on third thought...
the modern cathedrals show is actually over at 4:30 - there's a "chill out" set to close it down. so, i'm really only going to get an ~4 hour set of...moderately interesting techno...if i get there a bit after midnight. the headliners are on from 1:30-4:30, so that's three hours. if we get the advertised set...
terrence dixon doesn't have an endpoint to his set, so it could in theory go to 4:00. & kenny larkin seems a bit boomy, but, i am going to be drinking and looking to dance, after all. so, if i get there a bit before midnight (it's closer), or closer to 11:00 (if i leave early for it), i'm looking at an hour or two of silly techno, and at least two hours of something more interesting. it could be three hours. if we get a longer set on the deck...
if i go to the magic stick, and it's done early, i'm sure to end up in the neighbourhood of the tangent gallery, at least. they've been clear that nobody's buying tickets at the door. but, if i show up at 3:30, and twenty people have left, what do they do?
i may have nothing better to do than try.
and, if they're running late..
hrmmn.
i'm using paypal money, which means the cover for the other two nights is unbudgeted; it's not free, but it doesn't come out of anything meant for anything else. the other parties are all free. outside of beer money, this is the only thing coming out of my pocket.
i'll see how i feel tomorrow afternoon, i guess; i could end up at the magic stick, after all.
what i want is for the line-up at the magic stick to be staggered just a tad later, and in a way that people aren't competing with each other.
Thursday, May 24, 2018
the conservatives won a large number of seats in toronto in the 2008 federal election by using media to run the leader of the party, stephane dion, into the ground.
very few toronto liberals voted for the conservatives or ndp, but enough avoided voting altogether that it got harper a lot closer to a majority.
if main street is right, and turnout is down by as much as 40%, that might be the right model to look at. and, if it is, and the depressed turnout is overwhelmingly liberal in past voting intentions, it might be the case that the second-place parties end up winning seats by default - because liberals have completely tuned out.
the liberals have a strong base in toronto. it might be easier and more likely to suppress than swing.
but, they also have a strong ground game and this has been underestimated before.
as i've pointed out a few times: if toronto holds liberal, we could see provincial numbers swing all over the place, and very few seats actually change hands. the vote is strongly concentrated; if they get wiped out outside toronto, and yet hold it, they could end up third in the popular vote, and still win the most seats. you'd need them running in the high 20s, minimum, though. but, if liberals don't vote, in the end, it's hard to imagine any outcome besides a tory win.
people hate this woman. i get it. but, if she has the best ground game in the most populous region, it doesn't matter.
the tories don't have a large enough swing to compete where they haven't already won. and, the ndp need a 10+% swing to be serious, not a 5% one.
we'll see what the numbers say tomorrow. but i'm still holding to a likely pc minority.
very few toronto liberals voted for the conservatives or ndp, but enough avoided voting altogether that it got harper a lot closer to a majority.
if main street is right, and turnout is down by as much as 40%, that might be the right model to look at. and, if it is, and the depressed turnout is overwhelmingly liberal in past voting intentions, it might be the case that the second-place parties end up winning seats by default - because liberals have completely tuned out.
the liberals have a strong base in toronto. it might be easier and more likely to suppress than swing.
but, they also have a strong ground game and this has been underestimated before.
as i've pointed out a few times: if toronto holds liberal, we could see provincial numbers swing all over the place, and very few seats actually change hands. the vote is strongly concentrated; if they get wiped out outside toronto, and yet hold it, they could end up third in the popular vote, and still win the most seats. you'd need them running in the high 20s, minimum, though. but, if liberals don't vote, in the end, it's hard to imagine any outcome besides a tory win.
people hate this woman. i get it. but, if she has the best ground game in the most populous region, it doesn't matter.
the tories don't have a large enough swing to compete where they haven't already won. and, the ndp need a 10+% swing to be serious, not a 5% one.
we'll see what the numbers say tomorrow. but i'm still holding to a likely pc minority.
it would be nice to get a second opinion, but he's the only scientific pollster in the field, right now.
https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/ontario-campaign-2018-state-of-the-race/
https://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/ontario-campaign-2018-state-of-the-race/
the mainstreet poll should be out tomorrow, i think. we'll see if it picks up the same movement to the ndp or not.
if it doesn't, the media will reject it as an "outlier". wrong.
it's the only scientific poll in the field. you can't be an outlier, when the sample size is one.
rather, what it will demonstrate - again - is that the "online polling" is merely propaganda.
if it does pick up the same trend, what we'll need to look at is how it's being quantified. i would not be surprised, at this point, to see some firming of ndp support at the expense of the liberals - if for no other reason that the media is pushing it down so strongly. but, i would be very surprised to see the ndp competing with the tories for first place.
i think that what the polling is going to reveal is the following:
1) are undecideds remaining steady, or are they beginning to shift one way or another?
2) how seriously do we need to take the idea of a hung parliament?
if it doesn't, the media will reject it as an "outlier". wrong.
it's the only scientific poll in the field. you can't be an outlier, when the sample size is one.
rather, what it will demonstrate - again - is that the "online polling" is merely propaganda.
if it does pick up the same trend, what we'll need to look at is how it's being quantified. i would not be surprised, at this point, to see some firming of ndp support at the expense of the liberals - if for no other reason that the media is pushing it down so strongly. but, i would be very surprised to see the ndp competing with the tories for first place.
i think that what the polling is going to reveal is the following:
1) are undecideds remaining steady, or are they beginning to shift one way or another?
2) how seriously do we need to take the idea of a hung parliament?
hrmmn.
i might end up staying in tomorrow; the late party doesn't seem worth it, but then the early party doesn't, either.
i made a kind of a bad gamble, in thinking the line-up at the magic stick was actually better than the one at modern cathedrals, and if i was going to show up late after trip metal, anyways, i'd probably have a better time at the magic stick. the tickets were also cheaper...and there was no warning of an increase in price....
i figured if i got to the magic stick at 12:00 and stayed there until 4:00, i could get a coffee at the old diner around 4:30, leave a little after 5:00 and catch the early bus to get ready for the next day, which starts at 22:00 and runs until the next afternoon. less crazy than staying at tangent until 6:00, but tangent has been raided more than once, too - there's no guarantee they'll be open until 6:00. if tangent does get raided, i'm the one laughing at the stick right?
but, they've since doubled the price of the ticket (to the same cost as the modern cathedrals show) and put the two djs i wanted to see on at the same time. these particular djs are the most interesting ones playing anywhere on that night, they really are, but i'm not really interested in paying $30 for a two hour set and spending it bouncing between areas - and then having to find a late party somewhere else, anyways.
modern cathedrals is now sold out.
i'm wondering if my secret hideout might be open. it's not far from the modern cathedrals show. and, are they really going to turn people away once people start exiting, fucked up on whatever? i probably wouldn't get there until 1:00, anyways.
ack.
if i can't find a late party, i'll probably stay in tomorrow. that's ok, i've got two long nights planned afterwards.
i might end up staying in tomorrow; the late party doesn't seem worth it, but then the early party doesn't, either.
i made a kind of a bad gamble, in thinking the line-up at the magic stick was actually better than the one at modern cathedrals, and if i was going to show up late after trip metal, anyways, i'd probably have a better time at the magic stick. the tickets were also cheaper...and there was no warning of an increase in price....
i figured if i got to the magic stick at 12:00 and stayed there until 4:00, i could get a coffee at the old diner around 4:30, leave a little after 5:00 and catch the early bus to get ready for the next day, which starts at 22:00 and runs until the next afternoon. less crazy than staying at tangent until 6:00, but tangent has been raided more than once, too - there's no guarantee they'll be open until 6:00. if tangent does get raided, i'm the one laughing at the stick right?
but, they've since doubled the price of the ticket (to the same cost as the modern cathedrals show) and put the two djs i wanted to see on at the same time. these particular djs are the most interesting ones playing anywhere on that night, they really are, but i'm not really interested in paying $30 for a two hour set and spending it bouncing between areas - and then having to find a late party somewhere else, anyways.
modern cathedrals is now sold out.
i'm wondering if my secret hideout might be open. it's not far from the modern cathedrals show. and, are they really going to turn people away once people start exiting, fucked up on whatever? i probably wouldn't get there until 1:00, anyways.
ack.
if i can't find a late party, i'll probably stay in tomorrow. that's ok, i've got two long nights planned afterwards.
fell asleep again this morning. argh. and, i ate early, too, to prevent it. *shrug*.
the air quality is certainly suspect in these early crashes, but it's hard to tie together anything substantive. i'm happy it's nice and warm in here, anyways.
my drugs are now fully covered, which gives me an extra $85/month, which i may very well spend on rent. it expands the scope of what's available, anyways.
i got a hold of somebody about a non-smoking apartment, but it's available for june 1st. if i break the lease, i won't get my last month's back, so i'd be breaking it for july 1st, as of right now (and not paying june). and, after june 1st, it's going to be rigid for august (meaning i won't pay july). i'll need to wait until the next showing.
and, i've decided, for that reason, i should wait until next week to make any more calls. i don't want to be tempted, and after i pay june's rent there's no longer a choice.
that means i'll need to find something over the weeks of june.
still need to call a dentist...
the air quality is certainly suspect in these early crashes, but it's hard to tie together anything substantive. i'm happy it's nice and warm in here, anyways.
my drugs are now fully covered, which gives me an extra $85/month, which i may very well spend on rent. it expands the scope of what's available, anyways.
i got a hold of somebody about a non-smoking apartment, but it's available for june 1st. if i break the lease, i won't get my last month's back, so i'd be breaking it for july 1st, as of right now (and not paying june). and, after june 1st, it's going to be rigid for august (meaning i won't pay july). i'll need to wait until the next showing.
and, i've decided, for that reason, i should wait until next week to make any more calls. i don't want to be tempted, and after i pay june's rent there's no longer a choice.
that means i'll need to find something over the weeks of june.
still need to call a dentist...
also: when i was a child, i never cried.
not that i remember, it's what my mom said.
i was apparently highly non-vocal all around, but just started talking in full, flowing sentences one day, out of the blue. it was apparently concluded by some doctors that i had decided against speaking. i just didn't want to talk.
was i an existentialist as a toddler? was life already so absurd, that there wasn't any point in speaking? did i realize that nothing good comes out of arguing, so i'm better off being quiet?
in hindsight, i don't think this is far from the truth. i might suggest that what was happening was actually a lack of emotion, and reflective of a personality disorder; i was a little sociopath, really. aren't all toddlers sociopaths? not in an introverted sense, like this.
she says it was clear that i understood her, but i just refused to actually respond. until i did, one day. and instantly converted myself from a borderline autism case into a highly precocious gifted gift.
fine lines.
not that i remember, it's what my mom said.
i was apparently highly non-vocal all around, but just started talking in full, flowing sentences one day, out of the blue. it was apparently concluded by some doctors that i had decided against speaking. i just didn't want to talk.
was i an existentialist as a toddler? was life already so absurd, that there wasn't any point in speaking? did i realize that nothing good comes out of arguing, so i'm better off being quiet?
in hindsight, i don't think this is far from the truth. i might suggest that what was happening was actually a lack of emotion, and reflective of a personality disorder; i was a little sociopath, really. aren't all toddlers sociopaths? not in an introverted sense, like this.
she says it was clear that i understood her, but i just refused to actually respond. until i did, one day. and instantly converted myself from a borderline autism case into a highly precocious gifted gift.
fine lines.
what i think is that hip-hop is the absolute pinnacle of gramscian hetero-patriarchal conditioning, using quasi-scientific methods, and that the effectiveness of this strategy is clear from the empirical results: the target audience is a perfect representation of the status quo. it's not just kanye west.
your hip-hop records are just corporate brainwashing, intended to teach you to love capitalism and the systems of control that uphold it.
your hip-hop records are just corporate brainwashing, intended to teach you to love capitalism and the systems of control that uphold it.
there still hasn't been any scientific polling released since the weekend.
and, no - it's not the case that you can argue that the unscientific polls are convincing if they're consistent with themselves. fallacy.
i'm not arguing that the unscientific polling is necessarily wrong; it might be correct, by coincidence. or, it's trajectory might be continuing evidence of the argument i presented previously - that the media is trying to split the vote.
i'll need to consult some scientific polling before i can present an analysis of this.
and, no - it's not the case that you can argue that the unscientific polls are convincing if they're consistent with themselves. fallacy.
i'm not arguing that the unscientific polling is necessarily wrong; it might be correct, by coincidence. or, it's trajectory might be continuing evidence of the argument i presented previously - that the media is trying to split the vote.
i'll need to consult some scientific polling before i can present an analysis of this.
my teeth.
if you're curious.
i have never had a cavity, and rarely go to the dentist. i have all of my teeth, still. in fact, i have some crowding in the back - a few extra.
