Elimaan: So what Sam quoted
Elimaan: was the actual amendment proposed
Elimaan: but Bush's speech
Elimaan: on the other hand says
Elimaan: The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage.
Elimaan: which is leaving the door open for civil unions with equal rights, which is why Kerry agreed with him
Elimaan: btw, what Kerry did was a politically smart move, which was to say that he would vote no for a constitutional amendment but vote yes for a state amendment for Mass. with the same wording
Elimaan: which means he looks like he's bashing Bush while simultaneously garnering votes

Flutekw: ah, I see. but it still doesn't do anything about requiring states to accept the unions created in other states. Wouldn't that be a serious problem, if a union was created in a liberal state, then the couple moved somewhere like TX? It seems like it'd cause huge headaches if there are substantially different standards developed by each state/county

Elimaan: you can argue about that problem separately :-) my point was to counter your original point :-)
Elimaan: that is, his speech was actually more middle-of-the-road than it appears

Elimaan: i think a lot of people say "how could bush say that, i won't vote for him' but not realize that Kerry said the exact same thing
------
Ok, Eli, you win on that one. And I grant that my cultural institution remarks don't have much bearing on this situation... but I still think there are going to be plenty of headaches if different places develop their own standards for civil unions.

Thanks to Sam:
http://www.npr.org/display_pages/features/feature_1694774.html
Proposed Constitutional Amendment

U.S. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) has proposed an amendment banning gay marriages. The text follows:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."

SamLindsayLevine: as far as I can tell, Eli was incorrect when he stated that it allowed for civil unions, since it explicitly says nobody can require that "the legal incidents [of marriage] be conferred upon unmarried couples".
SamLindsayLevine: besides, we all know how well the doctrine of "seperate but equal" has worked before

The legal benefits of union are what I'm most concerned about. Frankly, I think there's no way in hell religious/social conservatives would allow a gay couple's union to be called marriage, as they would view it as blasphemous and an abomination. At the same time, there was a person in the editorial section today who commented that denying any couple marriage also denied them not only legal but social benefits too. What kind of status would a 'union' have in a community, as opposed to a 'marriage'? Would "Just United" carry the same weight as "Just Married"? Besides, if marriage is strictly confined to a union conducted in a church or between two members of a specific religion, that label serves to differentiate the religious from the non-religious, effectively opening the door for discrimination.

Think about that for a minute. Doesn't that potentially open the door to a theocracy? Would a 'united' presidential candidate stand a snowball's chance in hell of being elected? What about 'united' Congressmen and other elected officials? Christians are something like the majority of the country's population, I think - someone correct me if I'm wrong. Although many people are tolerant of different religions and lifestyles, I don't believe that religious affiliation and sexual orientation are things that should be broadcast to everyone on job application forms, background checks, legal documents, etc - those two topics are so divisive that they could provoke discrimination. Aren't those two of the topics banned from job interviews? (Other ones are marital status, health, future family plans, and the like) Hate to say it, but Sam's right - this opens up a whole 'nother can of worms.

-sigh- Of all the issues recently, this is going to be one of the most divisive... even though people should be focusing on other issues as well. I don't see an easy solution at hand; this one may take decades to resolve.

Eli's raised some thought-provoking objections (see below). If anyone knows where I can find the actual amendment text, please alert me. Here are his thoughts, and a few responses:

Elimaan: hmm, based on your blog entry, maybe you should re-read his speech and re-evaluate your arguments, considering how Kerry agreed with the speech in most aspects and how Bush's speech is entirely about the use of the word 'marriage': most political analysts agree that his speech is very middle of the road for this time of election year in that his proposed amendment would allow civil unions and permit them to have the same privileges as marriage: the only thing it would limit is terminology (a civil union would not allowed to be called a marriage, but would be entitled to the same rights). This is essentially a re-iteration of Clinton's view when he signed the Defense of Marriage Act back in 1996.

**Where is the amendment text? I've been reading the LA Times nearly every day for the past month, and haven't seen anything about the actual text yet. Also, I'd heard that Kerry was the one considering making all 'marriages' civil unions, in effect taking religion out of government, and allowing churches to confer the title of 'marriage' to couples.

