Punch Out!!

Made a random reference to this in conversation today:


Mike Tyson's Punch Out!!

George (C) had no idea what I was referencing when I started talking about giving a super uppercut to Bald Bull before he starts charging. I told him he just wasn't a Nintendo connoiseur. Punk.

Anyway, this game hearkens back to the days when Mike Tyson wasn't regarded as a complete wack-job. Back then, he was just an athelete with criminal tendencies, especially in dealings with women. Then he got thrown in jail for 6 years (of which he served 3) for rape.

Wait... you get only 6 years for RAPE? And you only have to serve 3? There is something seriously, seriously messed up about our penal system. That's completely ridiculous. Oh that makes the blood boil.

When he got out of jail, he was somehow even more insane. There was that highly publicized incident with biting off Evander Holyfield's left ear. Not to mention that bizarre facial tattoo... oh, and the numerous stupid quotes, such as:

I'm on the Zoloft to keep me from killing y'all.

For more disturbing details about the life of Mike Tyson, check this out.

Okay, so I'd set out to write a light-hearted "Remember this classic game?" post, but my research into the subject of Mike Tyson has really killed any light-heartedness about the matter. Nowadays, we sit back and laugh in disbelief at how completely off the wall this guy is. Really, we should be outraged that this criminally insane thug is out on the streets. (Literally on the streets--last I heard, Tyson was last heard to be living in homeless shelters.)

I've got nowhere to live. I've been crashing with friends, literally sleeping in shelters. Unsavoury characters are giving me money and I'm taking it. I need it. The drug dealers, they sympathise with me. They see me as some sort of pathetic character... I know I was a tough, bad-ass talking fighter, but I ain't no mob figure. I did my time for the rape. I paid my money to Las Vegas. I paid my dues. I ain't the same person I was when I bit that guy's ear off.

Ugh... "I did my time for rape," he says. 3 years? Yeah, great. Makes you want to play some Punch-Out just so you can punch that guy out.

Earth Day

Today is Earth Day.



Question: Who cares?
Answer: Not enough people.

I remember back in the day, when Earth Day was this huge thing. Maybe it was just because I was a younger and more idealistic then. But it at least seemed that people cared about saving the planet and all that. We even made up a superhero to carry the banner for the cause.

As you may remember from The Adventures of Captain Planet and the Planeteers, ("Planeteers?" At least they didn't wear goofy headgear with planets thereupon.) environmentalism was tied in with a sense of international unity. From the other angle, when I attended a language immersion program with a call to internation understanding, the environment was a large part of that curriculum. I, for one, was most intrigued by the prospect of an international project which built unity among nations while preserving our planet for our descendants.

I seem to recall a bit of pagan mythology thrown in for good measure. I think the character of Gaia, the spirit of the Earth, was meant to appeal to a broad-based audience. I think a few religious groups were against the idea at the time, but the kids found it plausible. Oh, and there was this other guy, Zarm, who was the spirit of war. He was brought in whenever the show wanted to tackle an anti-war theme.

I didn't realize it at the time, but I suppose many of the shows ideas might be viewed as quite liberal. However, since the idea of protecting the environment was one ostensively championed by both sides, it was never much of an issue. At least, that's the cutting political insight I had at the time.

So what's happened since then? The show was cancelled in 1996. And in recent years, I've noticed a great deal more apathy regarding the environment. Environmentalism became increasingly viewed as a liberal cause, as it had been back in the 1960s.

Our recent political polarity and partisanship has only worsened the problem. Remember this? Would that have ever happened if the Republicans didn't feel such a need to show solidarity? Look, I know that party solidarity helped them win the last election, but party loyalty is a pox on our political system and probably on our planet as well.

I'm a far cry from your stereotypical tree-hugging hippie. But I do care about the environment. I believe it is a matter of taking personal responsibility as a citizen of the Earth. Yet there are those who would argue that anyone who believes in the concept of "citizen of the Earth" are obviously "liberal." But what does that labeling accomplish? No respectable middle-class parent wants to be grouped with drug-crazed degenerates in front of their children. We therefore back away from anything which might get us branded as a "liberal."

