Hey, Obama, and Doctors, and Nurses, and Other Medical Technicians, Lab Coats, Scrubs, and the Like, Should Be For Hospitals ONLY...

The NY Post points out (via Althouse, with her take on it here) that the Obama Adminstration in stage managing their doctor photo op prescribed the wearing of lab coats so that all the doctors assembled looked more doctorly rather than like a bunch of professionals in suits.

I guess they feared that in the minds of many, driven by folks like Michael Moore (another Althouse post at link) and his latest agitprop Кино, that in the minds of fellow progressives the following equation applies

SUITS=EVIL (or at the very least, Republican)

So, they encouraged the doctors in the photo to play dress up.

This brings me to one huge pet peeve of mine. The purpose of having special garb that hospital staff wear, is to minimize the possibility of cross contamination, and the original intent was that garb stayed in the hospital. The point of the lab coat is that it stays in the lab so that if some stray virus has found its way on it, the doctor in that lab coat doesn't then bring that virus with them when he or she runs off to their favorite restaurant while they grab a bite to eat. I live surrounded by hospitals and labs, and any time I'm out during lunch break hours I see a sea of scrubs and lab coats on the street and in various eating establishments. I know many hospitals have cut out laundry service, and don't issue these clothes like they used to, but that doesn't mean staff should wear these clothes out and about in public. Rather than telling people how to sneeze into the crook of their arms, maybe they should remind health professionals that they are a primary channel by which new bugs spread.

Heckuva job on preventing the potential spread of disease, buddies and budettes.

Your Daily Photo (Don't Let Althouse See This Picture Edition)

Players in shorts, fine, they're athletes, but the coaches?

Not a good look.

(but for the record, I wore shorts, too, it was 106 in Las Vegas yesterday, so comfort ruled, fashioned suffered)

Didn't take any of the usual tourist-y shots of the Strip last night, didn't feel like lugging around my camera, maybe tomorrow after hours and hours of watching basketball.

Turns out shooting video is a no-no during the Summer League (at least with a good camera), I got busted by one of the event-staff, she told me I could snap stills, but no video, guess they don't want the teams pulling a New England Patriots type move. I was isolating a specific player while shooting (which is why I guess that she could tell I running video rather than stills), which was more just for practice keeping the camera somewhat steady and fluid.

I wasn't going to post any of the video on YouTube, but since I was told I wasn't even supposed to capture the footage, I feel I almost have to, even if just to see if I get a take down notice for doing so.

Your Daily Photo (Just Cause Althouse Posts Pictures with a Particular Color Scheme Doesn't Mean I'll Always Do the Same Edition)

I'm not a copycat, I'm more of an homage-ist. Plus, I took these photos first (from the Getty Villa set back in late May, so really, she's copying me...)

Shots presented as originally posted at Flickr, don't think too much retouching was done on any of these.

Should she and Meade find themselves out this way later this summer, Getty Villa should definitely be a place high on their lists to visit, if only as a place to snap some pictures.

Speaking of Green and Purple, Voices Green and Purple, by The Bees...

The Most Modern of Vices...

It's rare for both sides in a comment section regarding some recent political event not to call each other hypocrites (a recent example at Althouse can be found in the comments for this post regarding Obama's press conference). Nobody seems to ask the more salient question, 'what's wrong with hypocrisy?'.

Seeing hypocrisy as a great sin is patently childish. It's real playground stuff, realizing that people in authority do one thing while saying another, and have different rules for you compared to themselves is a common complaint if you are 4 or 6 or 8, but you'd think adults would know better than to take hypocrisy too seriously.

I think a couple of quotes (culled from the Quote Garden) well illustrate the pre-modern view of hypocrisy when compared to the post-modern.