it was now quite a while ago that i went to the dentist for the first time in years, and what he did was fill in a couple of gaps with some kind of cement. i can't remember what the procedure was called, but he literally just drew it in.
since then, i've drank a lot of coffee, and picked up some stains on the cement in my mouth. it's not the prettiest thing, but it's just cosmetic.
i never made it to the follow-up, because i moved to windsor from ottawa. and i was waiting to quit smoking before i booked another appointment. and then after i quit i just never got around to it.
i'm going to have my phone open this morning. and i'm going to try and book an appointment.
i repeat: it's coffee stains. it's cosmetic. i'm going to guess they'll paint over them; my teeth are, in fact, actually flawless.
if you're curious.
i have never had a cavity, and rarely go to the dentist. i have all of my teeth, still. in fact, i have some crowding in the back - a few extra.
it was now quite a while ago that i went to the dentist for the first time in years, and what he did was fill in a couple of gaps with some kind of cement. i can't remember what the procedure was called, but he literally just drew it in.
since then, i've drank a lot of coffee, and picked up some stains on the cement in my mouth. it's not the prettiest thing, but it's just cosmetic.
i never made it to the follow-up, because i moved to windsor from ottawa. and i was waiting to quit smoking before i booked another appointment. and then after i quit i just never got around to it.
i'm going to have my phone open this morning. and i'm going to try and book an appointment.
i repeat: it's coffee stains. it's cosmetic. i'm going to guess they'll paint over them; my teeth are, in fact, actually flawless.
i want to be clear though.
when you kill a fly (and i'm actually fairly good at catching them with my bare hands), there is a fly carcass that you then need to retrieve and flush.
but, when you kill a moth, it often vanishes into some alternate dimension - because it's just water.
i've pulled two of these things out of my hair tonight and they're just water. no carcass. just kersplat. but they're like two-three times the size of a house fly.
if they were may flies, i'd be getting swarmed, right? or there would be a swarm outside. there's not.
hrmmn.
when you kill a fly (and i'm actually fairly good at catching them with my bare hands), there is a fly carcass that you then need to retrieve and flush.
but, when you kill a moth, it often vanishes into some alternate dimension - because it's just water.
i've pulled two of these things out of my hair tonight and they're just water. no carcass. just kersplat. but they're like two-three times the size of a house fly.
if they were may flies, i'd be getting swarmed, right? or there would be a swarm outside. there's not.
hrmmn.
no.
wait.
that can't be right; they're aquatic in that phase.
hrmmn. not certain what these bugs are, then. they fly, land in your hair, are about 2-3 cm long and are squished into water on quite minimal force.
i haven't see any roaches in here since december, but the ones i saw were climbing species and i'm wondering if it's humid enough for them to fly....which would be creepy...
they could be very small mayflies? ugh. i've killed two tonight, but, like i say, they just squished into water on immediate contact - i'll have to see if i can get one in a good enough condition to study.
wait.
that can't be right; they're aquatic in that phase.
hrmmn. not certain what these bugs are, then. they fly, land in your hair, are about 2-3 cm long and are squished into water on quite minimal force.
i haven't see any roaches in here since december, but the ones i saw were climbing species and i'm wondering if it's humid enough for them to fly....which would be creepy...
they could be very small mayflies? ugh. i've killed two tonight, but, like i say, they just squished into water on immediate contact - i'll have to see if i can get one in a good enough condition to study.
you know, they don't have mayflies in ottawa.
that's two, tonight. i guess they came in the window...they just fall right on you...
i remember seeing them last year when i biked out to tecumseh to see a neurologist. just swarms of them all over the store....first time i'd seen one, creeped me out...
i just hate getting bugs in my hair. ick. and it's nice to knoiw what they actually are.
i think they're mayflies, anyways. the nymphs...
that's two, tonight. i guess they came in the window...they just fall right on you...
i remember seeing them last year when i biked out to tecumseh to see a neurologist. just swarms of them all over the store....first time i'd seen one, creeped me out...
i just hate getting bugs in my hair. ick. and it's nice to knoiw what they actually are.
i think they're mayflies, anyways. the nymphs...
Wednesday, May 23, 2018
collective bargaining ought to be absolute to a point, there does need to be a concept of essential services that can't be shut down, but nobody should take the ndp seriously when they claim some pure adherence to it.
every government passes back to work legislation.
it's dirty but it's necessary, sometimes.
every government passes back to work legislation.
it's dirty but it's necessary, sometimes.
my hydro bill would be about $30/month - $10 for electricity and $20 for delivery. and i don't use a/c. ever. in fact, i complain about the neighbours when they do...
i get a $70 rebate under the hydro plan.
so, i get about $35 a month, credit.
so, my credit at enwin is currently about $150. i don't know if they pay it out at the end, or not.
under horwath's plan, if taken at face value, i'd go from $0 to $20.
i'd rather pay $0 than $20.
i get a $70 rebate under the hydro plan.
so, i get about $35 a month, credit.
so, my credit at enwin is currently about $150. i don't know if they pay it out at the end, or not.
under horwath's plan, if taken at face value, i'd go from $0 to $20.
i'd rather pay $0 than $20.
to be fair, horwath is also promising to take some production offline, which would in theory reduce prices, if it weren't for the need to absorb the payouts.
the only way to reduce prices is to use more electricity. it's counter-intuitive, but it's the way the system was designed; we were supposed to have electric cars by now. things like expanded subway and rail lines, or a push for new streetlights, would actually help to lower costs. christmas lights all year? art installations? you get the point.
i benefit from wynne's plan; i get free hydro, although i'm going to be looking for something all inclusive for august, too. if ford wants to carry through with it, great. but, horwath would actually raise my electrical bill from $0 to something more than $0, and because i'm dealing with small sums it's substantive percentages of total income. if i take them at face value, i'd be better off with ford than horwath - and i'm at the absolute bottom of the income scale.
https://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/8623194-hydro-sparks-election-debate-but-parties-promises-don-t-add-up/
the only way to reduce prices is to use more electricity. it's counter-intuitive, but it's the way the system was designed; we were supposed to have electric cars by now. things like expanded subway and rail lines, or a push for new streetlights, would actually help to lower costs. christmas lights all year? art installations? you get the point.
i benefit from wynne's plan; i get free hydro, although i'm going to be looking for something all inclusive for august, too. if ford wants to carry through with it, great. but, horwath would actually raise my electrical bill from $0 to something more than $0, and because i'm dealing with small sums it's substantive percentages of total income. if i take them at face value, i'd be better off with ford than horwath - and i'm at the absolute bottom of the income scale.
https://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/8623194-hydro-sparks-election-debate-but-parties-promises-don-t-add-up/
i got lucky and found a good spot.
i got unlucky and had it taken over by a terrible person.
this place sucks...
i can find another good spot, i'm sure.
http://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/apartment-rental-rates-in-windsor-lowest-in-nation-study-says
i got unlucky and had it taken over by a terrible person.
this place sucks...
i can find another good spot, i'm sure.
http://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/apartment-rental-rates-in-windsor-lowest-in-nation-study-says
so, the same thing happened this morning that happened yesterday, although i have to point that a big part of it was that it was so cold in here...so i sat down to warm up and passed out.
*shrug*
this is the adjustment i'm going to make: i'm going to start looking early tomorrow morning, and make some calls before i eat.
i guess i'm back to rebuilding for the night.
*shrug*
this is the adjustment i'm going to make: i'm going to start looking early tomorrow morning, and make some calls before i eat.
i guess i'm back to rebuilding for the night.
if we had a right-leaning liberal government in ontario, it wouldn't matter - it couldn't get worse, right?
we don't.
the sitting liberal government in ontario is actually by far the most left-leaning in the country.
it's just not the right time to make the gamble, especially not given horwath's historical tendencies to lean to the right.
we don't.
the sitting liberal government in ontario is actually by far the most left-leaning in the country.
it's just not the right time to make the gamble, especially not given horwath's historical tendencies to lean to the right.
i don't remember bob rae either, but i'm educated enough on the history to understand what the ndp are all about: they're a controlled opposition party that campaigns on the left and governs on the right, which is where their history in fire and brimstone prairie populism is.
their founder, tommy douglas, was basically a nazi.
throughout the years, there's always been reasons to keep them out. they've held homophobic positions, racist positions, xenophobic positions, backwards positions on trade, weird positions on the constitution, bizarre positions on sovereignty, scary ideas about electoral reform - ideas that smart people have, in the end, usually rejected. sometimes, they produce good mps, and you want them on committee. but, you've generally wanted to keep the way they think - this "progressive" ideology - out of government, because it just leads to calvinism and eugenics, in the end.
the liberals have always been the more secular and more humanist party. and, they've always done the heavy lifting, in the end.
their founder, tommy douglas, was basically a nazi.
throughout the years, there's always been reasons to keep them out. they've held homophobic positions, racist positions, xenophobic positions, backwards positions on trade, weird positions on the constitution, bizarre positions on sovereignty, scary ideas about electoral reform - ideas that smart people have, in the end, usually rejected. sometimes, they produce good mps, and you want them on committee. but, you've generally wanted to keep the way they think - this "progressive" ideology - out of government, because it just leads to calvinism and eugenics, in the end.
the liberals have always been the more secular and more humanist party. and, they've always done the heavy lifting, in the end.
the ndp are famous in canada for running on great platforms, and then not carrying through with any of it - or even doing the exact opposite.
rae won primarily on universal auto insurance, which never happened.
the 2015 election aside, where the liberals and ndp switched roles, the liberals usually run less flashy and more realistic campaigns, then tend to actually follow through with it.
so, you need to be constantly weighing that out.
but, the ndp will not do anything in their platform; they never do.
rae won primarily on universal auto insurance, which never happened.
the 2015 election aside, where the liberals and ndp switched roles, the liberals usually run less flashy and more realistic campaigns, then tend to actually follow through with it.
so, you need to be constantly weighing that out.
but, the ndp will not do anything in their platform; they never do.
it's not just bob rae. i mean, if you're talking about the ontario election, you cite bob rae as the obvious betrayer.
in the end, bob rae became a liberal, but it was clear he always was; i think andrea horwath is a conservative.
but, it's not just bob rae, it's the entire party, at every level of government. the sad truth is that there is not a single example of an actual left-wing ndp government. not even one. they're batting 0.
rachel notley is a pawn of the oil industry - veritably as far right as jason kenney. thomas mulcair lost because he ran to the right of justin trudeau. roy romanow has been praised by the fraser institute (the canadian heritage foundation, for those unclear). darrell dexter, greg selinger, ujjal dosanjh - every single one of them betrays their own base and lines up behind capital, in the end.
andrea horwath herself was heavily criticized four years ago for running to the right of the liberals.
you can fool me once, and you can fool me twice. but, after the thirty-seventh time? i'm not getting fooled again.
the knowledgeable political geek should realize that this isn't as obvious as a novice mind might think. it's not at all clear if horwath or ford are going to push bigger cuts, even if it is clear that ford will run deeper deficits.
it's not just bob rae; the ndp have never been what they claimed they were.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/05/22/consigning-the-bob-rae-monster-to-the-pages-of-history.html
in the end, bob rae became a liberal, but it was clear he always was; i think andrea horwath is a conservative.
but, it's not just bob rae, it's the entire party, at every level of government. the sad truth is that there is not a single example of an actual left-wing ndp government. not even one. they're batting 0.
rachel notley is a pawn of the oil industry - veritably as far right as jason kenney. thomas mulcair lost because he ran to the right of justin trudeau. roy romanow has been praised by the fraser institute (the canadian heritage foundation, for those unclear). darrell dexter, greg selinger, ujjal dosanjh - every single one of them betrays their own base and lines up behind capital, in the end.
andrea horwath herself was heavily criticized four years ago for running to the right of the liberals.
you can fool me once, and you can fool me twice. but, after the thirty-seventh time? i'm not getting fooled again.
the knowledgeable political geek should realize that this isn't as obvious as a novice mind might think. it's not at all clear if horwath or ford are going to push bigger cuts, even if it is clear that ford will run deeper deficits.
it's not just bob rae; the ndp have never been what they claimed they were.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/05/22/consigning-the-bob-rae-monster-to-the-pages-of-history.html
and, i'm now through april, 2016.
