they did.

This from TVGuide:

Mel Gibson to the Jewish Community: Oops... My Bad

Yesterday, Mel Gibson issued an apology to the Jewish community for the anti-Semitic remarks he made while being arrested for drunk driving in the wee hours of Friday morning. "I am not a bigot," he wrote in a statement circulated by his publicist. "Hatred of any kind goes against my faith." (Hmm... where was all that disarming tolerance when he was busy verbally gay-bashing a few years back?) Furthermore, as the Oscar winner climbs back on the wagon, he says he wants to "meet with leaders in the Jewish community, with whom I can have a one-on-one discussion to discern the appropriate path for healing." Let me save him the trouble -- it's called O'Doul's; try it.

Of course you're a bigot, and an asshole too. Hatred-goes-against-my-faith bullshit. I really hope your career is over and your new movie makes 2 pennies.

The cover up widens

Apparently the 9/11 Commission put together to analyze what went wrong on that infamous day (and what led us to it) in order to avoid making the same mistakes again and to fix whatever needed fixing wasn't told the whole story by the Pentagon:

Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.

Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.

Astonishing.

And what is our Congress doing about this? About our military lying to us in order to cover up their mistakes? Nothing. Why? Because one way or another they're all in this together.

That's probably why in the end the Commission gave up on the idea of asking the Justice Department to investigate the matter. They all report to the same guy, what's the point?

This administration is packed with criminals. All of them.

Only capable drivers should be allowed to get behind the wheel

I read this article a couple weeks ago and saved it to post about it because I believe it makes a very good point: anyone who reaches a certain age should be recertified often for driving and their license renewed only if they can pass strict vision and reflex/response tests.

Driver recertification and road testing should be required for those age 65 and older.
[...]
But the driver who hit me has scarcely been inconvenienced. He was charged with failure to yield and issued a $128 fine. He is permitted to drive without restrictions and without any assessment of his competence. In all probability, he has had no legally mandated driver training since he received his driver's license more than half a century ago.
[...]
Someone can get behind the wheel of a potentially lethal automobile without having had his basic competence tested in decades. Most drivers receive their last exposure to driver education and testing in their mid-teens.

This makes no sense. Given their great, and frequently proven, capacity to do harm, drivers should be required to take a continuing driver education course every 10 years.

Special emphasis should be placed on elderly drivers.
[...]
Accordingly, it makes sense to recertify drivers at age 65 and require subsequent recertification, based on road testing, every five years thereafter. Yet only two states, Illinois and New Hampshire, require road tests for older drivers -- and those only after age 75. Some states actually reduce requirements; in Tennessee, licenses issued to drivers over 65 do not expire.
[...]
We should require continuing education for all drivers, and licensing recertification and mandatory road testing for drivers age 65 and older. It would make the roads safer for all.

I couldn't agree more. Coming from Italy, where you're presented with a huge rules book to study for the exam and the test isn't easy at all, I was aghast when I saw how easy it was to get a driver's license in the US. The book to study for the test is more like a pamphlet, and the test's questions could be aced by a drunken skunk. The eye visit is simple and Ray told me the driving lessons are more a formality than a real learning environment (he told me he once was able to park the car without touching the brakes at all, because the instructor was doing it all for him with his set of pedals; how beneficial is that exactly?!)

The reason the rules book is so big in Italy is that new signals are occasionally introduced to account for new necessities, and, unless you're trying to get a driver's license (or get it renewed,) you'd never have a chance to learn about them. The end result would be that you're on the road, see a new signal, and have no idea whatsoever how to behave. Our book actually grew exponentially in size when the European Union came into being, because people could drive across borders more freely now, and their knowledge of other nation's road signals became a necessity to avoid accidents and fines.

Our driver's license lasts 10 years, after which you can easily get it renewed, but only up to a certain age (I guess 60 or 65, I'm not sure), after which you have to get it renewed much more frequently (I think it's every 5 years at first and then every year once you pass another age limit).

