Pages

20101031

POEM: EMPTY WINDOW

EMPTY WINDOW
2010103101 - c2010 WLC

Another empty window
I want to fill it up with glee
Shiny surface gleaming
Like you have done for me

Sometimes I'm wrought with worry
But it must be clear to see
Despite a past of obstacles
I am with you happily

The past is nothing more than that
The future isn't ours to view
But in the present, where we are,
Is this gift of you

So I reminisce
Forget to live
With he who has
So much to give

Where do I go when I'm not here
Identifying with my words
Spelling out my history
Fingers singing like the birds

Lost within my memories
Looking forward to my past
So that I can live it over
Just in case it doesn't last

Yet still an empty window
I never have that much to give
I feel an endless pool of wonder
For your staying here to live

Wrought with worry, so afraid
It isn't very clear to see
Despite a past of disappointment
I'm still with you happily

Lost within my memories
Looking forward to my past
So that I can live it over
Just in case it doesn't last

20101013

Finally found my style

This is my ideal wardrobe.  This stuff has been tried and tested and I've finally figured out it's what I love.  Very specific, mind you.  I'm excited, though, because at least now I have an idea as to what I'm looking for!!

Shirts:  Rayon.  Sleeveless.  Button-up.  Solid-colour, if anything otherwise, then the most would be subtle stitching but no patterns.  Colours - dark stuff, like black, brown, deep reds, deep purples, dark greens.  A little below the waist for length.  I have searched high and low for these sorts of shirts and haven't yet found much in the way of what I like.

Pants (summer):  Gaucho.  That's what they're called!!  Gaucho!!  Basically capris with extra wide legs.  They look like a skirt when worn because the material is so loose and draping.  Rayon, patterned or not, any colour that would go with the usual colour scheme.  Cotton might work, too.  I don't see these very often.  One pair was at http://www.thelittlebazaar.com/category/Clothing/.

Pants (hiking or more all-purpose):  Zip-off pants with lots of pockets.  Awesome.  Solid colours, browns, greens, black.  I've seen this in heavy cotton and nylon ripstop.  Both are awesome.  I generally have found these at LLBean and other outdoorsy stores.

Pants (winter):  Still figuring this out.  The zip-offs would work OK if in heavy cotton.  I tend towards LLBean for now.

Jackets:  Dark/medium red or dark green denim or canvas, breast pockets, collared, button-up, obvious stitching a plus.  Would also go for a tan of sorts, or any shade of brown.  Jackets are good for two reasons.  First, when it gets cold, they keep me warm and I can still wear my sleeveless shirts.  Second, they offer pockets when I'm wearing skirts.  Finally, they tend to look good on me.  LLBean sometimes has them, as does Eddie Bauer, Orvis, and other such places.  I think Old Navy has them sometimes, too.  They seem expensive to me, but jackets usually are.  (Grr.)

Skirts:  Rayon or cotton.  Long (ankle-length, preferably).  Patterned or solid.  Lots of material.  I've seen a couple of things these are called:  Batik, swirly skirts, Hippie, Gypsy, Crinkle.  They're awesome and I finally found a huge selection of them at reasonable prices:  http://www.thelittlebazaar.com/category/Clothing/

Sweaters:  I don't typically do sweaters, but the few I wear are zip-ups in dark colours that are super soft to the touch.  I _hate_ wool.  It's never "not itchy."  Ever.  Chenille is very nice.  Generally I don't do anything polyester due to the static factor.  Whatever chenille is, it doesn't seem to cause static all the much.  :D

Shoes:  I know my style on this one, always have.  Black booties with a separate heel that isn't too high, the top of the booties fold down about a half-inch.  The problem is that shoes and my feet hate each other.  It has become impossible to find shoes my feet love.  Except for the five-finger ones, but those are for hiking and short-term use only.  Sigh.

Socks:  Black calf-high tube socks.  Became exceedingly difficult to find so I switched to white calf-high tube socks.  Gah!  I also wear colourful thin ones these days.  My favourite shoppe for the latter is hotsox.com.  Not warm in winter, though.  LOL

Hats:  No.





~w

20101012

pledge of allegiance

Ok, so I made a faux pas or something of the sort.

I was visiting some friends tonight and we somehow got on the subject of removing religion from school, etc. I mentioned how the Pledge of Allegiance oughta be removed as well if they need to go doing that. I was very decidedly met with disagreement. Very strong disagreement. "You don't deserve to be a citizen if you don't want to say it," I was told.

Why?

Here are my arguments:
1. People GENERALLY are told to say it as little kids. Little kids do not understand its implications, so at that time, it is either meaningless, brainwashing, and/or merely teaching what the words are so they can say it and MEAN it down the road.

2. A pledge should be honoured as such, and thus not require repeating. Thus repeating the Pledge over and over and over every day at school, at ball games, et al, cheapens the heartfelt meaning behind it and makes pledging less powerful and less serious.

3. It can be spoken with no meaning. Simply saying the words means that you are agreeing with/trying to fit in with/obeying/fearing/deceiving your peers.

