the reason we have a cbs is that the red cross screwed up the blood supply. we nationalized it in response to market failure. if something happens, and it's tied to a shift in policy...

i expect the government will eventually lift the ban, but it's going to need to protect *itself* first. this is more about the history of blood services in canada than it is about homophobia. you have to understand *that* history to realize why there's push back against anything that modifies a system that has worked well up to this point.

when the changes happen, they're going to be broader than this, too - because, as mentioned, this is symptomatic of broader, underlying systemic issues.

they should be applauded for not kneejerking, really, and holding to the script rather than being affected by political pressure.

www.cbc.ca/news/politics/gay-men-blood-donations-1.3643761

19-06-2016: information overload

tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inri-cassette-demo-1
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1

j reacts to the smoke and mirrors around warren as "anti-establishment" pick for vp

see, like it or not, this is what i would expect hillary's logic to be something like: she wants an insider to help her get an agenda through, and warren is consequently not just useless but a potential liability.

i think the article is playing up the liability aspect, but that's probably to send a message.

i've been pushing back against the idea that warren is in any way left-wing: i think she's a republican from a past era, and kind of a fish out of water. there's a pretty big swath of space to the left of ted cruz before you get to be called left wing. she's a good way to the right of center, still. rumour has it that she is even the author of clinton's bizarrely calvinist "debt-free tuition" plan that would convert students into slave labour for corporate interests - but would keep them out of debt. and, truthfully, probably out of graduation, too - it's hard to study when you're making shoes for nike. it's the next logical step of the school-to-prison pipeline system, really.

but, that's not why she won't get the pick; if anything, it's a reason she would. the reason she won't is that she just doesn't have those backroom channels.

i haven't seen bill's name thrown around. but, he might honestly be her ideal choice. that's what she really wants:

1) somebody who can make backroom deals of questionable legality.
2) somebody who is a foreign policy hawk.

i still think franken is the only pick i've seen that i'd actually support. but, i've been clear that i don't expect her to pick somebody i'd support.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/elizabeth-warren-wall-street-vice-president-224489

i was eating when i started thinking of something and a quite natural thought entered into my head: why would i care what people half my age think?

i think that this is something very different than what most of us have grown up around, but i don't think it's a fleeting thought. rather, i think that the boomer obsession with youth may turn out to be the anomaly.

i've never been in a world where there are more young people than old people; there have always been more old people, they have always had the power, they have always had the money and they have always made the decisions. i have not been conditioned to look to young people to make decisions - and that is progress. the premise is absurd. we're lucky we survived that bottleneck.

i didn't sing my generation.

i think that gen x is going to actually look forward to being old. that's a big change. no anti-aging creams, no fountains of youth - we're too cynical. or do we know better? we're going to be cranky. we're going to look down on the millenials until the day that we die. and we're going to enjoy it.

i don't care what people half my age think, i don't feel bad about it and i don't expect it to ever change.