Sure, getting your license renewed can be a pain. You have to make time to go get it done, can be stressful, and if you don't pass, you have to take more in-depth tests, but so what? We'd all be safer on the road. So, not to inconvenience the elderly and force them to get tested thoroughly and often in order to be able to keep driving, we let them drive without checks at all? Is that a smarter policy?

I mean look at Tennessee: if you're older than 65, here's your driver's license and don't bother coming back to get checked ever again. You did your duty, now you're all set for life. And we don't really care if you get glaucoma or macular degeneration, Alzheimer's or Parkinson's disease, dementia or any other debilitating disease. Go right ahead, nothing bad can happen. We're confident you'll be careful and watch out for the pedestrians that dare cross the same road you're driving on.

Are they insane? I know everyone thinks they're great drivers and everyone else stinks, but with my current commute of an hour each way, mostly on secondary roads that cut across the countryside, I've had my share of encounters with older drivers (and younger ones too) who might definitely benefit from a checkup of their driving abilities.

I certainly would feel safer if they had to go get checked in order to keep driving.

A display of nature's power

... and wonder, I might add:

The Popocatepetl volcano in the Mexican state of Puebla spits out an immense cloud of ash and steam as it erupts on Tuesday, July 25.

I know that this is a volcano eruption and therefore quite worrisome and menacing for the population living nearby, but I still find it astoundingly beautiful.

Nature is amazing.

The new Joker

Seems official, they picked the actor who will play the new Joker in the next installment of Batman, which will be a sequel to the prequel, and apparently will undermine the first Batman, which already portrayed the Joker as the baddie du jour:

In the upcoming Batman prequel sequel The Dark Knight, the Joker will be played by Heath Ledger.

And the original Joker was played by none others than Jack Nicholson.

Those are big shoes to fill. I still consider Nicholson's as one of the best villain roles ever.

Returning for the next episode in the series are director Christopher Nolan and actors Christian Bale (in the title role), Michael Caine, and Morgan Freeman.

I'm pretty confident it will be a good movie, but I feel like the first two Batman movies, directed by the genial Tim Burton, were great and should have been left alone.

Undermine episodes three and four, which nobody liked and everyone thinks were stupid, so you also make a statement for other directors, "You make crap, we'll try to erase it from our collective memories," but leave the good ones alone.

Good Lord, how worried should we be?

Per the Hollywood Reporter, hottie Jessica Biel has been cast as Adam Sandler's attorney/lust interest in the upcoming comedy I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry. In the laffer, the erstwhile Billy Madison and Kevin James play a pair of straight firefighters who pretend to be a married gay couple so they can get domestic-partner benefits.

The only hope lies in the writer, Alexander Payne, who penned and directed Election, About Schmidt, and Sideways, three very good movies.

Let's keep our fingers crossed...

Setting your priorities straight

Check this list out (I'm sure it's incomplete, but still):

• the Middle East is imploding,
• gas prices are higher than ever,
• millions of Americans don't have health insurance,
• global warming is radically changing the planet in front of our very eyes,
• Iraq is marred by civil war,
• Afghanistan is falling back into the hands of the Taliban,
• Iran keeps getting closer to gaining nuclear weapons,
• North Korea is almost ready to launch a nuclear missile on whichever country that day happens to look deserving of destruction to its looney leader,
• India and Pakistan are always on the verge of open warfare, and both countries possess nuclear weapons,
• Africa has so many problems it would need a list of its own
  

and what does our President, the leader of the free world, the man in charge of the lone superpower left in the world do?

On Friday, President Bush bailed on his discussion of world affairs with British prime minister Tony Blair to rub elbows with this season's American Idol finalists, Reuters reports. Asked if Dubya was an Idol fan, a White House spokesperson said he'd never seen it, "but like most Americans, he is well aware of it."

I wonder if he's aware of the problems affecting the lives of "most" Americans as much as he's aware of their television viewing habits.