For the pre-modern view,

Hypocrisy is an homage that vice renders to virtue. ~François, Duc De La Rochefoucauld, Maximes, 1678

For the more or less post-modern view (or at least Marxist)

The hypocrite's crime is that he bears false witness against himself. What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; but only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core. ~Hannah Arendt, On Revolution, 1963

How can views regarding hypocrisy have 'evolved' from an "an homage that vice renders to virtue" to "plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices"? I think for all the navel-gazing popular in more or less recent times, folks have developed a massive blindspot to their own weaknesses, while simultaneously developing a hyper-awareness of the failings of others. That's how someone like La Rochefoucauld can say something so forgiving about personal weakness, while recognizing that striving to appear good to others is as important as actually being good, and when we fail, it's not for lack of virtue. Arendt, though, can easily claim that, "only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core". For Arendt, and most other modern and postmodern thinkers who tackle the subject, having good intentions coupled with bad actions, or having bad intentions coupled with good actions is unforgiveable. Having bad intentions followed by bad actions may be perplexing, but at least those people are honest with themselves and the world.

That's why a few bad soldiers in an Iraqi prison doing some horrible things and being stupid enough to take photos of their misdeeds can be reason enough to condemn the entire US Government, while thugs on motorbikes under the direct command of a dictatorial cleric in Iraq aren't really any of our business and even when they murder non-violent protestors, we shouldn't be dissuaded from reaching out diplomatically to that thugocracy.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I'll take the person (or government) who strives to be virtuous, but occasionally misses the mark, over the honest rogue any day of the week. There is nothing rotten about hypocrisy or hypocrites, only the rarest of saints, or those without any moral compass whatsoever are able to claim to never have indulged in a moment or two of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is the one vice whose opportunities for indulgence increase the more virtuous you are.

Hypocrisy is fine if one is contrite when caught, that's far preferable to those that are utterly shameless and looking to point fingers outward when their mistakes are brought to light.

People and Their Stupid Lists . . .

EW compiled a list of 'heartbreaking songs' (linked by Althouse), and they have Purple Rain #9.

First of all, Purple Rain isn't particularly heartbreaking, and second of all, I can think of at least eight Prince songs I'd put ahead of that track (including two from that album).

And thinking is blogging sometimes, so here's a roughly chronological (by date released, the two b-sides on the list are out of order) list of Prince songs more heartbreaking than Purple Rain:

When You Were Mine, from Dirty Mind:
"And U were so strange/U didn't even have the decency to change the sheets"
(tell me that's not heartbreaking, also, the Lauper version is better)

Nothing Compares 2 U, (The Hits/The B-Sides)
"It's been 7 hours and 13 days, since U took your love away"
(Has there ever been a more heartbreaking line? The Sinead version is amazing, the video is simple, yet incredible, as well, her eyes . . .)

How Come U Don't U Call Me Anymore, (The Hits/The B-Sides)
"I still keep your picture by my bed/I still remember every word U said"
(another song that was made more famous by someone else, this time Alicia Keys brings the sexiness and the sadness)

Another Lonely Christmas, (The Hits/The B-Sides)
My momma used 2 say
Always trust your lover
Now I guess that only applies 2 her
Cuz baby u promised me
Baby u promised me u'd never leave
Then u died on the 25th day of December
Oh baby

Last night I spent another lonely, lonely Christmas
Darling, baby, u, u should've been there
Cuz all the 1s I dream about
U are the 1 that makes my love shout
U see, u are the only 1 I care 4
Yeah
(Yes, it's schmaltzy, but he really sells it)

When Doves Cry, from Purple Rain:
"Don't make me chase u/Even doves have pride"
"How can you leave me standing/Alone in a world so cold"
(This song is at least 1.5 times sadder than Purple Rain, which is more or less power ballad/anthem while this song is pure wistfulness)

The Beautiful Ones, from Purple Rain:
"U make me so confused/The beautiful ones/U always seem 2 lose"
(the tone of this song is much sadder, with a touch of obsessive stalker thrown in for good measure, when compared to Purple Rain, and his vocal performance is both way over the top, and kind of awesome)

Sometimes it Snows in April, form Parade
Tracy died soon after a long fought civil war,
just after I'd wiped away his last tear
I guess he's better off than he was before,
A whole lot better off than the fools he left here
I used 2 cry 4 Tracy because he was my only friend
Those kind of cars don't pass u every day
I used 2 cry 4 Tracy because I wanted to see him again,
But sometimes sometimes life ain't always the way...