50 days left to go. 150 pages.
i need to eat & get looking...
the stench today appears to be cigarettes, and this is something that happens periodically; i don't know exactly where it's coming from, but it's enough that i've had to use the puffer. again: it's just overwhelming.
who smokes like this in a residential space? who is that selfish and clueless?
the people in this city are just horrible assholes. they just don't have any concept of decency, or self-respect. it's absurd, really/
50 days left to go. 150 pages.
i need to eat & get looking...
the stench today appears to be cigarettes, and this is something that happens periodically; i don't know exactly where it's coming from, but it's enough that i've had to use the puffer. again: it's just overwhelming.
who smokes like this in a residential space? who is that selfish and clueless?
the people in this city are just horrible assholes. they just don't have any concept of decency, or self-respect. it's absurd, really/
i actually don't think that the causes of transsexuality - or homosexuality - are being approached from the right angles.
i don't think that the reimer study proves anything more than that identity cannot be enforced. and, there is absolutely no convincing evidence of a genetic cause for any of this at all, whatsoever. i'll acknowledge some logic in the ideas of prenatal exposure, but i would expect these to have measurable physical consequences - like hermaphrodism - rather than abstract effects on brain chemistry that are easy to imagine but difficult to actually demonstrate.
i think that the proper idea has more to do with what psychologists call conditioning, and that the orientations and identities we see in front of us are complex things that are the result of chaotic interactions - it is learned in the sense that it is not genetic, but a lot of it is learned in an unconscious manner. identity & orientation are consequently stochastic & non-linear phenomena that can't be reduced to any specific or easy to understand cause. the cause of my own dysphoria is likely entirely different than the cause of another person's, as they both come out of random conditioning processes.
but, at the end of the day, i'm an autonomous being, and i made the decision to transition. i would react pretty violently to suggestions otherwise, as it would be a denial of agency.
i think the real issue here is a kind of scam by the pseudo-left to try and work through the contradictions in dealing with equality and what religion says about equality. if you look at this carefully, these ideas are broadly legal, rather than scientific in origin (although there are some unconvincing studies that attempted to demonstrate these legal ideas). what these people want to do is bridge a gap - they're told that these are "sinful" choices, so they react by trying to argue that it isn't a choice at all.
it's a neat legal argument, granted. and, we should be grateful when it has worked to get people out of trouble for sodomy charges, for example. but, the evidence does not support this.
further, as an atheist, i don't feel any imperative to align my views with those of some church. i don't care if some imam or some pastor somewhere thinks my decisions are "sinful", or feel any need to bow down to their authority on the matter. i'm perfectly willing to look them in the eye and tell them they're wrong to question my choices, and have no right to tell me my behaviour is immoral. and, i'd really like to see the left adopt this position.
for the foreseeable future, though, this debate is likely to carry on without any meaningful resolution. so long as the money is there, scientists will keep looking for something that isn't there. at the end of it, we'll at least be able to understand that and start looking for another explanation.
but, i don't think there's a single cause; i think it's best understood using chaos theory and unintentional subconscious psychological conditioning, rather than using genetics.
i don't think that the reimer study proves anything more than that identity cannot be enforced. and, there is absolutely no convincing evidence of a genetic cause for any of this at all, whatsoever. i'll acknowledge some logic in the ideas of prenatal exposure, but i would expect these to have measurable physical consequences - like hermaphrodism - rather than abstract effects on brain chemistry that are easy to imagine but difficult to actually demonstrate.
i think that the proper idea has more to do with what psychologists call conditioning, and that the orientations and identities we see in front of us are complex things that are the result of chaotic interactions - it is learned in the sense that it is not genetic, but a lot of it is learned in an unconscious manner. identity & orientation are consequently stochastic & non-linear phenomena that can't be reduced to any specific or easy to understand cause. the cause of my own dysphoria is likely entirely different than the cause of another person's, as they both come out of random conditioning processes.
but, at the end of the day, i'm an autonomous being, and i made the decision to transition. i would react pretty violently to suggestions otherwise, as it would be a denial of agency.
i think the real issue here is a kind of scam by the pseudo-left to try and work through the contradictions in dealing with equality and what religion says about equality. if you look at this carefully, these ideas are broadly legal, rather than scientific in origin (although there are some unconvincing studies that attempted to demonstrate these legal ideas). what these people want to do is bridge a gap - they're told that these are "sinful" choices, so they react by trying to argue that it isn't a choice at all.
it's a neat legal argument, granted. and, we should be grateful when it has worked to get people out of trouble for sodomy charges, for example. but, the evidence does not support this.
further, as an atheist, i don't feel any imperative to align my views with those of some church. i don't care if some imam or some pastor somewhere thinks my decisions are "sinful", or feel any need to bow down to their authority on the matter. i'm perfectly willing to look them in the eye and tell them they're wrong to question my choices, and have no right to tell me my behaviour is immoral. and, i'd really like to see the left adopt this position.
for the foreseeable future, though, this debate is likely to carry on without any meaningful resolution. so long as the money is there, scientists will keep looking for something that isn't there. at the end of it, we'll at least be able to understand that and start looking for another explanation.
but, i don't think there's a single cause; i think it's best understood using chaos theory and unintentional subconscious psychological conditioning, rather than using genetics.
Tuesday, May 22, 2018
drugs are fun when they're used sparingly to enhance the effects of events and experiences, but being addicted to drugs is a type of self-induced slavery, a type that the people around a drug addict have no responsibility to bear the effects of.
i don't care if this woman gets the help she needs to control her addiction.
i just want her carcinogenic, nausea-inducing, rancid shit out of my face.
i don't care if this woman gets the help she needs to control her addiction.
i just want her carcinogenic, nausea-inducing, rancid shit out of my face.
it's 10:00 pm on a fucking tuesday.
people do things like shower and read at 10:00 on a tuesday.
they don't sit around and get so fucking stoned they can't see.
you fucking loser...
and, it's like....be a fucking loser...i don't care...but go be a fucking loser in a parking lot, or in a field. don't do it somewhere where everybody else has to fucking deal with it.
you self-centered, worthless piece of shit.
it just makes me so fucking angry that these people can still exist, that people are raised so fucking terribly that they lack basic concepts of decency and respect for the people around them - or the self-respect to not be responsible for stinking up the whole goddamned block.
how does somebody have such little respect for themself that they don't care if people have made multiple requests to stop fucking blazing all the time? how can people have such little regard for their own integrity that they can look somebody in the eye and say "i am a habitual marijuana smoker, and i don't care if it makes everybody else sick".
it's revolting.
repulsive.
and remarkable that anybody could sanction this kind of behaviour.
there is no excuse for this. there really isn't.
people do things like shower and read at 10:00 on a tuesday.
they don't sit around and get so fucking stoned they can't see.
you fucking loser...
and, it's like....be a fucking loser...i don't care...but go be a fucking loser in a parking lot, or in a field. don't do it somewhere where everybody else has to fucking deal with it.
you self-centered, worthless piece of shit.
it just makes me so fucking angry that these people can still exist, that people are raised so fucking terribly that they lack basic concepts of decency and respect for the people around them - or the self-respect to not be responsible for stinking up the whole goddamned block.
how does somebody have such little respect for themself that they don't care if people have made multiple requests to stop fucking blazing all the time? how can people have such little regard for their own integrity that they can look somebody in the eye and say "i am a habitual marijuana smoker, and i don't care if it makes everybody else sick".
it's revolting.
repulsive.
and remarkable that anybody could sanction this kind of behaviour.
there is no excuse for this. there really isn't.
no, this is an old argument for me, because i used to get accused of being a pessimist all of the time. it's actually not even true.
whenever pessimism vs optimism is presented to you, what is actually being presented to you is really just a false dichotomy, but it's intriguing because it obscures a more fundamental division, which is realism vs magical thinking. pessimists and optimists are really two sides of the same coin: they're both existing in the realm of fantasy, of magical thinking, of utter delusion. the real counter to both optimism and pessimism (which are the same thing...) is realism.
the volume of water in the glass is 50% of it's maximum capacity.
get it?
whenever pessimism vs optimism is presented to you, what is actually being presented to you is really just a false dichotomy, but it's intriguing because it obscures a more fundamental division, which is realism vs magical thinking. pessimists and optimists are really two sides of the same coin: they're both existing in the realm of fantasy, of magical thinking, of utter delusion. the real counter to both optimism and pessimism (which are the same thing...) is realism.
the volume of water in the glass is 50% of it's maximum capacity.
get it?
so, what do we know about doug ford so far, anyways?
- he opposes an imaginary carbon tax
- he was going to open the greenbelt to development, but then decided not to *winkwink*
- he wants to cut taxes for people that don't pay taxes
- he wants alcohol & marijuana in corner stores
- he's going to slash revenues, and has no idea how he's going to pay for it.
- he's supposedly opposed to teaching sex ed in schools
- he opposes safe injection sites & wants to spend billions of public dollars on helping addicts
i thought "strong economic leadership" didn't make any sense. how do you campaign against this? how do you campaign for this?
have you seen idiocracy?
i'm not really in support of carbon taxes, but nobody is actually proposing one; i don't think poor people should pay taxes, but we already don't....and i don't have any particular aversion to beer at the corner store, but it's hardly a ballot question. nor do i really care about deficits.
the sex ed thing is a red flag, but i'm not sure how seriously i can take a guy that wants to eliminate sex ed and liberalize alcohol sales. it's a rather confused muslim that votes for that, isn't it? i'm thinking he's more likely to open a beer store across the street from your mosque than he is to protect your kids from their own sexuality.
the most contentious thing seems to be the billions wasted on trying to save addicts, which i'd argue would be better spent elsewhere - and closing these injection sites, which save taxpayers billions by stopping the spread of diseases. but, this doesn't seem to be very consistent with conservative party policy, does it?
so, the weird thing about doug ford is that he might not be that different from kathleen wynne, really. he keeps saying he'll carry through with what she's doing. the deficits might just be a little bigger. and, the policies might actually be a little more liberal.
i'm not endorsing this guy; i realize his aim is to sell off the province. but, this is the era we're in. would he move faster than the liberals or the ndp in selling off resources? who knows, really. all he really sold off in toronto was the garbage collection, right?
i'm never going to vote for the conservatives, myself; it's ideological, really. but, he seems less scary and more just kind of daft. and, i'm getting the impression that he's going to sleepwalk through a term or two and then fall asleep at the door on his way out.
- he opposes an imaginary carbon tax
- he was going to open the greenbelt to development, but then decided not to *winkwink*
- he wants to cut taxes for people that don't pay taxes
- he wants alcohol & marijuana in corner stores
- he's going to slash revenues, and has no idea how he's going to pay for it.
- he's supposedly opposed to teaching sex ed in schools
- he opposes safe injection sites & wants to spend billions of public dollars on helping addicts
i thought "strong economic leadership" didn't make any sense. how do you campaign against this? how do you campaign for this?
have you seen idiocracy?
i'm not really in support of carbon taxes, but nobody is actually proposing one; i don't think poor people should pay taxes, but we already don't....and i don't have any particular aversion to beer at the corner store, but it's hardly a ballot question. nor do i really care about deficits.
the sex ed thing is a red flag, but i'm not sure how seriously i can take a guy that wants to eliminate sex ed and liberalize alcohol sales. it's a rather confused muslim that votes for that, isn't it? i'm thinking he's more likely to open a beer store across the street from your mosque than he is to protect your kids from their own sexuality.
the most contentious thing seems to be the billions wasted on trying to save addicts, which i'd argue would be better spent elsewhere - and closing these injection sites, which save taxpayers billions by stopping the spread of diseases. but, this doesn't seem to be very consistent with conservative party policy, does it?
so, the weird thing about doug ford is that he might not be that different from kathleen wynne, really. he keeps saying he'll carry through with what she's doing. the deficits might just be a little bigger. and, the policies might actually be a little more liberal.
i'm not endorsing this guy; i realize his aim is to sell off the province. but, this is the era we're in. would he move faster than the liberals or the ndp in selling off resources? who knows, really. all he really sold off in toronto was the garbage collection, right?
i'm never going to vote for the conservatives, myself; it's ideological, really. but, he seems less scary and more just kind of daft. and, i'm getting the impression that he's going to sleepwalk through a term or two and then fall asleep at the door on his way out.
again: i don't see a reason to think that we're dealing with large shifts, just yet. i still think we have a lot of people that haven't decided, and it's producing funny polls.
but, i don't know of a scenario in ontario where the ndp finished second and the conservatives finished first.
the 2011 federal election is probably not the best predictor, because the conservatives polled relatively high and the ndp & liberals split almost cleanly. that doesn't appear to be likely this time.
i suspect the numbers may in the end look a little more like the 2008 federal election, although it's not clear which party will end up in second and which will end up in third. the numbers then were:
conservatives - 39% / 52 seats
liberals - 34% / 38 seats
ndp - 18% / 17 seats
it's dangerous to invert the liberals & ndp and conclude they'll end up with the same number of seats after the inversion; if the ndp are running at 34% and the liberals are running at 18%, you can't really conclude that the ndp will get 38 seats or the liberals will get 17 seats.
but, i think this is the type of parliament we're on the way towards - one where the conservatives have a plurality of seats, but the ndp & liberals together have a majority.
while the fake polling isn't a convincing argument, i'm beginning to concede the point that wynne is burying herself, and that an ndp shift is becoming inevitable - it's just a question of trying to accurately quantify it.
it's way too early to start modelling. but i don't see an obvious parallel, right now.