Elimaan: Also, cultural arguments such as "harems exist" are not good arguments, since there are plenty of examples of cultural habits that are extremely negative, such as the Indian custom (before British colonization) of burning a wife alive after her husband died, or the African Ibo tribe's tradition of killing twins (twins were believed to be inherently evil). Unless you're simultaneously arguing for the legalization of polygamy, you should re-evaluate your arguments.

**Perhaps I should wait to post arguments until I have sufficient time to consider them, like my history essays. You have a point - not all cultural institutions are beneficial - but the reason why I emphasized the berdache was because it seemed almost a direct analogy. You have a man who's clearly a homosexual; yet instead of being ostracized, he's encouraged and often considered to be very powerful (many took on spiritual duties). He's even 'beneficial' to the society - he often looks after children, in addition to doing the typical women's work. The only way he does not contribute is through reproduction - and that's arguably a good thing, since Native American tribes in California tended to run through their resources fairly quickly, then move to another locale and repeat.

(As for the harem argument - yes, I should've thought about it and deleted that reference. Note that I didn't try to support it later, either. That comes from trying to think after being up for a long time.)

Elimaan: P.S. I think it was pretty clear to most people that when he said "of civilization" he implicitly meant "of western civilization", and when you say that "it's only the Catholic/Christian worldview that finds this totally unnerving and aberrant - NOT the entire US" recent polls show that over 70% of US citizens agree with the wording of the amendment proposed, hence why it was a good political move for him to make it and a good poltiical move for Kerry to say he agreed to it..... if this speech convinced you not to vote for him, does that imply that Kerry is not a valid candidate in your opinion either?

**Could you refer me to where you read about those poll numbers? I'd honestly like to read that article, and the amendment wording. I thought I had the facts straight before I commented, but I'm certainly willing to reconsider if I was ill-informed. I usually try to believe the best in people - even politicians - and so I was shocked and fairly irate when I read and interpreted that speech, since it seemed so intolerant.

This speech was more like the final straw than a pivotal issue. I've been reading a lot about the election in the LA Times in the last month, as well as looking over Kerry's site (and Edward's too) and I feel that both of them represent my views better than Bush by a long shot. However, since my parents are both conservative and are pro-Bush, I felt somewhat wrong in expressing an anti-Bush opinion... but what I read into this speech was the suppression of rights and liberties of another minority, and I cannot in good conscience vote for someone who believes that is the correct thing to do. If Bush is pro-civil unions for *everyone*, where civil unions include all the present benefits of marriage, and 'marriage' becomes an extra title conferred by a church/synagogue/whatever to a couple who has the civil union ceremony performed in a religious facility or who are members of a religion - then that's fine with me. Like I said, as long as equal rights are extended to all, then I'm content.

...but I'll probably still vote for the Democrat.

Stolen from Tyson's site:

Why Gay Marriage Should Not Be Legalized

1.Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control.

2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can't legally get married because the world needs more children.

3. Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage is allowed, since Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

5. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of the minorities.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

10. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to things like cars or longer lifespans.

12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages for gays and lesbians will

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/24/elec04.prez.bush.transcript/index.html

First of all, I'd like to say that this speech already steps over the line, simply because of its complete lack of tolerance for a severely persecuted minority. These people are not monsters; they are humans whose sexual orientation is in all likelihood determined by genetics and other factors before birth. I feel that the 'compassionate conservatives' continually forget this when they pen scathing articles against them, and insist upon barring them from the rights which are allowed to all other citizens.

What was the insult to injury were Bush's examples...
"After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization. " [Emphasis my own]

Excuse me; of civilization? There are plenty of examples of non-1 woman/1 man arrangements! What about the berdache, the men who lived and acted as women, even in relationships, in various California Indian tribes before the Spanish arrived? What about the harems of the middle East? Both of those groups certainly fall in the realm of civilization. I think Bush needs an anthrolopology course before he starts defining civilization as only those groups who keep to one of many forms of relationships.

"The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught humanity that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. "

Yes, and the berdache were also accepted and strongly encouraged! They were seen as *people*, not horrid aberrations - that's why. I'm not certain where the origin arose, but these few were even seen as particularly special and powerful, since they represented a fusion of male and female energies. It's only when the Spanish Catholics showed up and implanted the mission systems that the berdache were brutally put down, often with violence. Ergo, it's only the Catholic/Christian worldview that finds this totally unnerving and aberrant - NOT the entire US. Not by a long shot.