Sometimes it snows in April
Sometimes I feel so bad, so bad
Sometimes I wish life was never ending,
and all good things, they say, never last

Springtime was always my favorite time of year,
A time 4 lovers holding hands in the rain
Now springtime only reminds me of Tracy's tears
Always cry 4 love, never cry 4 pain
He used 2 say so strong unafraid to die
Unafraid of the death that left me hypnotized
No, staring at his picture I realized
No one could cry the way my Tracy cried

Sometimes it snows in April
Sometimes I feel so bad
Sometimes, sometimes I wish that life was never ending,
And all good things, they say, never last

I often dream of heaven and I know that Tracy's there
I know that he has found another friend
Maybe he's found the answer 2 all the April snow
Maybe one day I'll see my Tracy again

Sometimes it snows in April
Sometimes I feel so bad, so bad
Sometimes I wish that life was never ending,
But all good things, they say, never last

All good things that say, never last
And love, it isn't love until it's past

(that one deserves the entirety of the lyrics, a brilliant, and brilliantly heartbreaking song)

Somebody's Somebody, from Emancipation
It's 2 o'clock in the morning and I just can't sleep
Outside the rain is pourin', I'm lonely as can be
Maybe 2night'll be different than the nights before
I need 2 feel someone beside me, I can't be alone no more
(This is a really solid song, gets lost amidst the 3 cds worth of songs he unleashed with that collection, though)

And as far as the latest collection, I find all three albums have something to offer, they aren't great, but each has moments, definitely worth 12 bucks, and a trip to Target.

My Hollow Shell Gives You These Pictures . . .

It was a brutal 78 degrees F today near the beach. I forced my hollow shell to take a hollow walk and record a bunch of hollow images to document the hollowness of a life lived bereft of seasons.

There's a conversation regarding hollowness over at Althouse, consider this post, these photos, and this set over at Flickr my contribution.



First up, the obligatory shot of palm trees



Next, a hollow vent, venting hollowly (probably venting over its location out here in the land without seasons, and largely without anything interesting to vent from beneath the street)



See, we have seasons, so our "fall" is happening a bit late, and amounts to a few trees, but dammit, this looks pretty damn fall like to me, maybe we aren't so hollow after all



If she's hitchhiking, she might be there awhile . . .



Nothing but knee slappers out there, but that doesn't stop some from suiting up and sitting on their boards









We may not have the character building joys of surviving subzero temps, but if you can remain hollow after seeing another golden sunset over the wide blue, well, I think you have bigger problems than living in a bankrupt state with a sunny and pleasant clime.

Would It Be Such a Bad Thing?

Althouse notices that she's getting a few hits from many horndogs looking for a variety of searches, all variations on the theme of 'olympics+porn'.

Not that it hasn't already been done, sort of, a couple of Romanian gymnast who had competed in the olympics did perform routines, sans clothes on Japanese TV (which given the etymology of the word gymnastics, actually seems kind of appropriate), and it scandalized the gymnastics community.

So obviously, if a major gymnast were to do something similar, or even more explicit, they'd have to get paid very well, since they'd be blackballed for life.

Also, given the popularity of 'celebrity' sex tapes, even when the 'celebrity' involved isn't particularly a celebrity (though some have become much more 'celebrated' after their tapes, see Kardashian, K, and Hilton, P, for examples), I think a well compensated mash-up is in order.

Lohan v Sacramone would be the sex tape to beat all sex tapes. Don't do a pretend, 'I don't know how this poorly shot, poorly cropped, poorly lit, homemade piece of crap personal video escaped' type release. Do a full on, multiple camera, nice sets, well lit production with professional help.

Lohan's film career isn't exactly going gangbusters, and Sacramone is done as a competitive gymnast, all that's left for her is coaching if she wants to stay involved in gymnastics. But get those together, and have them enjoy each other's company in a rather explicit way, and the subsequent videos would explode the internet.