but, i don't know of a scenario in ontario where the ndp finished second and the conservatives finished first.
the 2011 federal election is probably not the best predictor, because the conservatives polled relatively high and the ndp & liberals split almost cleanly. that doesn't appear to be likely this time.
i suspect the numbers may in the end look a little more like the 2008 federal election, although it's not clear which party will end up in second and which will end up in third. the numbers then were:
conservatives - 39% / 52 seats
liberals - 34% / 38 seats
ndp - 18% / 17 seats
it's dangerous to invert the liberals & ndp and conclude they'll end up with the same number of seats after the inversion; if the ndp are running at 34% and the liberals are running at 18%, you can't really conclude that the ndp will get 38 seats or the liberals will get 17 seats.
but, i think this is the type of parliament we're on the way towards - one where the conservatives have a plurality of seats, but the ndp & liberals together have a majority.
while the fake polling isn't a convincing argument, i'm beginning to concede the point that wynne is burying herself, and that an ndp shift is becoming inevitable - it's just a question of trying to accurately quantify it.
it's way too early to start modelling. but i don't see an obvious parallel, right now.
so, this is a good demonstration of the absurdity of applying a universal swing.
even if it is true that the liberals are down 15 points and the ndp are up 15 points, it won't apply to every riding. and, i think there's reason to believe that the way it will apply will not particularly help the ndp a lot at all.
we'll see, though.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4212098/ontario-election-simulation-map/
even if it is true that the liberals are down 15 points and the ndp are up 15 points, it won't apply to every riding. and, i think there's reason to believe that the way it will apply will not particularly help the ndp a lot at all.
we'll see, though.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4212098/ontario-election-simulation-map/
i'm just imagining the scenario of a drunk person looking for a beer at 12:30.
if they're in town, they can find a bar. do i think it makes any difference if they try to get served at a bar or a store? well, you're going to run into hardasses either way, right. some bars serve anybody. some stores are pretty strict. the rules are going to be the same in either circumstance. so, what actual difference does it make? the server is a random variable, and you're just applying a prejudice towards one type or another.
you could argue that the bartender knows now much they've had to drink - which is true until they go to another bar.
maybe the more enlightened perspective is to put responsibility for drunkeness on the drunk, and not on the servers?
now, suppose this person is not in town. there may be a store a mile away, but the nearest bar is 20 miles away. is it a better idea to tell them to drive to the bar or let them pick it up at the store?
i'm not suggesting that this is a pressing issue; i'm not going to vote for or against beer in corner stores. i don't really care one way or another. but, kathleen wynne is embarrassing herself, and doing an incredible disservice to her party brand in thrusting out unfounded right-wing scare-mongering.
we need rational discourse, not the perpetuation of poorly thought through absurdities designed to act at the emotional level.
wynne isn't just running on an ndp platform, she's acting like an ndp leader. she's perpetuating all of the reasons i tend to avoid voting for this party, without really encapsulating any of the reasons i might think about it.....
even using the term "progressive" is bizarre. liberals are not "progressives", they're liberals. we fought prohibition, we didn't enact it. the ndp are progressives, in the prairie gospel sense. the conservatives are progressives in the populist farmers sense. the liberals are not and never have been nor have ever had anything to do with progressive politics.
the liberals may indeed require an extended period in the wilderness to figure out who they are. it's a shame. based purely on policy, they seemed to be doing alright. then, the writ dropped and it exposed a party that doesn't know what it is, any more.
i still don't really want to vote for the ndp. i want to vote for the liberals. but, the liberals don't seem to understand what being a liberal means any more....
i dunno what to do.
i don't think the conservatives are serious contenders in this riding, so it probably doesn't matter if i stay home.
if they're in town, they can find a bar. do i think it makes any difference if they try to get served at a bar or a store? well, you're going to run into hardasses either way, right. some bars serve anybody. some stores are pretty strict. the rules are going to be the same in either circumstance. so, what actual difference does it make? the server is a random variable, and you're just applying a prejudice towards one type or another.
you could argue that the bartender knows now much they've had to drink - which is true until they go to another bar.
maybe the more enlightened perspective is to put responsibility for drunkeness on the drunk, and not on the servers?
now, suppose this person is not in town. there may be a store a mile away, but the nearest bar is 20 miles away. is it a better idea to tell them to drive to the bar or let them pick it up at the store?
i'm not suggesting that this is a pressing issue; i'm not going to vote for or against beer in corner stores. i don't really care one way or another. but, kathleen wynne is embarrassing herself, and doing an incredible disservice to her party brand in thrusting out unfounded right-wing scare-mongering.
we need rational discourse, not the perpetuation of poorly thought through absurdities designed to act at the emotional level.
wynne isn't just running on an ndp platform, she's acting like an ndp leader. she's perpetuating all of the reasons i tend to avoid voting for this party, without really encapsulating any of the reasons i might think about it.....
even using the term "progressive" is bizarre. liberals are not "progressives", they're liberals. we fought prohibition, we didn't enact it. the ndp are progressives, in the prairie gospel sense. the conservatives are progressives in the populist farmers sense. the liberals are not and never have been nor have ever had anything to do with progressive politics.
the liberals may indeed require an extended period in the wilderness to figure out who they are. it's a shame. based purely on policy, they seemed to be doing alright. then, the writ dropped and it exposed a party that doesn't know what it is, any more.
i still don't really want to vote for the ndp. i want to vote for the liberals. but, the liberals don't seem to understand what being a liberal means any more....
i dunno what to do.
i don't think the conservatives are serious contenders in this riding, so it probably doesn't matter if i stay home.
i stopped this morning right before i got to the end of season 5.
there's now less than 2 months and less than two hundred pages before i get to the hookup with the blog, and the project flips over to archiving...
the audio closure also began in mid 2016, meaning i should be able to do some alter-reality work soon, too.
i wanted to eat and get to looking through listings this morning. instead, i crashed hard after the smoothie and feel like i should wait until tomorrow.
i wasn't as productive over the second half of the weekend as i'd have liked to have been. and all the listings i saw last week were for july...if can get a good 24 hours in, i think that's a better use of time tonight....
how's the air quality?
it's sporadic. she smoked a nasty joint last night, and it was still lingering deep into the morning. as mentioned, i slept all day - and i'm waking up feeling pretty awful. but, what i am is dehydrated, and i actually think it's partially from the air conditioner.
we're getting some nice hot & humid days this week, so i should be able to keep the windows open to fight the air. it really hasn't been warm enough out to turn the a/c on at all this spring. again: i don't understand these people. you turn the a/c on when it's 20 degrees out? what? i'd still have the heat on...20 degrees is cold...
what i'm going to say is that she's stopped smoking, except when it's raining. of course, that's the worst, because i can't always open the windows in the rain. but, you have to keep in mind that she has no legal obligation to smoke outside, either. this is a frustrating situation where nobody seems to know what the law is, and nobody seems to much care what it would be, if they did. it makes it difficult to react legally; neither the tenants nor the landlords care about the law or behave in ways consistent with it or intend to have to deal with it. anarchism isn't the idea that we don't follow laws, it's the idea that we don't need cops to force us to, and they're actually both failing that test, here - these are people that need a state to tell them what to do, because they can't figure it out on their own.
so, the landlord is illegally asking her to smoke outside, and she's mostly doing it, but it's not any kind of real solution. when she does decide to smoke inside, it lingers for days and makes me sick. the landlord is refusing to implement a real solution, which would be patching up the holes in the floor. he's really behaving illegally towards both of us, creating this false scenario of imaginary compromise. and, i think he's clueless enough to show up in court and say "i asked her to smoke outside...." and think that absolves him of liability. it doesn't. if he's not going to fix the floors, he needs to pay me out.
so, i'm going to work until i'm so hungry i have to stop.
there's now less than 2 months and less than two hundred pages before i get to the hookup with the blog, and the project flips over to archiving...
the audio closure also began in mid 2016, meaning i should be able to do some alter-reality work soon, too.
i wanted to eat and get to looking through listings this morning. instead, i crashed hard after the smoothie and feel like i should wait until tomorrow.
i wasn't as productive over the second half of the weekend as i'd have liked to have been. and all the listings i saw last week were for july...if can get a good 24 hours in, i think that's a better use of time tonight....
how's the air quality?
it's sporadic. she smoked a nasty joint last night, and it was still lingering deep into the morning. as mentioned, i slept all day - and i'm waking up feeling pretty awful. but, what i am is dehydrated, and i actually think it's partially from the air conditioner.
we're getting some nice hot & humid days this week, so i should be able to keep the windows open to fight the air. it really hasn't been warm enough out to turn the a/c on at all this spring. again: i don't understand these people. you turn the a/c on when it's 20 degrees out? what? i'd still have the heat on...20 degrees is cold...
what i'm going to say is that she's stopped smoking, except when it's raining. of course, that's the worst, because i can't always open the windows in the rain. but, you have to keep in mind that she has no legal obligation to smoke outside, either. this is a frustrating situation where nobody seems to know what the law is, and nobody seems to much care what it would be, if they did. it makes it difficult to react legally; neither the tenants nor the landlords care about the law or behave in ways consistent with it or intend to have to deal with it. anarchism isn't the idea that we don't follow laws, it's the idea that we don't need cops to force us to, and they're actually both failing that test, here - these are people that need a state to tell them what to do, because they can't figure it out on their own.
so, the landlord is illegally asking her to smoke outside, and she's mostly doing it, but it's not any kind of real solution. when she does decide to smoke inside, it lingers for days and makes me sick. the landlord is refusing to implement a real solution, which would be patching up the holes in the floor. he's really behaving illegally towards both of us, creating this false scenario of imaginary compromise. and, i think he's clueless enough to show up in court and say "i asked her to smoke outside...." and think that absolves him of liability. it doesn't. if he's not going to fix the floors, he needs to pay me out.
so, i'm going to work until i'm so hungry i have to stop.
Monday, May 21, 2018
two sentences in the platform on the gai.
but, what we've seen from the ndp is better encapsulated in the following part of the platform:
"The focus of the social assistance system should be helping people overcome barriers, get out of poverty and participate in society. "
that is what you're going to actually get from them. and, as such, i don't really trust them to follow through on a ubi; it's not really consistent with their ideological positions.
the tendency of "progressive" parties to push producerist policy is just typical calvinist bullshit: what they support is using the government's resources to send people to work, which in the end is just a process of trying to maximize profit for investors. it's this idea that the government is a human resources department for capital, and that, ultimately, it is work that sets us free. perfectly backwards. perfectly orwellian. you might naively point to religion as some kind of force of purity, but it was marx himself that made the point that religion is the tool that capital uses to brainwash workers with, and this is the analysis that any leftist would utilize - but progressives have never been leftists, they've always been conservatives.
i happen to seek freedom from labour, i don't need or want the government to help me to find a job, i want to abolish wage slavery. as the liberals are a bourgeois party, the focus on calvinism or producerism is less, and so they do seem to appeal more to the interests of artists.
i flipped through this, and my immediate take is that most of this just isn't going to happen, or is being presented sort of bizarrely. for example, they do state in the platform that their pharmacare plan only covers 125 drugs, but then they repeatedly refer to it as "universal pharmacare", which isn't really true. the liberal plan covers less people, but offers coverage for thousands of drugs for the people it's covering.
i sent my ndp mpp an email about getting estrogen covered under odsp once and he didn't reply. it's nice to see the promise, but i wouldn't bet on it. and, i'd be better off with the gai, if i have to choose.
i also don't think their claim that the liberals have pushed through deep cuts to health care is factually accurate; they actually brought in a special health tax. i spend a lot of time in the health system, and my only complaint is that the doctors seem to be too socially conservative. i've never faced unreasonable delays or experienced any of the things that the ndp are talking about.
at the end of the day, these are specific changes that will benefit specific people, so it's less about whether one health care plan is better than the other, and more about whether you're in a specific target group. if you're in the group that the liberals are targetting, you're obviously better off with a drug plan that covers thousands of medications; if you're not, the very limited coverage being offered by the ndp is better than nothing. it's something similar with the child care. so, it's a weird election on that level - there isn't really an objectively correct choice, not even over traditionally determined demographic groups.
nobody is offering universal plans, so it comes down to who you're being targeted by. and, that's a prescription to split the vote....
i don't get the same kind of personal commitment from horwath that i get from wynne; this is almost the exact opposite of what she told us four years ago, so it's feeling like she's just making shit up to get elected. it comes off as shady, slimy & opportunistic. i'm more inclined to believe that the 2014 version was the real andrea horwath, and so i'm left to conclude that you should be expecting her to govern on her right. at least the liberals have a record you can consult to understand where they sit: horwath just tells you what she thinks you want to hear, and changes her views as quickly as she realizes it isn't.