Thanks, Bush. You've finally convinced me not to vote for you. I cannot in good conscience tolerate someone in a high official office who believes that other people, who are kind, decent, and a damn sight more intelligent than him in many cases, should not be allowed to share in the rights and priveleges allowed to every other citizen of the US. This is patently ridiculous.

After reading this speech, I am almost ashamed to call myself an American citizen.

Wow, yesterday was powerfully... something.

I like to think that I'm generally less bitchy than the majority of women. And most of the time, I make a sincere effort to be accomodating and understanding of others.

Unfortunately, yesterday was not one of those days. Perhaps it was the combination of stress and lots of demands on my time, but I definitely felt like I was in bitch mode. :( D&D was ok; my character's torn between caring for her presently-mentally retarded sister and continuing to aid the others in the day to day skirmishes of the rebellion. I can't imagine that it's fun for Abby to be playing a creature with the intelligence of a lizard, but feeling like my character should be responsible and find a solution to this well-nigh impossible problem (and watch over her in the meantime) is really hard. The only way to remove it will be to go through a high level wizard or druid; both of them are going to ask a high price. Frankly, I'd rather pay nearly ANY wizard than try to bargain with that druid we met last week. I have the feeling that his price will be that we leave the party and return to 'normal' druid lives - ie Lyra goes back to be Markham's village wise woman. That's really unacceptable for me (and for her), but I have the feeling it'll be a question of who takes priority in Lyra's mind: herself and the cause, or her sister, her only living relative. Talk about internal struggles... but we'll see.

At least the guys pulled off a great kidnapping of the Duke without really needing Lyra. It looks like she would've just gotten in the way... but even Ethan, who really led to the ultimate botching of the last mission, got to go in! I want to whine about how it's not fair, but that's life. I guess there'll be other battles, but I really was not enthused about babysitting the hostage and retarded mountain lion while everyone else went off to have fun. >:(

After D&D - Katie and Luigi were nice enough to make some yummy enchiladas. They were really terrific, and I'm slowly discovering the merits of beer with lime imbibed with mexican food. Unfortunately, I haven't got the trick of throwing in the lime and not spilling a drop, and I've been known to accidentally knock over drinks on more than one occasion... and a few people made smart comments. Those stung more than they should have, probably because of the not-so-great session immediately beforehand. I hate having emotions so close to the surface. Sam's occasionally remarked that I tend to take things more personally than I should (witness Real Nominations when I was Secretary); I know it's a fault, and I do try to insulate myself so that careless remarks don't get me down. But it's not second nature yet, and some days are worse than others.

This became exceptionally clear when I was sitting in winds rehearsal from 7-9:30. (more like 9:50) We spent a good 30-40 minutes working over TEN MEASURES with the damned brass who couldn't get their act together. Why bother keeping the woodwinds?? What good do we do, just sitting there?! At least I'd brought some work with me, so I wasn't just sitting there getting upset - I did manage to finish my German. It just irks me that we spent 40 minutes waiting patiently for the brass to get their heads around a little music... and then he LETS THEM GO EARLY!!! *AND* we had to stay an EXTRA TWENTY MINUTES AFTER! Where the hell is the fairness in that?? I've had the music down for some time, but I don't get to go early - and the brass who clearly haven't spent much time thinking about it get to spend less time on it!? I was pissed. I'm afraid I scared Harlan with my ranting. It's great to have him in my section - he's always so upbeat about things, and he tried to be soothing and point out that sometimes it's the woodwinds who have difficulties. I still say the brass consistently have more problems with their music, and I believe this has been the case ever since I was a freshman. -sigh-

Then, of course, it was time to study and take my SS 13 midterm. :( It was not happy. I didn't know what one question was asking (Involuntary Swings?! What? - Lucie said today she thought it was a typo. Well, shit.); I'd only briefly skimmed the article another question focused on; couldn't remember problems inherent in current and constant dollar calculations for national income estimtates. Well, bugger.

At least this morning held a light at the end of the tunnel. Not only was the lecture on politics and manipulation of voting outcomes very interesting, I talked with Davis after class. I expressed concern over my last midterm, and was about to mention p/fing the class, when he said that he would certainly raise my grade a little because of the excellent contributions I made in class. He claims that I ask really good questions and it's a relief to have someone like that in class, since many other techers don't bother to contribute in hums/SSs. At least that's positive. Maybe I shouldn't p/f the class... we'll see when I get that 2nd midterm back on Wednesday.

