My year in music – 2011
December 19, 2011
Music is something I greatly enjoy, yet it is something I rarely get to talk about. I have a few friends on Twitter that have similar tastes but the subject just does not come up that often. So, in order to share a little bit about what I like and have been listening to this year, I thought I’d share a smattering of music I purchased and enjoyed in 2011. No human alive, save for those for whom it is their job, can listen to everything that comes out. So if you by chance see my selections and think there’s another artist I might like, don’t hesitate to comment or speak up!
In no particular order, here are a few albums I bought this year, along with links to Amazon and, if I could find one, a YouTube video.
This is a fantastic album. The title track, “Civilian”, was one of my most listened-to tracks of the year. Wye Oak creates a sound that is complex and somewhat haunting, with interesting religious overtones and just enough of a rock edge. Listen to the track below… it is awesome.
2. Fleet Foxes – Helplessness Blues
As a massive fan of Fleet Foxes’ first offering, this one had high expectations from me, and did not disappoint in the least. This is one of those albums that gets better with each listen as you discover new levels. Expertly crafted songs. My favorite track is hard to pick, but I’ll go with the title track, “Helplessness Blues.”
3. St. Vincent – Strange Mercy
Now this one was a bit of a departure for me. I’ve never been a fan of music with a lot of electronic sounds. But this one quickly won me over. It is a complex, interesting collection of songs that is simply a great listen. Tracks I particularly liked include “Cruel” and “Cheerleader”.
4. Pistol Annies – Hell on Heels
I don’t buy a lot of country music (maybe one or two albums a year). A lot of it, quite frankly, sucks. But the Pistol Annies go back to classic country goodness to produce a very enjoyable record. Favorite tracks include “Lemon Drop” and “Bad Example”. Below is the only one officially on YouTube, the title track.
5. The Civil Wars – Barton Hollow
This is just a fantastic debut by two musicians who have amazing chemistry and produce some of the most pleasant music I’ve heard this year. Pretty much every track is a nice listen. One of my favorites is “Girl With The Red Balloon”.
6. The Head and the Heart – The Head and the Heart
I’ve heard this band compared to Mumford & Sons, another one of my favorite groups. But I found this ensemble to be somewhat lower-energy, a little more laid-back. There are some great tunes here though, I’d suggest “Lost in my Mind,” “Ghosts,” and “Down in the Valley” to start.
7. PJ Harvey – Let England Shake
This one I just discovered about a week ago so it just made it under the wire. Really good music, with a harrowing theme about England in turmoil. Worth a purchase for both reasons.
8. Belle and Sebastian – If You’re Feeling Sinister
Yes, first of all I do realize this album came out in 1996. So I’m a little behind here – give me a break, I wasn’t always a big music fan. But if you’re someone who has not heard this, or even more so if you’ve never heard Belle and Sebastian, this is pretty much the most perfect indie pop I’ve heard. Every song’s a winner. I’m so glad I decided to dig into B & S this year – better late than never.
So there you go. As promised, a sampling of what I was buying and listening to in 2011. I bought plenty of other stuff too (through eMusic and Amazon) but I either haven’t had the chance to fully take it in, or it just simply did not stick with me. I might add one or two if I discover a glaring hole. But for now, I’d invite you to enjoy the videos I posted and perhaps discover some wonderful new music!
My brief personal Christopher Hitchens story
December 16, 2011
I first got involved in politics around my junior year in college when I decided to join the Conservatives Club on campus. In the fall of 2004, the club invited Christopher Hitchens to speak on campus and give his rebuttal to the film Fahrenheit 9/11 by Micheal Moore. As a new member, I was fortunate enough to be invited to eat dinner with Mr. Hitchens at a local restaurant (which, we had to ensure in advance, served Johnny Walker Black). In attendance were about 20-25 club members.