again: i don't want a change of government right now, and i'm uneasy about believing what the ndp is telling me. i don't think that voting ndp right now is a good idea. and, i think you should read this a bit more carefully, and compare it carefully to the 2014 platform, if you're convinced that it is.
https://www.ontariondp.ca/sites/default/files/Change-for-the-better.pdf
but, what we've seen from the ndp is better encapsulated in the following part of the platform:
"The focus of the social assistance system should be helping people overcome barriers, get out of poverty and participate in society. "
that is what you're going to actually get from them. and, as such, i don't really trust them to follow through on a ubi; it's not really consistent with their ideological positions.
the tendency of "progressive" parties to push producerist policy is just typical calvinist bullshit: what they support is using the government's resources to send people to work, which in the end is just a process of trying to maximize profit for investors. it's this idea that the government is a human resources department for capital, and that, ultimately, it is work that sets us free. perfectly backwards. perfectly orwellian. you might naively point to religion as some kind of force of purity, but it was marx himself that made the point that religion is the tool that capital uses to brainwash workers with, and this is the analysis that any leftist would utilize - but progressives have never been leftists, they've always been conservatives.
i happen to seek freedom from labour, i don't need or want the government to help me to find a job, i want to abolish wage slavery. as the liberals are a bourgeois party, the focus on calvinism or producerism is less, and so they do seem to appeal more to the interests of artists.
i flipped through this, and my immediate take is that most of this just isn't going to happen, or is being presented sort of bizarrely. for example, they do state in the platform that their pharmacare plan only covers 125 drugs, but then they repeatedly refer to it as "universal pharmacare", which isn't really true. the liberal plan covers less people, but offers coverage for thousands of drugs for the people it's covering.
i sent my ndp mpp an email about getting estrogen covered under odsp once and he didn't reply. it's nice to see the promise, but i wouldn't bet on it. and, i'd be better off with the gai, if i have to choose.
i also don't think their claim that the liberals have pushed through deep cuts to health care is factually accurate; they actually brought in a special health tax. i spend a lot of time in the health system, and my only complaint is that the doctors seem to be too socially conservative. i've never faced unreasonable delays or experienced any of the things that the ndp are talking about.
at the end of the day, these are specific changes that will benefit specific people, so it's less about whether one health care plan is better than the other, and more about whether you're in a specific target group. if you're in the group that the liberals are targetting, you're obviously better off with a drug plan that covers thousands of medications; if you're not, the very limited coverage being offered by the ndp is better than nothing. it's something similar with the child care. so, it's a weird election on that level - there isn't really an objectively correct choice, not even over traditionally determined demographic groups.
nobody is offering universal plans, so it comes down to who you're being targeted by. and, that's a prescription to split the vote....
i don't get the same kind of personal commitment from horwath that i get from wynne; this is almost the exact opposite of what she told us four years ago, so it's feeling like she's just making shit up to get elected. it comes off as shady, slimy & opportunistic. i'm more inclined to believe that the 2014 version was the real andrea horwath, and so i'm left to conclude that you should be expecting her to govern on her right. at least the liberals have a record you can consult to understand where they sit: horwath just tells you what she thinks you want to hear, and changes her views as quickly as she realizes it isn't.
again: i don't want a change of government right now, and i'm uneasy about believing what the ndp is telling me. i don't think that voting ndp right now is a good idea. and, i think you should read this a bit more carefully, and compare it carefully to the 2014 platform, if you're convinced that it is.
https://www.ontariondp.ca/sites/default/files/Change-for-the-better.pdf
the liberals need to be defending their own record, and putting forth their own proposals, not playing gotcha politics over trivialities.
i actually want to vote for what the liberals have put in motion. the ndp doesn't care about the environment, and it's stuck in a producerist attitude towards labour. the ndp haven't said anything about the gai, from what i can tell. but, these constant absurd meltdowns are making it almost impossible to hold to their own vision, which they're not even trying to project any more - they're just taking ideas from the ndp and watering them down, then selling it back as ndp-lite....and then criticizing them over trivial nonsense. who the fuck thought that would work?
it's almost like they're trying to lose this election.
i actually want to vote for what the liberals have put in motion. the ndp doesn't care about the environment, and it's stuck in a producerist attitude towards labour. the ndp haven't said anything about the gai, from what i can tell. but, these constant absurd meltdowns are making it almost impossible to hold to their own vision, which they're not even trying to project any more - they're just taking ideas from the ndp and watering them down, then selling it back as ndp-lite....and then criticizing them over trivial nonsense. who the fuck thought that would work?
it's almost like they're trying to lose this election.
it just exposes that the liberals have kind of lost the plot on their own governing proposals; it's a triviality, and about the only people that are going to give it a second thought are in the conservative party base. so, are they trying to stop conservatives from voting for the ndp?
it's just tactically incoherent.
it's just tactically incoherent.
during world war one, in the british empire, only people that owned property could vote. the mass of dead conscripted soldiers lacked the most basic concepts of freedom, as we understand them today - they were impoverished cannon fodder with almost no rights, that were sent to die for no discernible reason at all.
the poppy was meant to commemorate the senselessness of this slaughter by reminding us of how so many young men became fertilizer for these flowers that grow in the cemeteries of belgium, not uphold this revisionist nonsense that anybody "died for your freedom".
the poppy was meant to commemorate the senselessness of this slaughter by reminding us of how so many young men became fertilizer for these flowers that grow in the cemeteries of belgium, not uphold this revisionist nonsense that anybody "died for your freedom".
the poppy thing is complicated.
it's not supposed to be a glorification of war; it's supposed to be a symbol of mourning. but, in practice it's absolutely a glorification of war. so, i find myself largely in agreement with the statement, with the caveat that the thing has been badly co-opted.
i don't wear them, and i strenuously avoid the people handing them out.
it's not supposed to be a glorification of war; it's supposed to be a symbol of mourning. but, in practice it's absolutely a glorification of war. so, i find myself largely in agreement with the statement, with the caveat that the thing has been badly co-opted.
i don't wear them, and i strenuously avoid the people handing them out.
this tired old media narrative from the 1970s is coming back up: that the ndp are "fiscally irresponsible". that's propaganda from like three generations ago...
the facts in canada are that the ndp tends to be the party with the strongest fiscal discipline, as demonstrated by it's strong endorsement from the fraser institute (for roy romanow). bob rae is famous for his "rae days", which were a straight out attack on workers to try and cut the deficit.
on the other hand, the conservatives are known for running the largest deficits, due to their insistence on tax cuts that create structural deficits. they get into office by bribing people with tax cuts, but then they realize nothing can be cut after all, so they just let the deficits pile up.
these are just the facts: the ndp balances budgets by cutting programs, and the conservatives run huge deficits by decreasing taxes.
the liberals tend to exist in the middle, which is really the worst if you're an ideological small-c conservative: they run deficits, because they don't cut programs. they tend to privatize, instead, when they ought to raise corporate taxes, or ask the feds to print more money.
but, the narrative the media is going to present - that the conservatives are fiscally responsible and the ndp are not - is simply a fantasy reality. it may have been true before you were born, granted. but, it hasn't been true in forty years. in the modern era, it's the exact opposite: the conservatives run the biggest deficits, and the ndp run the smallest ones.
that's just the facts. just empirical observation.
the facts in canada are that the ndp tends to be the party with the strongest fiscal discipline, as demonstrated by it's strong endorsement from the fraser institute (for roy romanow). bob rae is famous for his "rae days", which were a straight out attack on workers to try and cut the deficit.
on the other hand, the conservatives are known for running the largest deficits, due to their insistence on tax cuts that create structural deficits. they get into office by bribing people with tax cuts, but then they realize nothing can be cut after all, so they just let the deficits pile up.
these are just the facts: the ndp balances budgets by cutting programs, and the conservatives run huge deficits by decreasing taxes.
the liberals tend to exist in the middle, which is really the worst if you're an ideological small-c conservative: they run deficits, because they don't cut programs. they tend to privatize, instead, when they ought to raise corporate taxes, or ask the feds to print more money.
but, the narrative the media is going to present - that the conservatives are fiscally responsible and the ndp are not - is simply a fantasy reality. it may have been true before you were born, granted. but, it hasn't been true in forty years. in the modern era, it's the exact opposite: the conservatives run the biggest deficits, and the ndp run the smallest ones.
that's just the facts. just empirical observation.
and, of course.
victoria day is, of course, about queen victoria, the previous long-lived queen, who resided over the decay of british society into rigid, puritanical absurdity. it's not exactly her fault, but she seems to have been on board with it - as weird and hypocritical as the period was. a lot of the social norms we take for granted - and that leftists have been fighting so hard to destroy - come out of this period of resurgent conservatism.
we'd be better off forgetting about it than upholding it - and, by co-opting the weekend for feats of drinking bombast, perhaps we are on the path there.
i'd be happy to see the name of the holiday changed.
speaking of which, i had to sleep most of the day. i was home around 9:30, but didn't really get to sleep until about 17:00. i am going to spend monday rebuilding, and then get back to looking on tuesday.
victoria day is, of course, about queen victoria, the previous long-lived queen, who resided over the decay of british society into rigid, puritanical absurdity. it's not exactly her fault, but she seems to have been on board with it - as weird and hypocritical as the period was. a lot of the social norms we take for granted - and that leftists have been fighting so hard to destroy - come out of this period of resurgent conservatism.
we'd be better off forgetting about it than upholding it - and, by co-opting the weekend for feats of drinking bombast, perhaps we are on the path there.
i'd be happy to see the name of the holiday changed.
speaking of which, i had to sleep most of the day. i was home around 9:30, but didn't really get to sleep until about 17:00. i am going to spend monday rebuilding, and then get back to looking on tuesday.
i spend a lot of time in detroit, and you can get booze in the corner stores, there. they're called "party stores", rather than convenience stores - there's a specific market for it. i kid you not. given the way i transit through detroit, this is useful to me. if i get out of a concert at 12:15 and want to get to a late night destination that's a 20-30 minute bike ride away, it makes sense to grab a drink for the ride.
i know that a lot of people will frown on this, and i ended that paragraph where i did to produce a shocked reaction, but i haven't lost any limbs yet and don't intend to any time soon. my example isn't exactly widely emulated.
that said, let's address the actual point here, which is the hours that the stores are open. the reason people get frustrated is that they have to go to a bar to get a drink if they can't get to the store before 22:00, or if they just happen to run out early. is 22:00 really a reasonable closing time in 2018? could it not be extended until 2:00?
but, this is just another example of where these parties are on the spectrum: the conservatives are promising to extend the hours available for purchase, while the socialists are in favour of continuing restricted access. then, they wonder why their bases are upside down - why the socialists do better with lawyers, and the conservatives do better with workers.
i don't personally find the status quo to be particularly restrictive, because i just buy more than i need ahead of time and then drink too much.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/19/andrea-horwath-says-ndp-would-not-allow-beer-wine-sales-at-corner-stores.html
i know that a lot of people will frown on this, and i ended that paragraph where i did to produce a shocked reaction, but i haven't lost any limbs yet and don't intend to any time soon. my example isn't exactly widely emulated.
that said, let's address the actual point here, which is the hours that the stores are open. the reason people get frustrated is that they have to go to a bar to get a drink if they can't get to the store before 22:00, or if they just happen to run out early. is 22:00 really a reasonable closing time in 2018? could it not be extended until 2:00?
but, this is just another example of where these parties are on the spectrum: the conservatives are promising to extend the hours available for purchase, while the socialists are in favour of continuing restricted access. then, they wonder why their bases are upside down - why the socialists do better with lawyers, and the conservatives do better with workers.
i don't personally find the status quo to be particularly restrictive, because i just buy more than i need ahead of time and then drink too much.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/19/andrea-horwath-says-ndp-would-not-allow-beer-wine-sales-at-corner-stores.html
toronto probably needs emergency shelter to house it's native-born homeless population, anyways.
if this is an excuse to get more money into the system, that's great. and, shame on everybody for needing a refugee crisis to do it.
i mean, john tory wasn't somewhere i was expecting to find an inversion of naomi klein's logic on disaster capitalism, but ill take it: let's take advantage of this crisis to get the funds flowing where they should have been flowing years ago.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/05/18/toronto-may-need-emergency-centres-to-house-refugees-says-mayor-tory.html
if this is an excuse to get more money into the system, that's great. and, shame on everybody for needing a refugee crisis to do it.
i mean, john tory wasn't somewhere i was expecting to find an inversion of naomi klein's logic on disaster capitalism, but ill take it: let's take advantage of this crisis to get the funds flowing where they should have been flowing years ago.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/05/18/toronto-may-need-emergency-centres-to-house-refugees-says-mayor-tory.html
again: i've been pointing out for a long time that i don't want to have these arguments. i have better things to do.
really.
it would be easier if practising muslims stayed in muslim countries, and we just focused on admitting apostates and atheists by screening them for high educational standards.