I figure you could offer each $25,000,000, and give them both 2-3% of the net profit, and still make a ton of dough, as long as you control the distribution channel for the video, and make sure that it doesn't get pirated and distributed for free. It's not impossible to prevent copies of stuff from circulating, videos on the Playstation Network haven't been hacked yet, and the Netflix rentals seem to have been fairly secure, so DRM is getting a little more secure. Make it a Blu-Ray exclusive as far as physical media goes, given that Blu-Ray DRM has yet to be really cracked.

I think a Lohan meets Sacramone tape would generate the most interest, one because folks are obsessed with celebrity, and even though Lohan doesn't seem to be doing much acting lately, she is still constant tabloid fodder. Second, of all the gymnast in this current Olympics, Sacramone looks most like a normal, adult, human being, so lusting after her seems the least scummy (plus since she's already 20 years old, you don't have to wait till she hits eighteen to produce the thing). Just a naked gymnastics routine wouldn't be enough to generate massive revenue, and a typical 'accidental' sex tape with some random loser guy would also not be appealing. But, two relatively attractive women, one a celebrity, another a gymnast, and you'd get people not normally interested in this sort of thing curious, and for the people who normally consume this sort of stuff, this'd be right up their alley. Also, by putting two women together, I think that would broaden, rather than lessen, the potential audience for this, and it would also make this less damaging in the long run to their respective images. If they don't want to be labeled as gay after this, they could always use the pornstar excuse and say they were, 'gay for pay'. Or they could embrace it, and say that they did this to demonstrate that there's nothing wrong with two single people enjoying each other's company, regardless of the genders involved, and if it's filmed professionally, so much the better. Hell, they could even add their respective significant others in the mix, not in on the action, but maybe giving off camera words of encouragement to show that this is a fun hedonistic thing (a special, one time, memory that they can share sort of thing, and not something tawdry).

It's not like this sort of notoriety is such a bad thing in the long run. Even as far back as Vanessa Williams, being 'disgraced' and losing her Miss America title when pics of her and another woman surfaced, seemed like a bad thing at the time, but it didn't exactly ruin her career. Can anybody remember any of the other Miss Americas from the 80s? (bet you remember those pics, though, they were kind of hot). I think Lohan could still get real film roles after this, and Sacramone could still do just about whatever she would want to do, once the initial controversy died down. In the meantime they could both enjoy really fat bank accounts.

Something like this will happen at some point. Not with these two people, but some young celeb who sees their career waning, and their bank account shrinking, will realize that while a million or two for a Playboy spread would be nice, tens of millions of dollars for a little video would be even nicer (although, that's a window of opportunity that will close, too many 'celebrity' sex tapes, and they'd no longer be big news, definitely a business model where 'first mover' status would be of great benefit).

Certainly, I'd bet that half the candidates running for President by the year 2032 will have stuff from their late teens and early twenties up on the internet that they'd rather forget. People willingly invade their own privacy at the drop of a hat nowadays, so why not make some major loot in the process?

Tracking My Music Collection . . .

Because every post at someone else's blog is an excuse to make the comment section all about me, I whipped up a list of the albums on my Zune in Google Docs to share with the world what music I carry around with me.

This move was inspired by this Althouse post where she discusses the recent non-revelatory revelations regarding what plays on the "oPod" of The Obama (pictured above, allegedly, captured by The Mark Pike)

Seems like politicians are expected to make some sort of statement as to their musical tastes, so rather than hiding behind some carefully crafted and focus-group tested handpicked precis of my music collection, I'm laying it all out there for the world to see in all its horror and glory (in preparation for 2016, of course). Unfortunately, haven't found a tool that allows direct exporting of the list from the Zune software, or WMP, so I had to enter each the old fashioned way, which sucks, sucks hard (but was good typing practice, I suppose)

And is it really a good idea to put an "o" in front of stuff to indicate it being of The Obama. Anyone who has seen one of the great comic films of the last quarter century wouldn't help but wonder, 'Which songs on The Obama's oPod leads to The Obama wearing his O-Face?'

The NYT Should Embrace Their Inner Heroin Dealer . . .

The NYT should adopt the time-tested marketing approach so often employed by drug dealers, 'the first taste is always free'.