At the time I had just heard of Hitchens and was not familiar with his work. Purely by chance, my seat at dinner was right next to him. As he consumed his glasses of whiskey, I remember briefly engaging him in conversation about some trivial topic… I believe it was something like how technology was changing the world and how today’s children would never know a time without computers. Silly, I now know in retrospect, but nonetheless he was perfectly engaging to a young 21-year-old computer science major.
I don’t recall much about the speech itself. And looking back, I’m not sure why he spoke on such a trivial topic. I highly doubt Hitchens himself remembered much about his brief visit to Lewisburg, PA, especially considering his likely blood alcohol content during the presentation. As I recall this brief encounter I feel like, though I did not appreciate it fully at the time, he was certainly an interesting person to meet.
Hitchens was a remarkable fellow, as I’m sure will be communicated by the numerous obituaries popping up from nearly every major news site. He pissed off almost everyone at some point. I don’t think anyone ever shared, or will share, his particular blend of opinions. But they were all unified by his absolute persistence in stating his opinion, no matter what it might be. Let us all take that from him and learn to stick up for our beliefs, even when they may offend.
On the bashing of atheists/agnostics
November 28, 2011
I’ve been wanting to write a post here for a long time. There have been a few ideas that have come and gone, some even to the point where I started writing… but nothing to show for it. I’ve had an on-again, off-again relationship with blogging in general. There are periods where I write regularly, other periods where I come to see it as futile and give up. But I always come back to it, and over the years I’ve realized that while I do enjoy political blogging at times, it is other subjects, particularly those of philosophy and religion, that have always better aroused my passion.
While I make no secret of my non-faith, I’m not aggressive about it either. I’m not one of those non-believers that feels the need to call those of faith stupid or ignorant. I know good people of both faith and non-faith, and I certainly count among my closest friends many who take their religious views very seriously. As a rule, I try to be respectful of others’ beliefs, given that they do not try to force them upon me, and given that they, overall, make them a better person. Faith can do this, and does do this, for millions, and to deny that would be silly.
As a holder of a minority worldview – my own views surely deserving of further explanation but essentially coming down to non-theistic agnosticism – I’m used to politicians not exactly gunning for my vote. If I’m lucky, I’ll get an off-hand remark about how both those of faith and non-faith can be good people (for all his flaws, George W. Bush was remarkably tolerant). However, I’m not expecting much. What does get to me, though, is when a politician goes out of his or her way to insult me. It is not always a calculated move, usually a passing reference to the false belief that atheists/agnostics have no values.
The example that sparked this post came when I saw this brief comment made by Newt Gingrich in a debate last month. The moment did not get much attention at the time as it is hardly out of the ordinary to hear non-religious folks denigrated during Republican political events. But in seeing this, it made me think of two things. First, how profoundly ignorant Gingrich must be to think that those who don’t have faith have no values or judgment. Secondly, how utterly contemptible he is to essentially imply those without faith are, as a rule, of poor character and completely undeserving of trust and power.
Now, certainly, from a political point of view, bashing atheists/agnostics isn’t going to cost anyone many votes, and may in fact gain them quite a few from those who are prejudiced. Certainly among Republicans, it may indeed be a mainstream, majority belief that atheists are no better than Muslims – perhaps even worse. So in the grand scheme, Newt’s comments will not hurt him, if they have any effect at all. But it does, to me, shed some light on his character. Does he not know any non-believers in his personal life? If he does, does he treat them with suspicion? Or is he just throwing red meat to a base that is largely convinced that secular humanism is a force of Satan?
Throwing rocks at non-believers tells me a lot about a person. It says that person is willing to insult and slander one group in order to feed the worst instincts of the larger group. It says that person has not even bothered to understand or get to know non-believers. It says that person can and would prejudge those that they hire based on their faith and religious background. In the end, it says they are a fool – a small-minded person who simply cannot fathom how one can come to the conclusion that God does not exist without then becoming a mass murderer or rapist.