4. Justice is subject to major changes in the country's standards. So, by pledging that you want justice for all, you are stating that whatever the laws are at the time, even if it is that whites who kill blacks cannot be imprisoned but that blacks who kill whites can be, then you are OK with that. That would be justice at that time. Fifty years later, the law could flip to the reverse, and you would need to be OK with that, too. I personally would prefer to call everyone equal, which is what /I/ was taught this country is about. Of course we know it is not, but I would dare to hope we will one day get there. I am an idealist, unfortunately for me. But, the whole "justice" word is more a question of symantics.

5. Under God. Do atheists recite the Pledge? What about religious folk who cannot pledge allegiance to anyone but their own God? What about idolatry? This addition is good in theory, but really does not work in today's world. I also read somewhere that the addition was made in respect to some speech which more correctly meant "God willing," which means it is not even worded right.

6. I have always had, and still have, a problem with "the flag." Why not just "I pledge allegiance to the usa?" Why the flag? It is a symbol, but so what? Are they trying to get us to say we will not burn the flag or otherwise be disrespectful to it? I do not understand this particular portion. Flags can change... ours has changed several times, with the addition of states, for instance. What if it changes? Is "the flag" always the current one? Does it include every flag the U.S. has used? I am thoroughly confused. Why would we care about a flag, anyway? Isn't it more important to worry about our country than a piece of material?

Why, in a democracy... and it is a democracy, is it not? Why, then, do some people feel I am unpatriotic, or worse, not worth my own American-born citizenzhip, simply for questioning the Pledge and disagreeing with saying it in school? To those people, I say you are close-minded people who simply accept what you are told and you might as well go live in a country with a monarch. No questions allowed, blindly follow your leaders and forget about what America is supposed to really mean. Don't tell ME how wonderfully free our country is if you refuse to further define what you mean by "free."

From my understanding, kids are not to be forced to say the Pledge, for many of the same reasons. This extended to when I was in school but I distinctly recall being scolded for questioning it in fifth or sixth grade when I finally began to understand some of the implications. I feel this left a rather long-lasting effect on me (ya think?) and I do not want to have this same impression of "you are free, but only if you agree with me and follow these rules and say these words even if you have no idea what they mean" to be bestowed on other children. We do not want other countries teaching their kids crap like this, so why should we teach ours the same thing? Let them mean it!

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

-w

20101011

Rant spawned by Angry Birds discussions

Angry Birds, an app that I know primarily through Dale's iPhone, has had a lot of talk lately.  Apparently Microsoft, in its quest to market its new phone, erroneously indicated that Angry Birds would be available on the new phone.  Whups.  The game's peoples have tweeted about this and said nope, no such plans right now, but nothing against MS.  I read quite a number of  comments which consequently bash Microsoft.

This led me to the following rant.  Personally speaking, from the point of view of a few issues I've had somewhat recently, it's quite annoying to have meaningless errors or a white screen of death as an add-in crashes Outlook.  First, I think add-ins are evil and no one should make them in the first place.  They ruin perfectly good, working software.  Second, no Office product should allow these add-ins to take over.  If they're allowed at all, then have some sort of extra programming that will ignore the add-in if it tries to do something evil to the program's functionality.  Then people could be more appropriately angry at the add-in developer instead of the the program's developer, because the add-in would simply cease to function. Instead, the app crashes, restarts, then pleasantly asks if you'd like to disable the offending add-in.  Disable?  No!  I want it to get temporarily shut down while the problem is occurring, then permitted to be enabled once it stops being an ass!!  Have a little menu under "Help" that has a list of add-ins that are getting disabled so you can go up there and see what's going on if you want, not be forced to deal or else cope with constant app restarts.  Zheezh.  This doesn't hold to just Microsoft.  I recently witnessed something similar with a rather expensive Autocad product.  Although, in this case, the app still worked, at least.  It's just the cryptic error that was ticking me off.

Now, all that said, there are Windows 7 features that are totally slick.  The snapping, the minimizing, the keyboard control that is BUILT IN.  Windows 7 is the flagship now.  Leopard is still nice, but for me, it's still not quite as intuitive because, well, I'm used to Windows.  Prefer it for my Office experience, most definitely.  Each has their place, though, as I've often said:  When I'm using Photoshop, I can't imagine using it on a pc again.  I cannot live without iPhoto, iTunes, iWeb.  Egads.  GarageBand may be useless most days but for those times when I get the musically creative itch, there it is, waiting for me, a free app WITH THE OS!!  You cannot, with any honesty, say that a Mac is not worth the money. You can only say it does not meet your needs (if it doesn't).  Which in all truth, it really might not.  Nothing wrong with that.

I would love to have a dedicated Linux box in the house, but I consider Linux to be an offshoot of Unix, an open-source mess with good (albeit sometimes snobbish) intentions.  I suppose I have become a sort of narcissistic diplomat when it comes to operating systems, in that I feel everyone should get off their high horse and acknowledge that not everyone has to like one thing, but everyone should agree that we don't all have to agree.  How's that for hypocrisy?  Or is that an oxymoron?  I'm not sure, but it's kinda funny.  I've always entangled myself in such things... don't listen to anyone.  Now listen to me.  Yeah, thanks, self.  That makes sense.

Anywho, if you like tinkering, Linux is great.  If you like developing, you can really chase any of the Big Three.  If you like creating or little fuss, go get a Mac.  And if you're used to Windows and like it, go out and get it.  I don't give a rat's petoobies.  I try to recommend based on what you need and can afford!

~w