And now, it's time to polish up german translations.

Unrelated: I love mornings. Everything seems so fresh and bright, even if it's overcast.

Wow, what a day.

Got up late, had some cereal. The director of medieval studies over at Notre Dame called earlier today; I didn't really know what to expect, other than something akin to a phone interview. Instead, it felt like he was nearly begging me to come, touting the merits of ND and its funding. At one point, he even said that they were thrilled to see another scientist-turned-historian because that usually meant 1) excellent analytical skills and 2) real intelligence. I feel like they really want me. Wow. That's really new - college admissions wasn't like that at all for me. UT didn't give a damn, neither did Rice; Caltech deferred me and didn't bother to call when I was admitted, like they did with the other female admittees. I've never had someplace offer me money to attend. Full fellowship? Stipend?? What?! I felt dazed.

Not only that, but the medieval studies department has *loads* of money for travel, summer work, conference trips, you name it... AND they're considering an increase in the stipend that comes with the full fellowship. Yikes. o.O

This is a far cry from UCLA's severe lack of funds for its history department. Add this to Geary's remarks when I spoke with him last December:
1) If a college really wants you, they'll offer you money to go and take an interest in you, including calling you, email, etc.
2) UCLA rarely funds its first-year grad students in humanities, since there's simply not much money for these areas. With the budget problems CA's having, and from Schwarzenegger's last budget, grad student fees were set to increase on the order of 30-40%... and there will be less financial aid awarded. UCLA's looking like a bleaker and bleaker place to be a grad student, even with Geary and other fabulous historians in their dept. :(

I feel torn - I'd really hoped to go to UCLA or Princeton, where I figured I'd be nearby at least some of my friends from Caltech. South Bend's kind of out in the middle of nowhere in Indiana. But the money... god, I hate to say it, but not being in debt for $20k after my first year would be really, really nice. And things are less expensive there. AND they're in essence paying me to attend, with that stipend above and beyond my tuition and fees.

It's not just the money. Notre Dame's a great school - it's actually the only place I'd applied to their medieval institute, instead of their history dept. The difference is the breadth of education: the history dept focuses only on history, while med. studies is a much more interdisciplinary program, incorporating not only history but literature, languages, art, anthro - you name it. It's more concerned with developing a cluster of interests in a time period rather than a specific interest, and presenting a range of approaches to problems. In other words, it sounds very appealing. And Tom Noble sounds like a really nice fellow, though I'll soon be in contact with his mentees and get another view of the institute and Noble.

I just don't know what to do.

When it rains, it pours...

Notre Dame admitted me! Hooray!
-----------
Dear Ms. Welge,


I write to say that our admissions committee has voted to admit you and to
offer you a full fellowship. I would like to have chance to talk with you
and provide you with some details and useful information...

Best wishes,

TN

This should make you think.
from http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/rsirelease.html
-----
February 18, 2004

Preeminent Scientists Protest Bush Administration's Misuse of Science
Nobel Laureates, National Medal of Science Recipients, and Other Leading
Researchers Call for End to Scientific Abuses

Washington, D.C.—Today, more than 60 leading scientists—including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents—issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels.
“Across a broad range of issues, the administration has undermined the quality of the scientific advisory system and the morale of the government’s outstanding scientific personnel,” said Dr. Kurt Gottfried, emeritus professor of physics at Cornell University and Chairman of the Union of Concerned Scientists. “Whether the issue is lead paint, clean air or climate change, this behavior has serious consequences for all Americans.”

“Science, to quote President Bush's father, the former president, relies on freedom of inquiry and objectivity,” said Russell Train, head of the Environmental Protection Agency under Nixon and Ford, who joined the scientists in calling for action. “But this administration has obstructed that freedom and distorted that objectivity in ways that were unheard of in any previous administration.”

The statement notes that while scientific input to the government is rarely the only factor in public policy decisions, this input should be weighed from an objective and impartial perspective. However, the administration of George W. Bush has disregarded this principle.

“The Earth system follows laws which scientists strive to understand,” said Dr. F. Sherwood Rowland a Nobel laureate in chemistry. “The public deserves rational decisionmaking based on the best scientific advice about what is likely to happen, not what political entities might wish to happen.”