Whether or not believers like it, there are millions of us out there who find our answers and contentment outside of the cathedral, mosque, and temple. By many measurements non-belief is among the fastest growing groups in America. By no means at all does this mean religion is threatened. But it does mean that sooner or later, politicians will have to come to grips with the idea that we are out there. The sooner they shed their preconceived notions, the sooner they will learn how to connect with people regardless of their religious views or lack thereof.
Updated About Page
April 21, 2011
I just updated this blog’s About page to reflect changes I have made in regards to its purpose and identity. Much of that is still in the air, but suffice it to say, I have much in mind. Find it on the side bar, or here.
Future of this blog
April 2, 2011
As most readers of this blog (if there in fact are any) know a few months ago I started writing for another site, Pundit League. Doing so has been great – it is an honor to be sharing space with many other talented people and I’ve enjoyed actually having my work read. This past week brought another exciting opportunity to write for an influential libertarian blog, United Liberty. Writing at this site provides yet another tremendous chance to have my pieces get some more attention. Combined, the two blogs cover almost any blogging I want to do about politics and technology.
So what is left for this little blog? Well, it is still going to exist, but it will have a somewhat different purpose. I intend for this site to be where I post all the things that I don’t want to submit to the other sites. This includes posts of a more personal nature (or as personal as I get on the Internet), as well as assorted other things that belong on my own blog. If I ever decide to start something more, this will be where it is, but I don’t foresee that happening any time soon. For the time, I will keep posting to the two outside blogs and to this one when appropriate, and that should handle all my needs.
All this to say, if you want to read most of what I write, check out Pundit League or United Liberty. I will try and cross-post many of these writings here to provide a hub of sorts. And for anything I might write about more personal things, this is where you’ll find them. I hope you all stay tuned as I feel I finally have gotten my chance to enter the blogging world in legitimate form.
Mitch Daniels and RTW
February 23, 2011
With Chris Christie apparently determined not to run and libertarian darlings Gary Johnson and Ron Paul unlikely to gain much support, Mitch Daniels has become a popular choice amongst fiscal conservatives. A lot of people I agree with like Daniels, and I have not heard anything that would make me seriously question his credentials as a fairly solid fiscal con.
So when a controversy erupted yesterday over Daniels’ decision to abandon “right to work” (RTW) legislation in favor of other issues, I was more than a little skeptical. I knew that in this time leading up to 2012, those who support or dislike a certain potential candidate are ready and willing to slime whoever is needed. I also knew that many social conservatives already disliked Daniels because of recent comments he made supporting a “truce” on social issues. Both of these reasons made me question whether some were attempting to create a row in order to damage Daniels.
After looking into the issues involved more, it is clear to me that that is the case to some degree. For one thing, those who are criticizing Daniels are ignoring some essential political facts that need to be considered. This article in National Review Online lays them out wonderfully. In short, Daniels faces a limited legislative schedule and a minority that holds significant clout. And in his years as governor, he has hardly been a slouch. His record stands as being quite impressive and his legislative priorities, such as education reform, should make conservatives happy.
Finally, there is a very compelling argument to be made for not supporting RTW laws in the first place, so Daniels is hardly taking a position that is unheard of. Tim Carney in the Washington Examiner makes a good, succinct case that such laws stand against the rights of free association and the rights of employers to hire whom they wish. I’m quite sympathetic to this particular line of reasoning, being a firm believer in the right of individuals to freely enter into contracts of their choosing. Also essential to point out is that these laws concern private unions and not public ones as in Wisconsin, so these are really two vastly different animals we’re talking about.
Regardless of the facts, there’s a fair point to be made that Daniels had a communications failure here, which in some minds is enough in and of itself to damage him. But I think the bigger force at work here is conservatives who already resent Daniels for abandoning social issues. No matter how much some social conservatives talk about focusing on fiscal issues at this point in history, when it comes down to it many are simply not going to tolerate a candidate who does not at least pay lip service to abortion and “traditional marriage”.