Politicizing the environment is an atrocity. By this, I mean not only to blame those on the right who have villainized environmentalists, but also those on the left who have pointed the finger of blame at "conservatives." If our leaders are investing their time in endless name-calling and jockeying for media attention, what real progress can truly be made?

It sounde like a liberal thing to say, but Karl Rove is killing our planet. Not because he's a conservative, but because he deliberately created an environment of opposition which forces people to take sides. The spirit of cooperation which held so much promise for a united effort to protect the environment was cast aside in favor of power-grabbing.

Look, I know at the end of this, I'm veering left by targeting a major player on the conservative team, but I want to leave you with this question:


Who does Karl Rove more closely resemble?

a. Captain Planet

b. Hoggish Greedily

Take your time.

Birthday

Yesterday was my birthday. Woot! (So, um... I didn't post anything). I wanted to share this awesome card that Jiggity John sent my way. Enjoy!


Hallmark.com: Birthday Singers

Found it on the internets

Is this funny at all? Zombo.com

What about this? Badgerbadgerbadger.com

Or this? Mahir (ikissyou.org)

I've been guilty of blogging on more than my share of internet memes. (Did you know that was a word?) These are admittedly several years old, but like all jokes, they tend to recirculate every so often. I hear that All Your Base is still around, and that was big when I was in college.

It seems to me that as a society, our idea of humor has evolved into something unnatural. As an internet society, we spread dumb chain email jokes and humiliating A/V evidence and proclaim it funny. I, for one, am unconvinced that our sense of humor is evolving into any truer form of entertainment. There's just so little that's truly clever out there. Compare:

Classic humor:

A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
by Mark Twain

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all. Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.

Modern humor:

200 rounds of ammo: $70
Two ski masks: $24
Two black trench coats: $260
Seeing the expression on your classmates' faces right before you blow their heads off--priceless.

There are some things money can't buy, for everything else there's MasterCard.

The Twain quote is clever and amusing. The "priceless" thing? It's no doubt offensive. Some would call it dark humor. I agree that it's dark, but I take issue with calling it "humor." Is this what passes for wit these days?

When Shakespeare wrote his comedies, he made the fool more intelligent than any other character. It took a man of the utmost intelligence to be a good fool. What does it say if our modern idea of humor is to point and guffaw stupidly as yet another dude on TV gets kicked in the crotch by some barnyard animal? If this is to be used as a gauge of our most clever minds, then we have become quite dumb indeed.

Look, I enjoy the random internet phenomena as much as the next guy. I mean, unless the next guy is ROTFL, in which case I enjoy them less than he. And you know, I realize that my posting the above links will only perpetuate the cycle of mediocrity and humor through repetition. But to sum up my point in simple terms for the general populace:

Duh! Duhhh duh duh.

Seriously, to my loyal, intelligent readers--enjoy the links, but feel very guilty about it.

Gmail and other Google-goodness

It's like email, but it's only for G's...



I'm now the proud owner of a gmail account, and I'm enjoying it immensely. Unfortunately, I have no invitations to distribute, so that you may partake of the awesomeness. One of the fun, if less useful features, is that I can have the system talk to me in various other languages, like German. I'm currently running in English, since I don't know the system very well yet, but I might try some Deutsch-emailing later on.

Speaking of Google's translation services check this out:

Google's Language Tools

Scroll down a bit, and you'll see the option to "Use the Google Interface in Your Language." In addition to the usual French, Spanish, Italian, etc., you might notice some lesser used languages, such as Swedish Chef, Elmer Fudd, Hacker, Klingon, and Pig Latin. I was further amused to find that if you then return to "language tools" while in one of the languages, your selections are listed and alphabetized in your current language. For example, while in Swedish Chef speak, "Ilmer Foodd" is listed with the languages beginning in "I."

The reason I mention all of this is that I'm highly entertained by the antics of Google.com. In addition to having the world's premier search engine, they take time to engage in other entertaining intellectual pursuits, such as coming up with a cool, functional email system, translating their website into Klingon, or attracting brainy engineers through roadside math puzzles. I hear they even encourage their employees to spend time at work playing with other projects (like Gmail), which are then developed and spread under the Google flag. It's dang cool.