TimeSelect was an unmitigated disaster that hurt the brand and lessened the influence its Op-Ed staff have outside of their little Manhattan cocktail circles. Thankfully, they've ended that sad experiment (but the damage to their talent remains), but they're sitting on another potential disaster if they don't do something about it.

Prof. Althouse has started a new project, with a lot of potential, but only if the NYT gets wise. She's blogging the past as if there were blogs back then, taking a random year, and blogging the events of that date as covered in the NYT. Its an interesting concept and would foster interesting conversations, but only if everyone can see the articles she's linking to. Right now, .edu customers get 100 articles per month free, and NYT subscribers get unlimited access to the basic archive, but for everyone else, there's only a link telling you to shell out $3.95 to have a little peek at a musty old article from decades ago (1851-1922 are available, and since 1987, but 1923-1986 will cost you). I don't think too many people are going to be doing that.

So what would a drug dealer do?

He'd (or she'd) give out a taste for free, of course. Get people hooked on the idea that there's fascinating stuff to be mined by seeing the past as it was seen contempraneously. If I were working at the NYT I'd find a way to either bring Althouse's THE TIME THAT BLOG FORGOT directly in with all the other NYT blogs, or at least point to the posts each day. She's written Op-Eds for them, so they've had a working relationship in the past, but this project has started out as a freelance project that she's doing just as an interesting challenge and a new way to look at things (plus its a good excuse to put up that gorgeous picture of her younger self). Besides bringing the blog directly under the NYT (but don't get heavy-handed and exert any editorial control, or I suspect the good Professor would balk), the other brilliant thing to do would be to make access to the articles she links each day absolutely free to any and everybody.

Shouldn't be that hard to do that without creating a backdoor to sneak into the rest of the archive, and as people get curious about the way the past looked when it was the present, they might be compelled to start finding articles of personal interest and go ahead and splurge on the $14.95 a month (or $169 annually) for access to TimesReader (which also gives access to the archives), or even better for them, might spur people to actually subscribe to the dead tree edition (which also grants access to the archive, here in the 90404 area code it's $25 a month for home delivery).

They have a choice, be smart and act like a drug dealer, or be dumb and act like a music executive (and we all know how well holding the line against MP3s and file sharing went in that industry).

Which will it be Grey Lady?


AND . . .

(just cause it was playing in my head while thinking of this analogy, but come on NYT be 'my man' and give me a 'sweet taste')

Things You Do at 12:30 AM . . .

The above photo is a composite of a photo Prof. Althouse posted on her blog a little bit ago, and my transformation of the same photo pasted side by side.

She described her photo as a 'cockroach eye's view', but that got me thinking that their optics are very different from ours, and even the same view would look very different to one of them.

So after some quick googling, and seeing what I could find without taking too much time, things I've learned about cockroach optics, first, they are dark adapted, so they probably are very sensitive to picking contrast, but if there's too much light around their vision gets washed out. Second, they have compound eyes, so what they see is going to be a mosaic. Third, they probably don't see in color, their eyes are very simple light sensors, and their brains aren't too complicated either, so color is too 'processor intensive' and wouldn't serve a survival function for them anyway.

Applying all those notions (won't call them facts, cause it's just stuff I've pulled off the internet), I used GIMP to do a couple of quick transformations, I think the results are interesting, probably not accurate, but it's something to do at 12:30 AM on a restless night.

Also, when it comes to the possessive 's', does it belong on the "cockroach", or the "eye"? I see that Althouse put it on the roach, but I've been putting it on the eye. Does the view belong to the cockroach as a whole, or to the eye alone?

The phrase "bird's eye view" almost always puts the possessive with the "bird", but when you are talking about what an eye would see rather than what someone or something actually saw, I think the possessive would be better on the "eye" part. This way, you emphasize the image, rather than the seer, but I'm in the minority (possibly of one) on this issue.

A Vortex of Feminism

Althouse commends Paglia as she attacks Hillary and Steinem.