“We are not simply raising warning flags about an academic subject of interest only to scientists and doctors,” said Dr. Neal Lane, a former director of the National Science Foundation and a former Presidential Science Advisor. “In case after case, scientific input to policymaking is being censored and distorted. This will have serious consequences for public health.”

In conjunction with the statement, the Union of Concerned Scientists today released a report Scientific Integrity in Policymaking that investigates numerous allegations in the scientists’ statement involving censorship and political interference with independent scientific inquiry at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Interior and Defense.

One example cited in the statement and report involves the suppression of an EPA study that found the bipartisan Senate Clear Air bill would do more to reduce mercury contamination in fish and prevent more deaths than the administration's proposed Clear Skies Act. “This is akin to the White House directing the National Weather Service to alter a hurricane forecast because they want everyone to think we have clear skies ahead,” said Kevin Knobloch, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists “The hurricane is still coming, but without factual information no one will be ready for it.”

Comparing President Bush with his father, George H.W. Bush and former president Richard M. Nixon, the statement warned that had these former presidents similarly dismissed science in favor of political ends, over 200,000 deaths and millions of respiratory and cardiovascular disease cases would not have been prevented with the signing of the original Clean Air Act and the 1990 amendments to that Act.

The statement demands that the Bush administration’s “distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends must cease” and calls for Congressional oversight hearings, guaranteed public access to government scientific studies and other measures to prevent such abuses in the future. The statement further calls on the scientific, engineering and medical communities to work together to reestablish scientific integrity in the policymaking process.

# # #
Among the statement signers are:

Philip W. Anderson*†
David Baltimore*†
Paul Berg*†
Lewis Branscomb
Thomas Eisner*
Jerome Friedman†
Richard Garwin*
Walter Kohn*†
Neal Lane
Leon Lederman*†
Mario Molina†
W.K.H. Panofsky*
F. Sherwood Rowland†
J. Robert Schrieffer*†
Richard Smalley†
Harold E. Varmus*†
Steven Weinberg*†
E.O. Wilson*

* National Medal of Science
† Nobel laureate

Hooray!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Ms. Welge:


On behalf of UCLA, it is my pleasure to extend to you an official offer of admission to the Graduate Division. Our graduate programs attract an exceptionally qualified and talented group of applicants and the selection process is rigorous and highly competitive. Your selection for admission is a recognition of your academic accomplishments and potential for advanced scholarship. I wish to add my personal congratulations to those of your family and friends.

Wow, what a weekend.

Saturday: Played a lot, waltzed (and tried to polka) with Sam. It was fun.

Sunday: Left for Vegas with Pat, Abby and Sam. Saw some of the Strip, walked through the Excalibur, gambled a little (Wild Fruit!).

Monday: Watched in awe as we wagered more money than I'll ever see all together at once on one spin of a roulette wheel... and lost it all. Wow.

At least there are plans to begin recouping those losses, and socteam won't be entirely without a budget. There's hope on the horizon.

Still worrying about grad school/finding a job. According to the Princeton Review quiz:
People with blue Interests like job responsibilities and occupations that involve creative, humanistic, thoughtful, and quiet types of activities. Blue Interests include abstracting, theorizing, designing, writing, reflecting, and originating, which often lead to work in editing, teaching, composing, inventing, mediating, clergy, and writing.

People with yellow styles perform their job responsibilities in a manner that is orderly and planned to meet a known schedule. They prefer to work where things get done with a minimum of interpretation and unexpected change. People with a yellow style tend to be orderly, cautious, structured, loyal, systematic, solitary, methodical, and organized, and usually thrive in a research-oriented, predictable, established, controlled, measurable, orderly environment. You will want to choose a work environment or career path in which your style is welcomed and produces results.


Also, Monster has a neat list of career ideas and descriptions.

Trying not to think about not getting into grad school...

ApolloGirlVIII: http://quizilla.com/users/lurichan/quizzes/Which%20Magic:%20The%20Gathering%20Mana%20Color%20Are%20You%3F/

Auto response from Flutekw: either I've wandered off, or I'm sitting here lost in my thoughts. leave a message, and I'll see it when I return.

ApolloGirlVIII: since you like taking quizzes :-)
--------
Also, because I'm a huge nerd ;)


Your Color is....Green.