Malpractice

Okay, so I know of one loyal reader who may need this warning:

Do not read this post if you have access to firearms, as you may go out and decide to start shooting idiots on the street. It's not idiot season, and the game warden will be after you.

Seriously, I find the contents of this post deeply frustrating, and you may want to skip reading this if you're not in the mood to get angry at the world.


Nurse! I need legal representation STAT!

We in the United States face a medicolegal crisis. I've mentioned stupid lawsuits in the past, but perhaps more frustrating are the unmeritorious suits clogging up our legal system. I think that the abuse of malpractice suits is perhaps the most detrimental effect of our litigious nature. There are many reasons for this opinion, such as the fact that it drives up the cost of healthcare or that it contributes to the further decay of the doctor-patient relationship.

I'm not here to rant. You probably already agree that the fact that 80-90% of all malpractice cases are lost or thrown out of court is indicative that far too many people are suing their doctors without having a just reason. I just wanted to throw out a few solutions suggested to me this week:

First, for your edification, true malpractice requires three things: a mistake (the doctor did something not in keeping with the standard of care), damage (something bad happened to the patient), and causation (the doctor's mistake caused the damage). If you can't prove all three of those things, don't even think about filing a malpractice suit. You'll be thrown out of court. Physically, I should hope.

Now, on to the suggested solutions, which I found interesting:

• Cap on punitive damages. -- This is what the AMA is lobbying for, though it is in doubt whether this is really the solution. Sometimes real mistakes happen, and you can't say that someone who is permanently disabled doesn't deserve millions in dollars in compensation to pay for the healthcare costs incurred by his disability. Besides, though the ridiculously huge awards are the ones that get the most attention, it's not the big cases that are clogging up the courts, it's the little ones.


• No more contingency fee. -- Did you know that the attorney gets a percentage of the award? I guess I knew that. Did you know that no other country in the world has this system in place? I didn't know that. But as you can see, the contingency fee makes it such that the attorney will obviously sue for more money. Without that, perhaps the damages sought would be more reasonable.


• Loser pays court costs. -- This is a big one. Right now, you have to pay court costs, regardless of whether you win or lose. This typically costs upwards of $50,000. Therefore, malpractice insurance companies will often settle if the damages sought are less than the potential court costs. That, in turn, makes people more willing to sue, even if they have no case, because they can make tens of thousands of dollars just from a settlement. Meanwhile, there's a gray mark on the doctor's record that says "We're not saying you did something wrong, but we're not saying you didn't." If the loser had to pay for the court costs, then you might not want to sue without good reason.


• Better regulation of class action lawsuits -- Less applicable to malpractice, I think, but you've seen this in other arenas. Some lawyer will sue a large company on behalf of a whole bunch of clients. What you don't always see is that most of the time, though the gross payout might be huge, after the lawyer has taken his commission, the award actually distributed to the thousand clients is rather miniscule. What then, is the point of a class action lawsuit? To get 50 cents to thousands of people to make up for whatever wrong was done, to punish the company for making a mistake, or just to line the attorney's pockets?


• Limit flexibility of trial location -- In a criminal case, trials are often moved to find a more neutral venue. In civil cases, trials are often moved to wherever juries tend to give out bigger awards. Well, that's just silly.

I just wanted to share those with you. I don't really know if they'd ever really be followed, considering that the gross majority of our legislature is composed of lawyers. I'm not even sure, based on my limited experience, whether they would really attack the heart of the problem -- that we live in a society with a lottery mentality, where everyone thinks they can get lucky and win that million dollars, and they therefore "go for it" no matter how slim their chances.

It's a very frustrating problem, since the solution seems to involve a complete upheaval of the way our society works. As a final thought to demonstrate how frustrating this ridiculous system is consider this: If there are 3 doctors named as co-defendants... say an OB/Gyn, an anesthesiologist, and a pediatrician, all involved in the same labor/delivery suit... and one of them is shown to be at fault... say the anesthesiologist did something wrong and paralyzed the woman and the court awards $30 million... then all three doctors have to split the payment of damages, regardless of their stake (or lack thereof) in the actual malpractice committed. That is a very broken system.