At the end of the day, I remain convinced that Daniels is a strong candidate who I could support. If abandoning a bill that splits even those on Daniels’ side is what it takes to get other items through the Indiana legislature, I’d say that’s a very fair bargain. And if Democrats continue to act like children, it will be clear to the public that they are at fault and that the Governor is making a good-faith effort.
Reality vs. Unreality
February 17, 2011
This past week has been a revealing one for anyone wondering who is on the side of reality, and who hopes to keep living in a magical land where deficits don’t matter and spending can go on unabated. It is amazing how stark the difference has become. We have clearly reached a point in this country where some have stood up and acted like adults, while others have stuck their heads deep into the sand in hopes the big bad debt will go away.
On Team Reality, we have a slate of recently elected Republican governors – Chris Christie of New Jersey, Scott Walker of Wisconsin, and Rick Scott of Florida. Each of these state heads has, in the past weeks and months, shown a rare and praiseworthy willingness to actually say “no” to unsustainable spending. Christie has been a hero since his election two years ago, canceling a proposed NJ-NY tunnel that would have cost taxpayers billions, and taking on the entrenched unions and interests that no leader has ever dared to challenge. Governor Scott just this week refused federal money for a new high-speed rail that would have surely overrun costs, leaving Floridians with the bill. And most notably, Governor Walker has raised the ire of thousands by proposing modest reforms on public union bargaining powers.
Meanwhile, on Team Unicorn, President Obama dropped on the world a budget worthy of laughter in its unseriousness. The budget even includes INCREASES in some types of spending, and even with some cuts, adds trillions to the debt over the next ten years. Some estimates even suggest it would be worse to pass his new budget than continue the current one. Joining Obama in the Lollipop Corner are the unions and other interests acting as if any cuts whatsoever are the moral equivalent of leaving children to starve and poor people to die in the streets. These folks are the ones parading in the streets of Madison and Trenton demanding they be able to keep their cushy arrangement without the smallest bit of sacrifice.
The difference between the two teams could not be more glaring. While Team Reality is busy making tough choices and being serious about our issues, Team Unicorn is off promoting the delusion that there is no crisis and that no changes are needed. Luckily, it seems right now that the public is acting far more adult that these fools. We shall see if this trend continues as more and more people are affected by the necessary cuts. But hopefully, the public will be smart enough to realize that Team Unicorn is smoking the strong stuff while Team Reality is being blunt and honest.
Our robotic future
January 20, 2011
I’ve often thought that I was born in the wrong time. While others may think wistfully of the past, I have always been someone who holds tremendous excitement about the future. Being of the geek persuasion, I have watched the incredible progression of computers, cell phones, the Internet, and hundreds of other technologies that have made our lives so much better (well, at least for the most part). It leaves me feeling that the future is very bright, assuming we don’t manage to wipe ourselves out before it gets here.
Two news stories stuck out to me in the past couple weeks that brought my level of anticipation to even higher levels. The first was this story about an upcoming enhancement to the translation software available on Android devices that will allow the phone to translate real conversations on the fly. While the tech behind it is certainly in its infancy, the concept of being able to translate a conversation in real time is mind-blowing in its potential for improving and facilitating human communication. Just to name a few examples, it would be a tremendous boon to police in immigrant communities, to diplomats working abroad, and to tourists traveling in foreign lands. When this technology finally reaches a fully mature state, it could potentially eliminate many of the linguistic barriers we face in the world.
The second story is about the upcoming matchup between IBM’s Watson computer and two of the top champions on the game show Jeopardy!. This much-ballyhooed contest holds great importance in the evolution of artificial intelligence. It is the first time a computer has been developed that can parse and process natural human speech, and represents an amazing achievement that was the stuff of sci-fi novels just decades ago. While Watson is far from perfect and is still extremely large and expensive, anyone who follows computers can tell you it will soon be neither. One can hardly begin to imagine the potential of a computer that can understand human language. Indeed, the computer of Star Trek fame is not impossible to dream of.