Green is the color of large creatures.
You are slow to start, but the power is well worth
the wait.
You have quite a few versatile spells at your
disposal.
Elves are good small creature to play while waiting
for large ones.

Your weakness?
You have no direct damge, and have a difficult time
countering spells.
Please visit
http://www.geocities.com/fallendewdrops/green.jpg
for a larger picture.


Which Magic: The Gathering Mana Color Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

On yesterday: At least good things can come from bad days. Sometimes, venting worries is better than letting them remain within - I hadn't realized how much I was carrying around. I certainly feel much better now. And as always, thanks Sam - I love you.

On Waltz Night: I think we're set! Andrea V's going to stand in as another flutist, which allows the three of us to rotate on different pieces and get in some dancing time. Hooray! I'll get to dance and spend time with Sam on our 1 year anniversary, instead of just playing for 3 hours straight. :)

On Vegas: Leaving Sunday afternoon with Pat, Sam and Abby to get to Vegas in the evening. About 7 of us are sharing 1 room... it'll be interesting for sure! Pat's talking about seeing a show that evening and walking the Strip; The Socteam Event(TM) is occuring at 1 PM in the Monte Carlo. Go black go!

On the Thesis: Scary as always, but tonight I'll tackle one portion of it and enlarge it in detail. I just hope I can produce something up to Brown's standards.

On Grad Schools: No word except for the informal word from Geary. Fingers are crossed, esp. for UCLA and Princeton... and for funding.

Also... http://www.politicalcompass.org/
Economic Left/Right: -2.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.49

Well, at least I'm feeling better about everything...

1) worked ahead a little on Ovid Latin.
2) not having to worry about languages for thesis right now
3) playing waltzes makes everything feel better ;)
4) not worrying quite so much about grad schools/jobs. Still undecided on grad school, but it still seems like fun... especially at UCLA. Princeton seems a little more formal and a little less about creative thinking - seems to be a West vs. East Coast thing. And there's always teaching to fall back on... man, I almost wish I'd tried to do that teaching credentialing that was offered junior/senior year, but I think it would've been a little too much to handle with everything else.

Don't forget: this Saturday is Waltz Night over at Oxy. 8:30-11, Samuelson Pavilion - bring yourself and expect to have a good time! Seriously, it should be fun, so if you don't have anything else to do on Valentine's Day, you should come.

Exhausted. Mondays always hit hard... at least they'll be somewhat better from here on out. I moved the meeting with Brown to 1:30 Fridays, which should help a TON on relieving the stress, and decided to give up the early medieval Latin that I was trying to work through with him. I'm doing better at the Ovid, which is a darn sight harder, so prose should be no problem at all after this class.

Ok, I'm too tired to write. Time for a shower and nap, methinks.

Wow, an Oddly Enough story from my hometown!
-----------------------------------
Woman Strikes Oil in Toilet
1 hour, 58 minutes ago Add Oddly Enough - Reuters to My Yahoo!

DALLAS (Reuters) - An East Texas woman struck oil a strange way when she came home to find her toilet gushing with the bubblin' crude.

Liela LeTourneau returned from her work as a nurse on Monday to find oil gushing out of everything in her house connected to the water drainage lines, including her kitchen sink and toilet.

The floor of her Longview residence was drenched with a thick coating of what locals call "Texas Tea."

Texas state and Longview city officials said on Thursday they believe that a mix-up in sewer lines connected to the house might be the cause of the oil spill.

"There was this black (ooze) coming out from my house. I thought, 'What have I left on? What has my son left on that's spilled over?'" LeTourneau told the local daily Longview News-Journal. She had moved into a rental home due to the oil spill and was not immediately available for comment.

Longview city officials said they believe the trouble was due to the residence being connected to a line used to dispose of saltwater instead of a sewage line. Saltwater disposal lines are used in the oil production process as a conduit to drain off liquids associated with that process -- mostly saltwater.

The saltwater disposal line became backed up, and oil seeped out of that line, turning the LeTourneau home into an oil patch, they said.

"I was always proud to have an oil derrick in my back yard. Every Texan should have one," she told the paper. "Now, I don't know."

It's funny, but all I really want to do these days is create and be artistic. First it was sewing with the cloak and the short-lived TACIT help; recently I got hooked on painting miniatures - I'd done flat-surface and wooden pieces before, but these are awesome. There's so much more detail, plus the different techniques you can use to render cloth vs metal vs skin... I've sunk so much time into it already, on just two figures. (But hey, they're almost done!) Hopefully I'll prime a few more in the next couple days so I have new painting fodder.