but, the reality is that this has been thrust upon us, and we have no choice but to fight this out in court - because i'm not about to let my rights be trampled over out of some bullshit appeal to relativism.
this is the future. it was predictable. and, only fools couldn't see it coming.
really.
it would be easier if practising muslims stayed in muslim countries, and we just focused on admitting apostates and atheists by screening them for high educational standards.
but, the reality is that this has been thrust upon us, and we have no choice but to fight this out in court - because i'm not about to let my rights be trampled over out of some bullshit appeal to relativism.
this is the future. it was predictable. and, only fools couldn't see it coming.
what we need to do is shift the narrative.
currently, we take this position that religious diversity should be respected,and we're all entitled to our beliefs. this is often confused for a liberal perspective, but is in truth incredibly right-wing.
what we need to shift the narrative to is the idea that it is in fact true that religion often teaches discrimination, and when it does so then the specific religion is wrong to do it. that is an actual liberal perspective on the topic: it seeks out an empirical truth, and interprets it relative to egalitarian principles.
we don't have an obligation to tolerate intolerance. when religion is intolerant, it needs to be called out for it. and, when religious beliefs lead people to break the law, they need to be held accountable for it, too.
it is ok to tell somebody that their religion is wrong.
currently, we take this position that religious diversity should be respected,and we're all entitled to our beliefs. this is often confused for a liberal perspective, but is in truth incredibly right-wing.
what we need to shift the narrative to is the idea that it is in fact true that religion often teaches discrimination, and when it does so then the specific religion is wrong to do it. that is an actual liberal perspective on the topic: it seeks out an empirical truth, and interprets it relative to egalitarian principles.
we don't have an obligation to tolerate intolerance. when religion is intolerant, it needs to be called out for it. and, when religious beliefs lead people to break the law, they need to be held accountable for it, too.
it is ok to tell somebody that their religion is wrong.
when you're being accused of discrimination, and your response is "but, religion.", you're not actually presenting a defence - you're just explaining why you're guilty of discrimination.
and, i consequently think the correct thing for a judge to do is be explicit about it, in identifying the religion as the source of discrimination, and causally deducing the reality of discrimination from the religious principle, itself; if the judge wanted to really do this right, it would find the precise place that the discrimination is written into the muslim scriptures, and begin the argument from that point.
the correct answer is that islam is an inherently discriminatory system of thought, and muslims need to be held accountable for it when they follow through with it.
i've been clear about this: i think that s. 2a of the charter was a mistake. it's not going to be easy to strike it out. but, for right now, anyways, judges have a responsibility to ensure that it isn't used a tool to circumvent the charter, altogether - which is what a judge would be doing in ruling that muslims have the right to discriminate against trans people, via conscience of religion. i just can't accept that argument; it's the religion that needs to be put on trial here, not the complainant.
and, i consequently think the correct thing for a judge to do is be explicit about it, in identifying the religion as the source of discrimination, and causally deducing the reality of discrimination from the religious principle, itself; if the judge wanted to really do this right, it would find the precise place that the discrimination is written into the muslim scriptures, and begin the argument from that point.
the correct answer is that islam is an inherently discriminatory system of thought, and muslims need to be held accountable for it when they follow through with it.
i've been clear about this: i think that s. 2a of the charter was a mistake. it's not going to be easy to strike it out. but, for right now, anyways, judges have a responsibility to ensure that it isn't used a tool to circumvent the charter, altogether - which is what a judge would be doing in ruling that muslims have the right to discriminate against trans people, via conscience of religion. i just can't accept that argument; it's the religion that needs to be put on trial here, not the complainant.
this sounds like a complicated case, and the facts are also in dispute. it's not going to be clear what the right answer is until the facts come out in a trial. but, my understanding of the general legal question is this:
is waxing a "general service" or a "specific service"? it might seem like it's a specific service, but there's some ambiguity if it's a general package.
a general service is something like picking something off of a menu. so, if you go into a restaurant and order the #2 special, denial of service on enumerated and analogous grounds would be a rights violation. but, if you order a #2 special with a list of specific modifications, that is a specialized service, and the owner has the right to refuse.
if the facts in the end demonstrate that this woman walked in and requested a wax job off of a menu, i would uphold the idea that this is discrimination - and i would not take the religious defense seriously. i don't think that citing religious observance is an excuse to deny service that is advertised; religion is the reason we have human rights in the first place. if the owner wins this case by citing "religious freedom", then that is just some kind of orwellian destruction of the concept of human rights - that would be upholding the right to discriminate, which is upholding the right to ignore human rights.
but, given that waxing services are widespread, i have a hard time understanding the claim to a $50,000 payment as a consequence of that discrimination. i would think that the complainant would have to demonstrate more concrete fiscal costs to be awarded a claim of this sort, or tie it to some kind of lost revenue. she's basically asking for $50,000 because somebody hurt her feelings.
it's going to come down to a bias in the judicial process, as these things generally do. but, even if she wins the argument, i don't think she wins the claims. and, it's consequently one of those weird scenarios where the judge would be justified in granting her the point - but forcing her to pay costs, anyways.
https://windsor.ctvnews.ca/human-rights-application-launched-against-windsor-body-waxing-business-by-transgender-woman-1.3925911
is waxing a "general service" or a "specific service"? it might seem like it's a specific service, but there's some ambiguity if it's a general package.
a general service is something like picking something off of a menu. so, if you go into a restaurant and order the #2 special, denial of service on enumerated and analogous grounds would be a rights violation. but, if you order a #2 special with a list of specific modifications, that is a specialized service, and the owner has the right to refuse.
if the facts in the end demonstrate that this woman walked in and requested a wax job off of a menu, i would uphold the idea that this is discrimination - and i would not take the religious defense seriously. i don't think that citing religious observance is an excuse to deny service that is advertised; religion is the reason we have human rights in the first place. if the owner wins this case by citing "religious freedom", then that is just some kind of orwellian destruction of the concept of human rights - that would be upholding the right to discriminate, which is upholding the right to ignore human rights.
but, given that waxing services are widespread, i have a hard time understanding the claim to a $50,000 payment as a consequence of that discrimination. i would think that the complainant would have to demonstrate more concrete fiscal costs to be awarded a claim of this sort, or tie it to some kind of lost revenue. she's basically asking for $50,000 because somebody hurt her feelings.
it's going to come down to a bias in the judicial process, as these things generally do. but, even if she wins the argument, i don't think she wins the claims. and, it's consequently one of those weird scenarios where the judge would be justified in granting her the point - but forcing her to pay costs, anyways.
https://windsor.ctvnews.ca/human-rights-application-launched-against-windsor-body-waxing-business-by-transgender-woman-1.3925911
Sunday, May 20, 2018
i went out in search of one thing last night and found something else instead, which worked out just fine.
saajtak was a good set. & i spent the rest of the night in a park. i was looking for a noise festival, but found a dance party instead.
the night is crystal clear, despite the fact that i took something from somebody that reminded me rather uncannily of an old friend of mine. and, i feel i came to terms with the utter triviality of satan as a concept, in the context of the judeo-christian mythology. i still think satanism is silly; just be a fucking atheist, y'know? but, even in this make-believe realm of metaphysical fantasy, satan is really easily disarmed as indiscernible from a metaphor for reality, and there's simply no value in being schizophrenic about it. strictly logically speaking, satan can never be any threat to you, unless you allow the fear to consume you.
so, if you ever find yourself face to face with satan, you should just ask for a smoke, and perhaps share a glass of whatever you're drinking. the only thing to fear is fear itself.
i may not have let on that i was deep in thought for much of the night. i didn't see any floating colours, but, i had an introspective moment.
introverts. you just don't know what the fuck's going on in there. really.
saajtak was a good set. & i spent the rest of the night in a park. i was looking for a noise festival, but found a dance party instead.
the night is crystal clear, despite the fact that i took something from somebody that reminded me rather uncannily of an old friend of mine. and, i feel i came to terms with the utter triviality of satan as a concept, in the context of the judeo-christian mythology. i still think satanism is silly; just be a fucking atheist, y'know? but, even in this make-believe realm of metaphysical fantasy, satan is really easily disarmed as indiscernible from a metaphor for reality, and there's simply no value in being schizophrenic about it. strictly logically speaking, satan can never be any threat to you, unless you allow the fear to consume you.
so, if you ever find yourself face to face with satan, you should just ask for a smoke, and perhaps share a glass of whatever you're drinking. the only thing to fear is fear itself.
i may not have let on that i was deep in thought for much of the night. i didn't see any floating colours, but, i had an introspective moment.
introverts. you just don't know what the fuck's going on in there. really.
i like that she's flipping the narrative on him.
it's a triviality. that doesn't matter. i have no idea what's going to happen, after this.
but, it will be a clear signal: if they don't react to this, they're beyond discourse.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/19/wynne-calls-for-police-probe-into-pc-nominations.html
it's a triviality. that doesn't matter. i have no idea what's going to happen, after this.
but, it will be a clear signal: if they don't react to this, they're beyond discourse.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/05/19/wynne-calls-for-police-probe-into-pc-nominations.html
Saturday, May 19, 2018
something the conservatives learned in 2011 was that the only way to get a majority for the conservatives in the 905 is to boost ndp support in key ridings at the expense of the liberals - that is, they have no choice but to try and split the vote.
the conservatives cannot win here without splitting the vote.
now, in that particular election, it was kind of what had to happen. there was no excuse to vote for ignatieff. if that was what the liberals were going to run, you had an obligation to vote ndp. there's no lesser evil calculation in voting for ignatieff over harper; the lesser evil may have even been harper. i'm not aware of harper condoning torture. ever. and, it seems unlikely and out of character; i'd be surprised to hear it, frankly.
we all knew the conservatives would win, but you had to do it, because the liberal leader was a war criminal waiting to happen.
in this particular election, that logic does not hold. wynne is about as far left as liberals come; she's maybe even an anachronism in that sense, as the other provincial liberal parties exist firmly on the center-right, nowadays.
regardless, it's easy to understand what the tory media is doing, in pushing for the ndp: it's trying to split the vote to open up ridings they wouldn't otherwise have a chance in. there is no other way for them to win.
now, don't misunderstand me: i'm not suggesting that the liberals are in good shape, here. the liberals are certainly on the brink of catastrophe. but, they've been on this precipice for months, and we don't seem to want to push them off.
i've pointing out forever, now, that wynne's big problem is on her left. but, this movement to the ndp is not happening. the polls just don't uphold the idea that liberals are moving to the ndp; what liberal voters are actually telling pollsters is that they don't know what to do.
so, we remain in this holding pattern, with the conservatives running in the mid to high 30s (which is no doubt inflated...) and the ndp run in the mid to low 20s, but the liberal base unwilling to make a choice.
as mentioned previously: if these voters decide to stay home, in the end, the liberals will be decimated by voter apathy, produced by a media intent on destroying them. this will be manufactured dissent.
but, i don't see any reason to think they're going to move to the ndp now, when they haven't yet, either.
if, in the end, the liberals can keep their base in toronto, then not a lot of seats are going to change hands - even if the numbers in front of us fluctuate wildly.
we're not seeing a groundswell of ndp support. i actually wish we were. but we're not.
what we're seeing is liberal party voters turn inwards, due to being beaten down by a hostile media that has convinced it that it's leader is incompetent. a sad truth, as she is anything but.
liberals have failed at controlling the message. but, the other parties have failed to capitalize on it, with the tories running an obvious buffoon and the dippers running a sleazy used car salesperson with minimal believability.
again: the media wants to split the vote. but, the electorate is hesitant to follow. and it's consequently still anybody's election to win.
the conservatives cannot win here without splitting the vote.
now, in that particular election, it was kind of what had to happen. there was no excuse to vote for ignatieff. if that was what the liberals were going to run, you had an obligation to vote ndp. there's no lesser evil calculation in voting for ignatieff over harper; the lesser evil may have even been harper. i'm not aware of harper condoning torture. ever. and, it seems unlikely and out of character; i'd be surprised to hear it, frankly.
we all knew the conservatives would win, but you had to do it, because the liberal leader was a war criminal waiting to happen.
in this particular election, that logic does not hold. wynne is about as far left as liberals come; she's maybe even an anachronism in that sense, as the other provincial liberal parties exist firmly on the center-right, nowadays.
regardless, it's easy to understand what the tory media is doing, in pushing for the ndp: it's trying to split the vote to open up ridings they wouldn't otherwise have a chance in. there is no other way for them to win.
now, don't misunderstand me: i'm not suggesting that the liberals are in good shape, here. the liberals are certainly on the brink of catastrophe. but, they've been on this precipice for months, and we don't seem to want to push them off.
i've pointing out forever, now, that wynne's big problem is on her left. but, this movement to the ndp is not happening. the polls just don't uphold the idea that liberals are moving to the ndp; what liberal voters are actually telling pollsters is that they don't know what to do.