Silence vs. Truth

I'm wearing my liberal hat today!

If you were in high school or college today, you might have noticed one of 450,000 students nationwide not talking.



Day of Silence started in 1996 with some students at the University of Virginia and spread nationwide from there. Since 2001, it has been coordinated by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). The concept is fairly simple. Participants spend a full day not speaking, which, considering they're high school and college students, is dang impressive. This is meant to draw attention to the isolation experienced by the gay community.

So you're thinking. Hey, that's great. Kind of liberal, but great. So what? Well, some folks on the other side of the divide thought there was far too much support for this sinful lifestyle. Hence:



The Day of Truth, sponsored by the conservative Alliance Defense fund and endordsed by such prominent conservative organizations as Focus on the Family and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, seeks to counter today's liberal propaganda. To quote their website:

The Day of Truth is scheduled for April 14, 2005. This is the day after GLSEN (The Gay, Lesbian, Straight Educational Network) will sponsor the "Day of Silence." GLSEN’s Day of Silence encourages students to remain silent throughout the day and not respond to teachers or school administrators. It is part of their overall strategy to change how our society perceives homosexual behavior. But the Day of Silence is a misnomer, because what is truly being silenced is the Truth.

This is being touted as a peaceful and respectful event, despite its clear message of damnation. I always felt that such actions were fundamentally unchristian. (Huh... ironic wording there.) Part of the whole, "throw the first stone" thing.

But the argument is that, if the liberal side can have their voice, shouldn't conservatives also have their voice? It's an interesting question. I want to say, yeah, you're entitled to your opinion, but you don't need to be hate-mongering. Then again, why should folks be forced to accept that homosexuality is okay, when so many obviously feel that it's morally wrong?

In the end, this is a matter of deeply debated personal opinion, much like the abortion debate. On the one hand, folks are saying, "Don't limit my liberty!" while the other side shouts back, "But it's wrong!" I personally take the Catholic line on this, which holds that, although homosexual acts are wrong, God made people homosexual, and you can't fault them for being who they are.

I think that much of the conservative argument presumes that homosexuality is a choice. This is really an outdated belief, debunked by years of psychological research. While I can understand their desire to uphold morality in a world which seems to be overly accepting of sinful acts, I can't condone the aggressive marginalization of a group you don't understand.

So, in summary:

Day of Silence = good
Day of Truth = bad

Recycle Yourself

Are you an organ donor? Are you sure?


Organ donation... more than just a pipe dream.

Okay, so bad puns aside, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you should strongly consider becoming an organ donor... after you die, that is, not while you're still using them. Seriously, what good are your organs going to do you when you're dead? It's not like you're going to use them any more.

I know that some folks have religious reasons for not donating. The rest of you should have every religious reason to donate. Let's talk about some lame excuses:

1. The thought of it is icky.
You'll be dead. If you don't donate your organs, they'll just disintegrate into a gooey mess. Now that's icky. Save your organs from certain gooeyness! Stick them in someone else's body.

2. I want to have an open casket at my funeral.
What? Are you going for one of those nude burials? Organ donation is a surgical process. They're even good enough to close up any and all incisions. Trust me, no one will know the difference.

3. Doctors are in it to make money off of selling my body parts.
First, that's completely illegal. Second, there is no black market for organs, not even kidneys, contrary to urban legend.
Third, don't be stupid.

4. I don't want to pay for it.
To quote the ever obnoxious Carrot Top, "It's free for you, and cheap for them." Okay, it's not really "cheap for them," and I apologize for the corporate promotion. But it's totally free for you. Totally.

5. I'm too old/unhealthy. No one would want my organs.
Do you realize how bad the organ shortage is? This bad. As of right (6:17 CT), there are 88,067 folks on the waiting list. That, dear friends, is not a small number.

Do it. Having it put on your driver's license is a good thing and is legally binding in some states. Regardless, it's a great idea to put it in your living will and discuss it with your loved ones so that they know. The rules say that if the family says no, then there can't be an organ donation, even if the deceased really wanted it. Okay? I'm done.