Unfortunately, I think I'm getting severely burnt out on orchestra. I hate going way too fast on pieces when it's clear we need to take it slow and see how the different pieces interlock to form the big picture. It goes against EVERYTHING all my teachers ever taught me. If we keep rushing through the whole damn thing, how are we supposed to understand how the piece works together!? Bloody irritating. And Allen... I don't know, it just seems like he's not quite the same. None of us are, I guess, but perhaps it's just him getting older and more irascible. -sigh-

I hate feeling like crap after an orchesra rehearsal, but that's what's been happening recently. It would help if I'd actually practiced beforehand, but I'm still doing ok, and better than some others. I don't play music to feel frustrated; I play it for enjoyment. I was almost feeling that way during this last chamber group - I knew we were capable of more, but we could never get everyone together on the same page, and it seemed like almost no one else really wanted to push to achieve. All right, so I'm competitive. So I want to live up to what I can do. Is that wrong? I don't think so. Hopefully my next group won't think so, either. With luck, we'll be able to get a number of good pieces under our belts and keep the group together for summer gigs, too... that's the hope, anyway. I have Jesse, now if only Robert comes back on bassoon I think we'll be golden.

Thank goodness this is a parody:
http://objective.jesussave.us/creationsciencefair.html

Because were it real, this would make me grind my teeth:

2nd Place: "Women Were Designed For Homemaking"
Jonathan Goode (grade 7) applied findings from many fields of science to support his conclusion that God designed women for homemaking: physics shows that women have a lower center of gravity than men, making them more suited to carrying groceries and laundry baskets; biology shows that women were designed to carry un-born babies in their wombs and to feed born babies milk, making them the natural choice for child rearing; social sciences show that the wages for women workers are lower than for normal workers, meaning that they are unable to work as well and thus earn equal pay; and exegetics shows that God created Eve as a companion for Adam, not as a co-worker.

I think last night falls under 'what not to do while trying to sneak around a castle without getting caught'.

It might also be catalogued as 'When everything goes to hell in a handbasket.'

And best of all - it wasn't Lyra's fault! :)

We'd sent a forward party ahead to scout out the fortifications of the ducal palace of Mardavia. This party consisted of Toes, Melvin, Ethan, Hoon and Lacha - everyone except Lyra, Richard and the army. Lyra's only in contact with Melvin through several minutes of scrying once a night, and that's only one-way contact which he may or may not perceive.

After getting on the back side of the manse, Melvin cast invisibility on Toes, Ethan and himself, did his rope trick (huge invisible interdimensional 'pocket' at the top of a line of rope) and all scrambled up the rope without attracting the notice of the guards (thanks to the feline wiles of Lacha). Melvin made straight for the pocket, while Toes and Ethan crept quietly into the open window of an occupied bedchamber. They made it into the corridor, and began to explore the area, looking for the duke's chambers.

Here arises the problem: this invisibility doesn't last forever. During the shenanigans getting up the wall and in the window, they took at least 5 minutes, leaving them roughly 10 minutes of invisibility time left. Toes was very careful about this, making his way back in time to get to the bedchamber before he began to become opaque.

Ethan, however, completely forgot about this effect (or something). He was quite a ways away from the chamber when he noticed himself turning opaque; he panicked and slipped inside a room that looked like a laboratory **with a person inside**. Having shut the door, and noticing that the person had his back to the door and seemed to be absorbed in the beaker he was holding and muttering something, Ethan tried to grab him and put a knife to his throat.

Bad move. The alchemist/wizard disappears. --Collective "Oh shit" from group-- Ethan looks into the adjacent room, which is a library... then hears a lot of guards jangling this way. He looks out the window - a 15 foot drop to ground level, and another 5 feet down into the moat - hesitates, and jumps for ground level. He doesn't make it. The guards outside are now alerted, and seeing a pikeman coming at him, the bruised and winded Ethan takes off running like a madman away from the castle.

Meanwhile, Toes has come back to the rope trick, and discovered that Ethan isn't there. Melvin becomes concerned, hops out of the pocket and takes off down the corridors after casting invisibility on himself. Toes is left to contemplate the intimidating interior of the pocket: "Grey Chaos swirls around you."

