The Ring

More (more!) on Paris Hilton and her ginormous engagement ring (for which she has nothing but my undying pity):

HILTON WEIGHED DOWN BY RING

Celebrity socialite Paris Hilton is regretting picking out such an expensive engagement ring because her weighty cluster of diamonds is hurting her delicate finger.

The problem is reportedly so bad, Hilton's shipping heir fiance Paris Latsis has brought her a plain band engagement ring for everyday wear.

A source tells American magazine Us Weekly, "(Hilton) started complaining how heavy her 24-carat ring was and that her finger hurt so (Latsis) got her a more manageable diamond-less platinum
Cartier band."

Music on the Internet

So I read this article today, which suggests that the album may soon be on the way out. Frankly, I truly doubt this is so. I have a feeling that people have been predicting the death of the album since about 1964. But the author makes an interesting point, which is that the music business, and musicians more specifically, have not adjusted well to the Internet Age. And that's kind of counterintuitive at first, because one think that we associate strongly with the internet is mp3's and song-swapping on Napster or whatever. But think about it - those things are a product of the fan base and bootleggers, not of the industry and the artists themselves. The music industry, instead, revolves around making an album, promoting it, touring to support it, and then returning to the studio. This means the a given artist is in the spotlight only for a short time before falling off the face of the earth, sometimes for years.

So this author says that maybe the solution for music on the internet is to make it more similar to news or television sites - provide constant material, and music on the internet will thrive. This, in turn, would kill the album, because someone who's putting out 50 internet singles a year simply won't have the time, or the motivation, to produce albums. But, as I stated above, I really don't see this happening. I could be wrong, but I think most musicians are perfectionists, at least to a degree, and they simply wouldn't have the temperment to just dash off songs and stick them online for anyone to hear. Sure, some would be gems, and some would have a lot of work put into them. But others would be junk. And I think the average artist wouldn't be happy with that.

On the other hand, I think for certain artists, this could work. Take someone like Ryan Adams. This year, he has three albums scheduled for release, two of which (I believe) are double albums. So we're probably talking about somewhere in the 50 song range, total. Now, imagine that, instead, he made one really good album (even a one double-album) and then released the remainder of the songs on a biweekly basis. Yes, he'd probably sell less albums in the short term, but he'd make up for it in constant exposure. Every couple weeks, you'd likely see a short review somewhere of the latest internet single. And that could help his career in the long-term.
Anyway, an interesting article.

Bats

Here's a cool article comparing old-time baseball bats to the more modern variety.

Anti-Terrorism

So the bad news is that London increasingly seems to be under seige by Islamic terrorists. The good news is that their latest attempts haven't been successful. Three cheers to the brave London policemen who killed the latest attempted bomber! The story indicates that they shot him at extremely close range - it takes a lot of balls to get that close to a man with explosives strapped to him. Not to mention the good police-work of identifying him in the first place.

UPDATE: So it now appears that the police killed a completely innocent man. That means that pretty much everything I said above is incorrect - they actually did a poor job identifying the man and shot him without any real evidence that he was up to anything illegal.

Here's to hoping that the police take steps to prevent this sort of tragedy from occurring again.

Scotty!

Sad news - James Doohan, Star Trek's Scotty, passed away today.

Doohan was an impressive man off-screen. I already knew about his WWII service, but it's worth repeating:

At 19, James escaped the turmoil at home by joining the Canadian army, becoming a lieutenant in artillery. He was among the Canadian forces that landed on Juno Beach on D-Day. "The sea was rough," he recalled. "We were more afraid of drowning than the Germans."

The Canadians crossed a minefield laid for tanks; the soldiers weren't heavy enough to detonate the bombs. At 11:30 that night, he was machine-gunned, taking six hits: one that took off his middle right finger (he managed to hide the missing finger on screen), four in his leg and one in the chest. The chest bullet was stopped by his silver cigarette case.

I didn't already know that his, ahem, child-producing skills were likewise impressive:

Doohan's first marriage to Judy Doohan produced four children. He had two children by his second marriage to Anita Yagel. Both marriages ended in divorce. In 1974 he married Wende Braunberger, and their children were Eric, Thomas and Sarah, who was born in 2000, when Doohan was 80.