(good stuff, all around)

A Formula for Discerning the Attention Worthiness of an Althouse Comment Thread

This is not a criticism of the Althouse blog itself. It's a frequent read with me, and there are times when the comment section is fun and stimulating.

But there's also times when the 'tit for tat'-ness gets way out of hand.

A scientifically derived formula for determining the quality of a comment thread can be described as follows:

# of unique commenters
_________________

# of comments

The closer to one the better. The closer to zero, especially on large threads, the poorer. There are times when there can be 100+ comments, yet there seems to be only 10 or 15 unique commenters. That isn't good, or helpful, or particularly interesting. Recently, many threads have approached a value of somewhere between .10 through .15 (I made those numbers up, but it sure seems that way, dunnit?)

Like Gresham's Law, the bad comments (and commenters) tend to drive out the valuable comments (and commenters).

Ideally, no thread with more than 50 comments should ever have a value of less than .40, but alas, the greater the total number of posts, the less likely that it is a melliflous melding of many voices, instead it tends to be the shrill shriek of a few very loud, but very unmelodious egotistical and parasitical jerks. Some folks confuse volume and certitude with cogency and correctness.

These parasites tend to get there fill and move on, or get so crazed as to step over a line that shouldn't be crossed, and slink away for awhile. Of course, sometimes they stay away, other times they come back in a new guise, but whether or not it's a new infestation, or an old one trying to make a comeback, these parasites are a problem for a popular blog that attempts to allow voices from a wide spectrum a welcoming place.

When things get like they are now, not commenting on posts that touch on subjects that will send certain folks on a spiral of 'tit for tat' seems like the only reasonable option, as any comment, no matter how interesting, will get lost in the shuffle.

I frankly don't see the attraction that the parasites have for Althouse, it would make more sense if they were trying to suck some of her traffic towards their own blogs, but most of the parasitical commenters don't blog themselves, they just seem to desire to bring down the comment section of a blog whose viewpoint they disapprove.

The worst offender presently, is a classic bore. Should someone choose to write a textbook on how not to engage in debate, then object lesson one would be that particular commenter's recent performance (and the folks who insist on engaging said troll, do themselves no favors (myself inclusive), either).

I don't envy Prof. Althouse and the choices she's confronted with. Either let things continue to devolve, and watch what you created tarnish a bit, or go back to moderating comments for awhile and deal with that hassle.

In summary, people suck (especially the parasites).

2006 LA Auto Show, The Videos

I didn't take much video footage at the 2006 LA Auto Show. My camera doesn't do video all that well. But what I shot, I share, so here it is.

First up, we have the new 2007 Audi TT Roadster. To my untrained eye it doesn't look much different from the previous model, but it's still a damn fine car. Also, in the description at Youtube I wrote, "This one is for Prof. Althouse". Is it pathetic or cute that I think of her when seeing TT's on the street? She could do worse than replacing Silvio with a red convertible, but then her more trollish commenters would probably deride her for buying the "Red" version, thus confirming their suspicions that she has fully gone over to the "Red State" or Conservative Camp, and was never as liberal or moderate as she claims. And even that wouldn't stop some really, really rabid conservative commenters from saying it only shows her still evident socialist leanings by buying a red as in "commie" car. You just can't win with some people.

Next up, the Chevy Camaro concept that should start production in 2009. It's a looker. Though, it's sad that the only cars that the Detroit automakers make that generate any excitement are the ones that live off of "heritage" design cues. Also, the Dodge Challenger concept is similar and attracted similar attention. These nouveau muscle cars won't win over younger customers so much as convince some older folks that they might be a nice 2nd or 3rd car. Almost all of these "heritage" design cars have started out strong and then petered out after a model year or two (think The Beetle, PT Cruiser, T-Bird, though there are counter examples that continue to sell strong like the Mini Cooper and the current Mustang).

That's it for videos, the rest is in over 400 still pictures, all being uploaded to Flickr. I'm uploading them in full resolution, so it's going to be awhile till it's all done. Once they're up and I've organized them a bit, I'll start those series of posts on the LA Autoshow, until then, you can peruse what's already up on my flickr page you choose.


NOTE: Edited slightly for spelling and coherence