Both of these technologies are in the early stages and have a long way to go. But both also give me great hope for the future of mankind to create systems that solve many of our most intractable conundrums. It may be only decades before we have computers that can interact with us in much the same way as people do. While some will surely tell us that we should fear this, I see it as something to embrace… well, at least as the robots all have an “off” switch!
Palin steps in it… again
January 13, 2011
The past week brought many of Sarah Palin’s normal detractors to her defense as those on the left leveled the absurd suggestion that she was somehow linked to the shootings in Tucson, AZ. Many of us who are not normally fans spent more than a little effort arguing with those accusing her with such an absurd charge. Indeed, until she finally decided to speak yesterday, this was looking like a good week for Palin as she was clearly a sympathetic figure.
But as she is wont to do, Palin managed to make me regret supporting her. Yesterday’s speech was almost entirely defensive. And perhaps in one of the worst word choices in recent memory, Palin deployed the term “blood libel,” a very specific reference to a long-standing line of anti-Semitic defamation. The fact remains that there are two possible explanations for using this phrase, and neither is good. One possibility is that she did not know what it referred to, which represents a profound ignorance and massive neglect on the part of her speechwriters. The other option is that she DID know the meaning, and chose to compare her “suffering” to one of history’s great slanders.
Whatever the case, she has proven again that in her mind, everything is about her. She has once again stepped into the limelight and contributed to making the story focused on Sarah Palin. And she demonstrated extremely poor judgment in needlessly choosing an inflammatory and insensitive term. One wonders if Mrs. Palin even understands this or cares. But at the very least, her staff failed her miserably.
Plans for the new year
January 1, 2011
As seems to be the norm, the end of the year brought me to considering the past year’s accomplishments and failures, and what I would like to accomplish in the new year. This is always a time that brings up disappointment and regret, but also hope and excitement for the future.
The past year brought me a couple of great opportunities, including the chance to write at a couple other blogs. Most especially the launch of Pundit League has been a great boon and something I am excited to be a part of. And the other blog I wrote for, Political Tavern, will hopefully pick up again in the new year. Both provide a chance to write and be read by more people, and I don’t have to do the self-promotion I so abhor.
As for Twitter, I finally reached 1000 followers, after being on Twitter since March 2009. It felt like a load off – for whatever reason reaching 1000 felt like a real accomplishment. Surely some of them are not actual people (such are the realities of Twitter). But it made me feel like I was finally in the big boy’s club after toiling for so long. I’m still nowhere near where I want to be, but that will take time. Improving at Twitter is a huge priority for 2011.
One thing I did start was keeping a list of great people who are producing fine Twitter content but who do not have the following they deserve. My Underfollowed list is one of my major projects – it consists of people with under 1000 followers who continue to make good points, provide amusing banter, and engage people well. I am thinking of how to expand this in 2011 to better help the “underfollowed” users to get some more attention. I feel like it is my little part to help newer users out, after a number of bigger folks played a large part in getting me where I am today.
Perhaps my biggest excitement for 2011 comes in the form of CPAC, the major political conference that I have finally decided to attend. I have never met in person any of the folks I’ve come to know on Twitter, and the opportunity to finally do so is thrilling. My expectations are tempered, of course, but my hope is that this will provide a chance to “break out” a bit and make some connections. Really, if nothing else I hope 2011 provides me with a better idea of how I fit into the larger political scene. 2010 may have taught me what I won’t be – maybe 2011 will teach me what I can be.
So with all of this said, I await to see what the new year shows me. I have my own personal goals with regards to living healthier and such, but I won’t go into those. What I will say is that, if it goes well, 2011 can be an important year. Or it could be a disaster. But I’m going to try and think positively for once!