Dr. Roberts, J.D.

So, from what I've read so far, the President's nomination of John Roberts to the the Supreme Court appears to be the most sensible pick we could hope for. I have to say that I'm surprised and relieved. It looks like the Democrats' tenacity in fighting judicial nominees may have paid off big time.

Of course, to be safe, let me note that I'm reserving final judgment for now.

Mine's Not A High Horse (Anymore)

So you may remember a post of mine from a long, long time ago about how, since I'm an atheist, I don't like being pressured into participating in religious activities, and how I'll try very hard to avoid doing so. How hard? Well, judging by this past weekend, not very.

My grandmother was being honored upon her retirement for her 25 years of service to the Synagogue where she worked. This involved a kiddush luncheon and also several mentions of her in the service, including the participation of her, her daughters, and (you guessed it!) her grandsons.

So my brother, two cousins, and I got to go up and dress the Torah (I'm sure that's not what it's called, but it's an accurate description), each of us decked out in a yarmulke and tallit. Four non-Bar Mitvah'd Jewish boys faking it (and not very convincingly). Did I feel like a fraud? Yes. Did my grandma just about plotz (explode)? You betcha. And in the end, that's why I don't really feel bad about it.

The worst part of the service, actually, came when the cantor paraded the Torah around the sanctuary before placing it back in the ark. He stopped briefly at each row and the congregants reached out to touch the Torah. When he got to me, I stood stock-still for what seemed like an eternity, with the cantor glaring at me, before he moved on. Thing is, the adulation people were showing for the Torah just seemed inappropriate (isn't idolatry, like, totally forbidden in the Ten Commandments?). I mean, I'm no Talmudic scholar or nothing, but I totally was not buying the argument in the English-language section of the prayer book that this sort of thing was different from idol-worship. I can understand considering holy the words in the Torah, but not the book itself.

Finally, I have to say that I kinda enjoyed the sermon (or whatever you call it) that the Rabbi gave. Partly, it was because the Rabbi emphasized that the Torah is not to be understood literally, something that I think a lot of people seem to forget nowadays. Secondly, I actually kind of enjoy all of those Mosiac stories. Maybe it's just because they resemble history (and, in fact, may actually be history, albeit with some, uh let's say, embellishments).

All You Need is Rove

I don't have a lot to add to the whole Valerie Plame thing. Karl Rove should resign or be fired, but I doubt that will happen. It's extremely doubtful that his leak was an accident, and it certainly wasn't done for the greater good. But Bush will probably keep him anyway.

But one thing that continues to puzzle me is the whole controversy over Time magazine handing over Matt Cooper's notes. Time had to choose between the law and the principle of maintaining confidentiality. Jacob Weisberg does a very good job in this article defending Time's decision, because, with all due respect to Judy Miller and the New York Times, there's no such thing as a right to maintain confidential sources, at least not at the federal level. And the reason is to avoid cases like this, where confidentiality aided in the comission of a crime. So there's not really a choice here, unless journalists think that they're above the law. But frankly, that's a really bad precedent to be setting. How, then, do you decide who's a "journalist"? And how do you prevent other professions from claiming similar rights?

Judging Non-Judgmentalism

One of the things that bothered me so much about the period right after 9/11 is how often you heard someone on the left say "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" or some such thing. They said it as if it were a profound thought. But really, it was a cliché standing in for a failure to make a moral judgment. Yes, yes, "judge not ...," but failure is the right word. What sort of world would we live in were we all to abdicate the responsibility to tell the difference between right and wrong?

I bring this up because following the bombing in London, we've been hearing some of the same moral abdication from the left again. See this post for some examples. What make this so abhorrent is that these same leftists who are too sophisticated to judge terrorists have no such problem when it comes to Wal-Mart, Karl Rove, or Imperialism. So then, either they just don't think terrorism is that big of a deal, or they don't think it's wrong. Either way, that's a huge blindspot, and a big part of the reason that Kerry lost the election.

On a related note, apparently Oliver Stone is directing a movie about 9/11. That this is a terrible idea almost goes without saying, but if you're not convinced, read this.