so, we remain in this holding pattern, with the conservatives running in the mid to high 30s (which is no doubt inflated...) and the ndp run in the mid to low 20s, but the liberal base unwilling to make a choice.
as mentioned previously: if these voters decide to stay home, in the end, the liberals will be decimated by voter apathy, produced by a media intent on destroying them. this will be manufactured dissent.
but, i don't see any reason to think they're going to move to the ndp now, when they haven't yet, either.
if, in the end, the liberals can keep their base in toronto, then not a lot of seats are going to change hands - even if the numbers in front of us fluctuate wildly.
we're not seeing a groundswell of ndp support. i actually wish we were. but we're not.
what we're seeing is liberal party voters turn inwards, due to being beaten down by a hostile media that has convinced it that it's leader is incompetent. a sad truth, as she is anything but.
liberals have failed at controlling the message. but, the other parties have failed to capitalize on it, with the tories running an obvious buffoon and the dippers running a sleazy used car salesperson with minimal believability.
again: the media wants to split the vote. but, the electorate is hesitant to follow. and it's consequently still anybody's election to win.
the new mainstreet poll is the same as the previous one, relative to the margin of error.
the headlines are bunk: there's no narrowing of any gap, there's just stasis.
but, the clock is ticking. everybody is running out of time to prevent a conservative minority that's unlikely to pass a budget, if it's even allowed to form a government.
the headlines are bunk: there's no narrowing of any gap, there's just stasis.
but, the clock is ticking. everybody is running out of time to prevent a conservative minority that's unlikely to pass a budget, if it's even allowed to form a government.
i had migraines for months after this, but i haven't had a single one since i moved.
i just want to tie two things together. i was convinced that this space was under the influence of some kind of magnetic interference, and it was fucking with my headphones making it impossible to mix; aphasia is thought to be the result of a wave of energy running through your brain, and disrupting certain functions. are these consequences of the same thing?
and, if so, was i being attacked for demonstrating that clinton was rigging the primary?
it's a strange thing to film your life, and piece together the oddities after the fact.
but, i keep pointing out that if this is what is happening then it is utterly foolish; the best way to deal with me was always to ignore me. if i just could have been mixing over this period, none of this would have happened. and, i might be done period 3.
i just want to tie two things together. i was convinced that this space was under the influence of some kind of magnetic interference, and it was fucking with my headphones making it impossible to mix; aphasia is thought to be the result of a wave of energy running through your brain, and disrupting certain functions. are these consequences of the same thing?
and, if so, was i being attacked for demonstrating that clinton was rigging the primary?
it's a strange thing to film your life, and piece together the oddities after the fact.
but, i keep pointing out that if this is what is happening then it is utterly foolish; the best way to deal with me was always to ignore me. if i just could have been mixing over this period, none of this would have happened. and, i might be done period 3.
so, should i be celebrating victoria day here in canada?
meh.
listen, i don't really have much to say about the queen one way or the other. about the only ritual i have attached to this day is posting the sex pistols classic somewhere or other. no future for you.
but, that is widespread, here. nobody much cares about the royal family, outside of very old tories, so old that they're starting to disappear.
the general idea on the "2-4 weekend" is that you get a case of beer - they come in cases of 24 - and go find a cottage somewhere to get drunk at. this is the canadian tradition. you're supposed to spend it arguing about hockey, too - and transitioning into the summer. but, it's frankly not really my idea of a good time. i'm not going to pretend i have access to such a cottage, but i probably wouldn't go, if i did.
if there were open air festivals around here, i might go to one. but, the victoria day weekend is actually a strangely insular thing - we interpret it as a family event, rather than a public one. it's about those cottages. as such, the bars here are actually likely to be fairly empty. the city doesn't pick up on victoria day; it actually shuts down.
on top of that, there's a local "art party" taking place that has occupied the interests of much of the local scene. that's where a lot of the city is going to be. but, i'm not generally into drinking in alleys, either - or at least not before 3:00 am. there will be a dj set, but it's more about sitting around and talking. i get that a lot of people would actually prefer that, but it's not my thing.
i checked the local venues and there's nothing much going on to get excited about.
so, i'm not going to just stay here for the sake of it. it's a fading imperial holiday that we mostly just use as an excuse to get drunk.
however, if the rain clears out late, it's possible i could just hit up phog - if i decide to go anywhere at all.
meh.
listen, i don't really have much to say about the queen one way or the other. about the only ritual i have attached to this day is posting the sex pistols classic somewhere or other. no future for you.
but, that is widespread, here. nobody much cares about the royal family, outside of very old tories, so old that they're starting to disappear.
the general idea on the "2-4 weekend" is that you get a case of beer - they come in cases of 24 - and go find a cottage somewhere to get drunk at. this is the canadian tradition. you're supposed to spend it arguing about hockey, too - and transitioning into the summer. but, it's frankly not really my idea of a good time. i'm not going to pretend i have access to such a cottage, but i probably wouldn't go, if i did.
if there were open air festivals around here, i might go to one. but, the victoria day weekend is actually a strangely insular thing - we interpret it as a family event, rather than a public one. it's about those cottages. as such, the bars here are actually likely to be fairly empty. the city doesn't pick up on victoria day; it actually shuts down.
on top of that, there's a local "art party" taking place that has occupied the interests of much of the local scene. that's where a lot of the city is going to be. but, i'm not generally into drinking in alleys, either - or at least not before 3:00 am. there will be a dj set, but it's more about sitting around and talking. i get that a lot of people would actually prefer that, but it's not my thing.
i checked the local venues and there's nothing much going on to get excited about.
so, i'm not going to just stay here for the sake of it. it's a fading imperial holiday that we mostly just use as an excuse to get drunk.
however, if the rain clears out late, it's possible i could just hit up phog - if i decide to go anywhere at all.
Friday, May 18, 2018
i expected to stay in tonight. it's cold & rainy.
i was hoping to get out tomorrow; it's iffy.
and, i've missed this band like a dozen times, too.
if i have to stay in tomorrow, this is what i'm missing.
i was up in the afternoon, but went back to sleep; i'm up now. i made a few calls, but nobody expects much of a market on the victoria day weekend. that said, i'm going to see something in the morning...
i won't understand the market until next week.
for tonight, i'm rebuilding. really.
i was hoping to get out tomorrow; it's iffy.
and, i've missed this band like a dozen times, too.
if i have to stay in tomorrow, this is what i'm missing.
i was up in the afternoon, but went back to sleep; i'm up now. i made a few calls, but nobody expects much of a market on the victoria day weekend. that said, i'm going to see something in the morning...
i won't understand the market until next week.
for tonight, i'm rebuilding. really.
better get rid of voting altogether - too dangerous.
and, better to keep your kid home. they didn't do a security check on the bus driver, and there are coyotes around. also, lightning. what is a parent to do in the perpetual threat of lightning? we can't send our kids around in faraday cages.
does she really think you can plan to stop school shooters? that they need invitations?
how do these people manage to dress themselves in the morning?
http://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/05/18/students-risk-vote-parents/
and, better to keep your kid home. they didn't do a security check on the bus driver, and there are coyotes around. also, lightning. what is a parent to do in the perpetual threat of lightning? we can't send our kids around in faraday cages.
does she really think you can plan to stop school shooters? that they need invitations?
how do these people manage to dress themselves in the morning?
http://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/05/18/students-risk-vote-parents/
thirlwell is shock rock; that tune was a little more offensive than i remembered it, so i feel the need to write this.
he's in character. you're not supposed to identify with it, so much as you're supposed to interpret it as a character attached to the music. and, this is often the case with thirlwell, who writes a lot of music that has felt rather exotic in the last quarter of the twentieth century, and the first quarter of this one. he doesn't just put it out there, he narrates it from this historical understanding of it, helping you see it from that first-person perspective, rather than just interpreting it as a product of a distant culture.
swing music was all about male energy and macho swagger on the floor. there's a kind of revisionist slant on this. and, women were more free in the 20s and 30s than they were immediately after the war, too, remember, when this kind of insular conservatism set in as a reaction to the depravity of what had just happened - and the promiscuity inherent to years away from your partner. so, a swing party was hunting grounds for consensual encounters. and, that's what he's trying to get across - without revisionist filters.
is he a historian, then? i dunno. but, it's a kind of satire, with it's wry humour, as it narrates that history.
and it's agit-prop.
so, i'm consequently not going to argue with you if you find his work offensive; his work is offensive, and you're supposed to be offended by it. he agrees it's offensive. but, then you're supposed to do something about it, or reflect on it, or just call it what it is.
you're not supposed to just tell him to stop offending you; that's not activism, it's a reactionary type of conservatism. activists dismantle things, they don't censor them.
personally? i'm going to agree he goes a little overboard. the "sister could you spare a suck?" part was a little gauche. now, as mentioned, you could and probably should make the opposite argument - that to be an authentic expression of the character of a swing dancer, you need to be crass like that. but, that doesn't mean it's enjoyable to listen to as music. so, what you end up doing is kind of overlooking these kinds of moments.
but, there's an argument that thirlwell realized that, too - the track was released as a side project on a small label. it's been out of print for years. you'll never find it for sale anywhere. if he had confidence in the presentation, he would have put it on an album....
in later years, thirlwell would seem to present the perspective that he got to a point where he was sick of people reacting negatively to what he was doing and stepped away from doing it. it's hard to blame him for giving up. but, he was really misunderstood from the start.
he's in character. you're not supposed to identify with it, so much as you're supposed to interpret it as a character attached to the music. and, this is often the case with thirlwell, who writes a lot of music that has felt rather exotic in the last quarter of the twentieth century, and the first quarter of this one. he doesn't just put it out there, he narrates it from this historical understanding of it, helping you see it from that first-person perspective, rather than just interpreting it as a product of a distant culture.
swing music was all about male energy and macho swagger on the floor. there's a kind of revisionist slant on this. and, women were more free in the 20s and 30s than they were immediately after the war, too, remember, when this kind of insular conservatism set in as a reaction to the depravity of what had just happened - and the promiscuity inherent to years away from your partner. so, a swing party was hunting grounds for consensual encounters. and, that's what he's trying to get across - without revisionist filters.
is he a historian, then? i dunno. but, it's a kind of satire, with it's wry humour, as it narrates that history.
and it's agit-prop.
so, i'm consequently not going to argue with you if you find his work offensive; his work is offensive, and you're supposed to be offended by it. he agrees it's offensive. but, then you're supposed to do something about it, or reflect on it, or just call it what it is.
you're not supposed to just tell him to stop offending you; that's not activism, it's a reactionary type of conservatism. activists dismantle things, they don't censor them.
personally? i'm going to agree he goes a little overboard. the "sister could you spare a suck?" part was a little gauche. now, as mentioned, you could and probably should make the opposite argument - that to be an authentic expression of the character of a swing dancer, you need to be crass like that. but, that doesn't mean it's enjoyable to listen to as music. so, what you end up doing is kind of overlooking these kinds of moments.
but, there's an argument that thirlwell realized that, too - the track was released as a side project on a small label. it's been out of print for years. you'll never find it for sale anywhere. if he had confidence in the presentation, he would have put it on an album....
in later years, thirlwell would seem to present the perspective that he got to a point where he was sick of people reacting negatively to what he was doing and stepped away from doing it. it's hard to blame him for giving up. but, he was really misunderstood from the start.
i like idm & industrial; when i listen to house, it's, like float-house. dream-house. house-gaze? i think you get the point.
i'm actually going to get a bit of all of that.
but, i'm not one for the booty shakin', or the dub step, or the autotune or the minimal house beats. it's a shame the leland show sold out so fast, but i actually don't think i'm missing out on anything.
and, i expect to spend the weekend with local underground detroit techno people, not with tourists and smug-ass rich kids.
i'm actually going to get a bit of all of that.
but, i'm not one for the booty shakin', or the dub step, or the autotune or the minimal house beats. it's a shame the leland show sold out so fast, but i actually don't think i'm missing out on anything.
and, i expect to spend the weekend with local underground detroit techno people, not with tourists and smug-ass rich kids.
yeah.
i've got everything condensed into two crazy days.
i'm skipping out on chrome on thursday. it's true that they're ancient, and it's not the same band. but i just don't want to blow the cash, really. and i'm going to get stuck over night, too. it would be one of those things you get to say you did, but it's too much of a hassle.
the weekend starts on friday at 16:00 at el club and runs until i get home on saturday morning. i will need to pay cover at the second venue, but it's relatively cheap. the first venue is free. and, i may need to get a coffee at the end. this should cost less than $50 usd + border fees. if i don't drink too much, it could be more like $30.