Melvin eventually finds the lab, where the alchemist/wizard is ordering a group of guards to keep double watch over the demesne. As it sounds like Ethan's no longer in trouble, he stays after the guards leave and peeks in the doorway to see the wizard staring toward the door. Caught in a sudden fit of... something, he is seized by the urge to break the intricate, expensive-looking glassware sitting on the countertop of the lab. He sweeps it to the ground, and as he's eyeing the next target of destruction, the alchemist dispels his invisibility. Ensue one very quick wizard's duel, where Melvin give the equivalent of a 'So long, suckers!' and changes to gaseous form to escape through the window... and is suddenly hit by a freeze spell that nearly crystallizes his organs. So much for escape. Near death, he morphs back to human form, falls to his knees and surrenders. In the meantime, the alchemist hurls another spell at him - this one a Charm Person. Melvin deflects it with the strength of his will, "Knock it off, will you?" Unfortunately, he manages to fail the next save.

Welcome to our worst nightmare. Melvin now believes the alchemist is his best bosom buddy, and here come the questions. Within 5 minutes, he's given the alchemist the names and descriptions of the people in the forward party, the composition and size of the army, and our final objectives. Well done.

Meanwhile, Ethan's limping away from the castle, Toes is sitting in the pocket wondering what the hell happened to Ethan and Melvin (and gearing up for going in as a servant), and Lacha's wandering around the corridors. At least she manages to spot Melvin being led away by the alchemist; she follows them and watches in disbelief as the alchemist convinces Melvin to spend the night in the jail cell, gag himself and put on handcuffs.

At this point, the alchemist/wizard is undoubtably headed straight for the ducal chambers to wake his lord and inform him of the coming attack. This, of course, will give the duke plenty of time to call for aid from surrounding duchies, and Lyra, Richard and army will be marching right towards a possible trap and a castle locked tighter than a drum.

Yup. Well done, indeed. With luck, we might be able to pull this chestnut out the fire. Unfortunately, there's absolutely nothing Lyra and Richard can do, so it's up to Hoon, Toes and Lacha to fix this situation. Here's to hoping it turns out well in the end...

http://www.hobbitlore.com/personality/index.php

You are most like
Frodo Baggins, Son of Drogo

With many acquaintances, Frodo is deeply attached to a few people, like Bilbo, Aragorn, Gandalf, and Sam. His high ethics come out in his treatment of Gollum and Saruman. Frodo has pity on Gollum and believes that change can occur.
You have a strong personal morality. You are committed to relationships and their growth. You tend to be an idealist, believing the best of the world around you. Time alone is important and solitary activities refresh you. You have a tendency to introspection. While providing compassion and being considerate, you may have the tendency of being soft-hearted or even "too emotional" You like keeping your options open. Closure is probably not one of your strong suits.

The Orcs display the evil side of this personality with their lengthy torture methods.

Traits: Empathic, benevolent, looking to the future. On the dark side you could be sadistic.

Helloooo, work.

I've been slacking a fair bit, putting off work in favor of painting miniatures (but it's FUN!!!) and watching the occasional anime with Abby (first Inuyasha, then Escaflowne, now Slayers...).

As a result, I'm now in for a real treat as I spin my wheels tomorrow and try to get back on track. I have a 2 hour midterm due at 8:30 AM Monday (in class :( ), roughly 60 lines of Latin due on Monday between thesis and Ovid classes, and reading and an outline of my thesis paper for Brown also due on Monday. I did manage to do my german translation, as I figured it would take several hours... I was pleasantly surprised when it took only 1 - 1.5. Hooray!!

Also went to dinner with Davee tonight. Yussanne and Andrea haven't seen her for 6 months; I haven't seen her for 9. She's doing ok, enjoying bartending and trying to get her feet back under her. She's even still working with her pony charges up in Northridge, training them to saddle and bridle. I just wish she could keep teaching... darn shame it doesn't pay more, but between animals and equipment, there's not much left for the teachers. And it's physically hard labor - mucking out stalls, feeding and watering, grooming 20 horses, keeping them exercised, training them... no wonder her back was giving her problems. Poor girl. :( But she's done an amazing job at keeping herself going. For someone who never went to college and lost not only a father, but a step-father, she is truly amazing, and I have worlds of respect for her.