Lawnmower Update

Oh, so it turns out that I'm not incompetent. The lawnmower engine was defective - it wasn't pulling gas from the tank. So it would start when primed but wouldn't keep going. My father-in-law and I returned the mower to Sears and got a replacement on Sunday.

Score one for the city boy.

Public Prayer

So Annie and I were having a very nice time at her aunt and uncle's 4th of July party when it suddenly came time to say grace before dinner. The 50 or so people gathered around the pool and took hands and her uncle said some things.

Annie and I, both being atheists, decided to stay inside and not participate. I, in particular, think that it's disrespectful to participate in religious ceremonies if you are an unbeliever, so when I do have to I make sure to neither actively participate nor be disruptive. For instance, at a church wedding, funeral, or baptism, I'll bow my head, but I won't repeat the prayers or even say "Amen." After all, I'm pretty sure that if God does exist, he doesn't want me faking it.

Anyway, after the prayer had started, our absence must have been noticed, and so Annie's dad came inside and pretty much told us that we were being rude by not participating. Not wanting to cause a scene, we sheepishly went outside and took our place in the circle, with 100 eyes trained on us. The prayer then continued and concluded by singing "God Bless America." Annie and I pretended to sing along. Annie and I both felt sufficiently chastened that the remainder of the evening was marred.

This sort of thing is exactly why I absolutely abhor the idea of government sponsored prayer. Look at what happens when peer pressure is brought to bear against unbelievers. Imagine the greater coercion and imposition on free-will if the pressure is exerted by government.

But I'm also confused, frankly. Why is it that Christians often want to compel the participation of unbelievers or heretics? I mean, isn't part of the point of Christianity that you freely except it and embrace Jesus Christ as your savior? Someone who has been coerced into participating isn't exactly letting Jesus into his heart, now is he?

Maybe this just can't except the idea that someone sincerely does not believe, and that such a belief can be as sincere as that of someone who does believe. Maybe they think of the prayer as a communal, not a religious, activity. But then why must it have religious content?

I truly don't have the answers to these questions. I can only hope that people of faith can come to respect those of us who live moral lives, but do not abide by any particular creed.

SCOTUS

So Sandra Day O'Connor is retiring, paving way for the President to nominate someone who's idea of the perfect social order is Alabama, circa 1950. The Senate will then descend into the chaos (remember that judicial compromise? - out the window). Democrats will try to block the nomination by any means necessary. Frist will scream "obstruction" (how dare the opposition party disagree with the majority!) and threaten to go nuclear. In the end, Bush will likely win and get his social ultra-conservative. Girls in Mississippi will have to start driving to Illinois for their abortions.

But amid all of this doomsaying, I think that we liberals ought to focus on some very important. What's that, you ask? Blame. In other words, who's fault is this mess? Oh, I'm sure there are lots of candidates - Tom Daschle and John Kerry, for being lousy leaders; James Dobson and Ralph Reed, for being such social neanderthals; President Bush, for tricking us all into believing in 2000 that he was a moderate.

But the real blame in my book has to go to Ralph Nader. Remember? The asshole who cost Al Gore the election? Yeah, without him, Gore would be President, and we could look forward to a nice moderate liberal to replace O'Connor, a nice moderate conservative.

Oh, you might say, Nader's hardly the real culprit here, and besides you're just kicking a guy who's already down. To which I answer, maybe and sure, but so what?, respectively. Progressives decided in 2000 that Clinton and Gore were some sort of crazed arch-conservatives in disguise, rather than the best liberal leaders since JFK. So they deliberately torpedoed Gore in order to get Bush in 2000, and then hopefully a "real" progressive in 2004. But it all failed miserably.

So now we just have to sit and wait for Bush to nominate his ultra and wait for the fireworks to begin.

Exam, Part 2

So I got back my exam that I took on Tuesday, and as I thought, I got 41 out of 50, a low B. However, everyone found the test hard, and so the the highest grade was a 45, and the professor grades on a curve. Plus, she decided one of the questions was vague, and so adjusted the scores of those who got it wrong.

In the end, then, I got a 42 out of 45 - 93%. So now I'm no longer worried about getting an A overall. And next week I only have two nights of class - Monday is a holiday and Thursday I have a flight to catch. These two things combined mean that I can relax and not worry about school this weekend.