saturday starts at 22:00 and runs until sunday afternoon, at least. i will need to pay cover at the first venue, and it's a little steep (not exorbitant.) but it looks like the best party. i'm going to skip out on this weather warlock thing because...if it was closer to the venue i'd do it, but i don't see the need to rush to get to hamtramck for 21:00, then rush to the party for 22:00 after - that's a lot of hassle and expense for little purpose. i can see a thrown together jam band some other night. the second and third parts of this are without cover, and it appears i may get a free meal out of it. score. so, the initial cover was a little steep, but it shouldn't work out to much more than $50 usd, either - maybe $60 usd.
i'm planning to spend sunday sleeping, but if i change my mind i'l hit the free party in mexicantown. unlikely. but, that would start at 20:00 and technically go until 14:00 the next day.
i'm more interested in going to a techno showcase on monday afternoon. i'll have to check the bus schedule. but, if i can do something like get to mexicantown for 7:00 am, i could handle a very long day over monday night, to get home for tuesday morning. or, i could do the all night in mexicantown and leave the techno revue a little early. we'll see how things like cash look....
friday & saturday are pretty set & sunday revolves around the most reasonable way to hit the revue on monday.
i've got everything condensed into two crazy days.
i'm skipping out on chrome on thursday. it's true that they're ancient, and it's not the same band. but i just don't want to blow the cash, really. and i'm going to get stuck over night, too. it would be one of those things you get to say you did, but it's too much of a hassle.
the weekend starts on friday at 16:00 at el club and runs until i get home on saturday morning. i will need to pay cover at the second venue, but it's relatively cheap. the first venue is free. and, i may need to get a coffee at the end. this should cost less than $50 usd + border fees. if i don't drink too much, it could be more like $30.
saturday starts at 22:00 and runs until sunday afternoon, at least. i will need to pay cover at the first venue, and it's a little steep (not exorbitant.) but it looks like the best party. i'm going to skip out on this weather warlock thing because...if it was closer to the venue i'd do it, but i don't see the need to rush to get to hamtramck for 21:00, then rush to the party for 22:00 after - that's a lot of hassle and expense for little purpose. i can see a thrown together jam band some other night. the second and third parts of this are without cover, and it appears i may get a free meal out of it. score. so, the initial cover was a little steep, but it shouldn't work out to much more than $50 usd, either - maybe $60 usd.
i'm planning to spend sunday sleeping, but if i change my mind i'l hit the free party in mexicantown. unlikely. but, that would start at 20:00 and technically go until 14:00 the next day.
i'm more interested in going to a techno showcase on monday afternoon. i'll have to check the bus schedule. but, if i can do something like get to mexicantown for 7:00 am, i could handle a very long day over monday night, to get home for tuesday morning. or, i could do the all night in mexicantown and leave the techno revue a little early. we'll see how things like cash look....
friday & saturday are pretty set & sunday revolves around the most reasonable way to hit the revue on monday.
Thursday, May 17, 2018
i mean, if you're from out of town, you might not realize it...
....but you're paying $40 for dj sets you can see on any detroit night for $5-10, or you're paying airfare for german djs to come in. hey, if you have the cash, you don't care. cool. whatever.
but, you're consequently going to end up with these bars full of very wealthy tourists that are being herded to where they'll spend cash; the real detroit techno parties, with the local detroit techno personalities, are going to be happening in parks or warehouses for less than $20. the bars are going to fill up with what are basically yuppies.
those expensive parties mostly really aren't the ones you want to be at at all.
there's one expensive show i think i want to hit. it's the one by the best local promoter. but, if i do that, then i'm skipping a noise show. i dunno. i'll see how i feel.
....but you're paying $40 for dj sets you can see on any detroit night for $5-10, or you're paying airfare for german djs to come in. hey, if you have the cash, you don't care. cool. whatever.
but, you're consequently going to end up with these bars full of very wealthy tourists that are being herded to where they'll spend cash; the real detroit techno parties, with the local detroit techno personalities, are going to be happening in parks or warehouses for less than $20. the bars are going to fill up with what are basically yuppies.
those expensive parties mostly really aren't the ones you want to be at at all.
there's one expensive show i think i want to hit. it's the one by the best local promoter. but, if i do that, then i'm skipping a noise show. i dunno. i'll see how i feel.
i'm still awake.
it's a nice change...
i'm working down my movement....movements....and i've got a pretty wacky weekend lined up, but the key thing about it is that it's mostly low cover.
i didn't have a bicycle last year, so what i wanted was to just find the place open all night and park myself there. so, i showed up to the after hour party at like 9:00. and, while i deny that i was too drunk, i don't deny that i was in fact pretty drunk, sure. and, i'm not ashamed of that.
but, for example, i skipped the trip metal festival because it made more sense to me to just go to the works. this is going to be different this year...i'm going to get out to a number of noise acts...and to a number of actually free parties....
the local bar parties seem to be a bit better, though, too - less booty shaking and more atmospheric. in fact, i'm not having the difficulties this year that i usually do.
it's a swell path.
but i'm not publishing it.
i'll tell you about it after.
it's a nice change...
i'm working down my movement....movements....and i've got a pretty wacky weekend lined up, but the key thing about it is that it's mostly low cover.
i didn't have a bicycle last year, so what i wanted was to just find the place open all night and park myself there. so, i showed up to the after hour party at like 9:00. and, while i deny that i was too drunk, i don't deny that i was in fact pretty drunk, sure. and, i'm not ashamed of that.
but, for example, i skipped the trip metal festival because it made more sense to me to just go to the works. this is going to be different this year...i'm going to get out to a number of noise acts...and to a number of actually free parties....
the local bar parties seem to be a bit better, though, too - less booty shaking and more atmospheric. in fact, i'm not having the difficulties this year that i usually do.
it's a swell path.
but i'm not publishing it.
i'll tell you about it after.
so, i got a start on it - sent some emails, left some messages. i don't expect to hear back from anybody until tuesday.
the market is sort of what i expected - it's not awful, but it seems like it's thin. i think it should open up next week.
i have not technically given notice, but i've asked for the lease to be broken on august 1st. so, i can play this both ways.
how's the air? well, i have the windows wide open. i can smell it, but it's not affecting me. i can't always have the windows open...
i've actually had a long day, which is nice, although i've spent a lot of it blaring merzbow at the neighbour sitting outside, to get her to smoke somewhere else.
it's a shitty situation. if i close the windows, i get overwhelmed by the pot (& the a/c). if i keep them open, i have to deal with the neighbour smoking - literally right underneath the window. there's no reason she has to smoke right there, and i've asked her not to, but she's just a worthless, selfish piece of shit that doesn't care - so i can't care about her, if she won't care about me. so, i'm just blaring merzbow out the window whenever she goes out to get her to fuck off - and it's definitely getting to her. like, i think i saw her crying. good.
i'll be happy to get the fuck out of here.
for right now, the day is over and i'm still awake, so i'm going to get to rebuilding, i guess. i don't want to eat again until the morning. and i have no idea how long i'll stay awake for.
the market is sort of what i expected - it's not awful, but it seems like it's thin. i think it should open up next week.
i have not technically given notice, but i've asked for the lease to be broken on august 1st. so, i can play this both ways.
how's the air? well, i have the windows wide open. i can smell it, but it's not affecting me. i can't always have the windows open...
i've actually had a long day, which is nice, although i've spent a lot of it blaring merzbow at the neighbour sitting outside, to get her to smoke somewhere else.
it's a shitty situation. if i close the windows, i get overwhelmed by the pot (& the a/c). if i keep them open, i have to deal with the neighbour smoking - literally right underneath the window. there's no reason she has to smoke right there, and i've asked her not to, but she's just a worthless, selfish piece of shit that doesn't care - so i can't care about her, if she won't care about me. so, i'm just blaring merzbow out the window whenever she goes out to get her to fuck off - and it's definitely getting to her. like, i think i saw her crying. good.
i'll be happy to get the fuck out of here.
for right now, the day is over and i'm still awake, so i'm going to get to rebuilding, i guess. i don't want to eat again until the morning. and i have no idea how long i'll stay awake for.
i was as excited about el club as everybody else, but the programming has really taken a nose dive, hasn't it? it's become magic stick 2.0.
there were a few nights that i was there last year when the place was just dead. but, it just closes too early. and it's in a bad neighbourhood....
this is going to be the summer of hamtramck, methinks. so long as that bicycle holds out, anyways.
when i eventually replace it, i'll start bringing the replacement back to canada with me. but i just don't want that much rust in the house, and it's as safe where it is as it would be anywhere else.
i'll be lucky if it lasts the year. and, if it does, i'll just take the lock back with me and leave it somewhere for parts.
there were a few nights that i was there last year when the place was just dead. but, it just closes too early. and it's in a bad neighbourhood....
this is going to be the summer of hamtramck, methinks. so long as that bicycle holds out, anyways.
when i eventually replace it, i'll start bringing the replacement back to canada with me. but i just don't want that much rust in the house, and it's as safe where it is as it would be anywhere else.
i'll be lucky if it lasts the year. and, if it does, i'll just take the lock back with me and leave it somewhere for parts.
well, i didn't get any work done, but i got a handle on what's going on this weekend...
all the after hours spots seem to have stopped updating around november. i don't know if the weather hit them or what, but i'm kind of blinded. how many are just quiet, and how many are defunct? there's a few that i'm pretty sure are still running, but none seem to be running this weekend...
*shrug*
- i don't remember the last time i went out, which was a saturday. so, i don't know if my goto spot was still there or not. i think they're only there on saturdays.
- i remember the friday previous, but...it was weird. i'm outside a bar with a 4:00 am license a little after 3:00 or so. it was late, legit. i asked somebody if they're done, and he said he was, but, in hindsight, i think it was the sound guy - i actually think i've talked to this guy a bunch of times because he's the sound guy. brain freeze. then, i sat around and hung out with people waiting for cabs ("ubers") for like an hour. but, it seemed like the place was still open. i'm too shy in these situations - i should have asked point blank. it was just weird. i thought i was told no, and didn't want to be pushy, but i'm not sure that this was true. you have to understand that i'm really neurotic about not appearing aggressive when i'm drinking. i'm the most passive drunk in the world, and i exaggerate it because i hate violence - i'm paranoid i'm going to get into a fight. the flip side is that they can't charge me cover at 3:30, right. so, i dunno. the intent was to hang out there until around 4:30. and i was in fact there until a little after 4:00, it's just that i was just hanging around outside....and i would have probably been out on the patio had i gone in. but, either way that's not the late night i was looking for, and i knew it wasn't going to be. but i'm going to blame myself for being too shy, rather than give up on the path. i might do this again some other friday night....
- i actually made it home on the night of the screaming females concert. i'd had plenty to drink. that was the right choice. but, like... i made it. i knew it was time to go home.
- the sunsquabi show was also a friday, and i can confirm that my goto spot was closed. friday. but also april.
so, i dunno. i guess i might have to ask around a bit more. on a friday, finding somewhere open until 4:30 is largely good enough, as the bus comes at 6:00. but, on a saturday, the bus doesn't come until 8:30. i need to find the spots open until 7:00...
all the after hours spots seem to have stopped updating around november. i don't know if the weather hit them or what, but i'm kind of blinded. how many are just quiet, and how many are defunct? there's a few that i'm pretty sure are still running, but none seem to be running this weekend...
*shrug*
- i don't remember the last time i went out, which was a saturday. so, i don't know if my goto spot was still there or not. i think they're only there on saturdays.
- i remember the friday previous, but...it was weird. i'm outside a bar with a 4:00 am license a little after 3:00 or so. it was late, legit. i asked somebody if they're done, and he said he was, but, in hindsight, i think it was the sound guy - i actually think i've talked to this guy a bunch of times because he's the sound guy. brain freeze. then, i sat around and hung out with people waiting for cabs ("ubers") for like an hour. but, it seemed like the place was still open. i'm too shy in these situations - i should have asked point blank. it was just weird. i thought i was told no, and didn't want to be pushy, but i'm not sure that this was true. you have to understand that i'm really neurotic about not appearing aggressive when i'm drinking. i'm the most passive drunk in the world, and i exaggerate it because i hate violence - i'm paranoid i'm going to get into a fight. the flip side is that they can't charge me cover at 3:30, right. so, i dunno. the intent was to hang out there until around 4:30. and i was in fact there until a little after 4:00, it's just that i was just hanging around outside....and i would have probably been out on the patio had i gone in. but, either way that's not the late night i was looking for, and i knew it wasn't going to be. but i'm going to blame myself for being too shy, rather than give up on the path. i might do this again some other friday night....
- i actually made it home on the night of the screaming females concert. i'd had plenty to drink. that was the right choice. but, like... i made it. i knew it was time to go home.
- the sunsquabi show was also a friday, and i can confirm that my goto spot was closed. friday. but also april.
so, i dunno. i guess i might have to ask around a bit more. on a friday, finding somewhere open until 4:30 is largely good enough, as the bus comes at 6:00. but, on a saturday, the bus doesn't come until 8:30. i need to find the spots open until 7:00...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)