Diversion of the Day: Google Maps

Okay, I'm totally bummed about losing my nice long serious post, so you get a short amusement post today:

Google Maps, now with satellite photography!


Keeping an eye on old George W, 'cause he's keeping an eye on me.

Google now offers stalkers a new found capability. George C (not W) pointed out that you can really only stalk things the size of buildings... but I'm ignoring that and saying that this is somewhat creepy although super cool. I can see my house from here!

The system was down

For those of you who have been checking up on the old Nuclear Fleem Reactor in the past few days, the system was down. There was apparently some sort of malfunction secondary to their now "recover post" function, which works via cookies, but not the tasty kind. A casualty of the event was a lovely little book review I'd written, which I will try to recreate in a few days when the frustration wears off. But you'll be happy to know that I've recovered my post-capability. Update is imminent.

Assorted amusements

Okay, so a loyal reader pointed out that my blog has looked more like an obituary column as of late, so to lighten things up, some amusements:

Addicting Games -- take them at their word, folks. These games are danged addicting.

Busted Tees -- Wacky T-shirts. My personal favorites are the Aweso shirt and Jesus Shaves. I should probably warn that there's some offensive-type language there, but the shirts are still amusing.

Homestar Runner -- Dude, I know. It's linked over on the right (see "Links"). But in case you have yet to enjoy this internet phenomenon, do check it out. Probably the cream of the crop are the Strong Bad Emails, though admittedly, some of the humor is lost without some familiarity with the Characters. Some fleem reactor sbemail favorites: Japanese Cartoon, Dragon, Caffeine, and Radio.

There... I was thinking about another serious post about a very interesting book I've just finished, but I'll hold off so that we don't too bogged down in serious discussion, yeah? Enjoy the amusements.

Requiescat in pace

Pope John Paul II died on Saturday. I heard the news en route to a wedding. It was quite possibly the most acutely aware I have ever been of the dichotomy of human emotion. As if to further cleave my soul in two: Yesterday, my baby learned how to giggle. Today, I came across some truly heartbreaking photos of mourning Catholics. Some of the more poignant ones from around the world:

From CNN:









From Notre Dame:




Looking over these pictures has placed me in the nadir of my emotional sine wave of recent days. I will likely reach the other extreme upon reviewing recent additions to Gabi's blog. I suppose it's really a good thing to have such joy in my life to truly bring my sense of mourning into perspective.

The world mourns his passing (see pictures above). Not everyone, mind you, but I think that most of us will. I mean not to sanctify the man... that will probably come later. There are just so many reasons why I can't abide efforts to tarnish his legacy at this time. It makes my blood boil. The man made mistakes, as all men do, but the world has lost a great spiritual leader--I believe its greatest. Have you no respect for those who have devoted their lives to doing more than sitting back and pointing out the shortcomings of others from the comfort of our computer desks?

I am a Catholic, tried and true. I went to Catholic grade school, high school, and even attended the University of Notre Dame. I've never been one to take the church's decrees without some questioning and introspection, and as such, I doubt I'd have made a very good priest. But thinking about the passing of one who proudly bore the mantle of Catholicism with all the weight of its sometimes outdated traditions has made me rethink my spirituality. I'd hope that it would have a similar effect on all citizens of the world community.

John Paul II was a champion of humanity. Though he caught a great deal of flak for a few controversial statements of company policy (e.g. last year's odd stance on PVS), I don't think that such deep philosophy of religion was ever his strongest suit. He ought to be rightly remembered for his concern for human rights and social justice, not for the fact that he represented "the establishment" of a church which is unfailingly conservative and often behind the times regarding science. Given time, I think the Catholic Church will come about as the last one across the line in the race for scientific understanding. I recall a little tiff the church had with a fellow named Galileo... and to my knowledge, Catholics are now allowed to accept that the world is round and that it orbits the sun.

I know that those who would urge us to now reconsider what we remember about this hero of our times are a small, but annoyingly vocal minority. Allow me to veer this reactor to the right to say that the world needs more spiritual heroes like him. It's folks who dole out criticism for the sake of criticism who give liberals a bad name. And I like liberals.

Anyway... to Pope John Paul II. Requiescat in pace.