I shall start, as I should almost any time I speak, by saying I wish to offend nobody. If you fall within the "moderate" group I am about to malign, I apologize. It is not personal. I realize this likely won't be a popular post with some....get over it.
I will state my main point right off the bat. Political moderation (by which I mean the political ideals moderates hold) is hurting America more than anything else and the "respect" given to moderates is overblown and dangerous.
It's simple really. Just because something is pragmatic, possible, and a compromise between two opposing sides...does not mean it is the right thing to do.
It truly bothers me that those who call themselves moderates are automatically given a stamp of approval and looked at as those who have the wisdom to guide us. This is simply not the case. What moderation does is hold us back from completely curing problems or creating progress. The fact is, a great amount of really good policies, no matter which side of the aisle, are politically to the left or right. Just being "in the middle" does not mean something is a good idea.
Look, I get it. Politics is the art of the possible and moderate, pragmatic ideas are what can pass. I am certainly not lobbying for continued bickering or blind disagreement between the left and the right. However, this moderate approach makes for very watered down legislation that rarely gets us where we need to go.
Now, I'm not attempting to insult those in the middle. What I would argue is that those in the middle are there for reasons that tend to lead to bad policy. In my experience, most of those who identify as somewhere in the middle tend to fall in two camps: those who have given up on the political process, and those who are uninformed (there are of course exceptions).
I completely understand being disillusioned and discouraged about the political process. It's dirty, childish and seems to never get anywhere with no change in sight. I've almost been there myself (voted for Nader once...shhhh). However, these are not the kind of people who I want making policy, or deciding who gets to make policy.
Now, I also classified a portion of moderates as ill informed or ignorant about the issues. I stand behind this statement as does Newsweek. Newsweek recently conducted a poll, albeit not a very scientific poll, of different political stances showing that as people from each side of the aisle got closer to self-identifying as "in the middle" they knew less and less about American government and history. This isn't to say moderates are dumber, of course they aren't, but it is to say they are apathetic and less informed (again, there are exceptions, I realize these are generalizations).
Those who tend to study, those who inform themselves, those who are passionate about what our problems are and the solutions to those problems...tend to be impassioned enough to choose a side.
I happen to be a liberal, so I think liberal policies tend to be better ideas. There are conservatives, and they happen to think conservative policies are better ideas. In some instances I am correct and in some instances conservatives are correct. The result of compromise isn't correct merely because it is a compromise.
Obamacare (I hate calling it that because the bill looks nothing like what he wanted) was a compromise and yes it will cover many more Americans but it will likely do so at great expense. Had a liberal policy, such as single-payer been adopted, it would have covered everyone and cut per capita health care costs by about two-thirds. That would have been far superior than the moderate compromise of Obamacare.
::Scratches head trying to think of conservative version of the above::
Alright, I'll give this one a try. I happen to be conservative on the problem of illegal immigration. I think an amnesty program, including earned amnesty, is a bad idea. We tried it in 1986 when President Reagan compromised and agreed to a blanket amnesty with stepped up efforts at border patrol. Obviously, this did not work. A better plan likely would have entailed strict enforcement of illegal immigrant employment laws. Once you dry up the illegal jobs there is no reason for illegal immigrants to come here. This would also reward immigrants coming legally. This policy, I feel, would have been better...but through the art of compromise, we got a watered down version that did little to fix the problem putting it off for another day.
Of course I realize that sometimes a compromise does turn out to be the best policy. For instance, I believe gun control would be best left to each state to determine what is appropriate for their constituents. I don't believe guns should be banned altogether (some people hunt and some towns have a very small police force). I also don't believe guns should be available everywhere (banning guns in NYC would be a wonderful idea, they serve no legitimate purpose). Here, in my opinion, a compromise is the best answer. However, not because it is a compromise, but because it seems like the best policy.
This leads me to a finer point I'd like to make. I believe there is a distinct difference between a "moderate" and an "independent". A moderate wishes to compromise. He/she wants to take both sides of a policy proposal and somehow combine them so we get some mix of both worlds. I believe this leads to mediocre policy and only puts off the problem for a later time and a ballsier legislator who will likely never show up.
On the other hand an independent analyses the problem, chooses the policy that will best cure the problem while disregarding whether the proposal came from the party they tend to agree with. This is the exact kind of person I want making policy. This is how problems are solved. Moderation isn't the answer, political independence is.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
On Ineptitude.
I'm sadly not as able to handle certain aspects of my life, in particular my past, as I want to be and it's beginning to effect my future and that's disappointing.
For the record, here's a list of adjectives I'd currently use to describe myself:
- immature
- pathetic
- confused
- small
- fucking stupid
- self destructive
- handsome (gotta be one in there)
- fucking confused
So there's that.
I rarely have people in my life who fully understand my very special blend of insane herbs and spices or the reasoning behind it that befuddles even me. Nobody currently in my life has ever gotten there. In fact, there is likely only one person who has ever fully been able to walk the fall corn maze of my mind and come out the other side. Perhaps if I go sit on a half wall by Madison or the swings they'll be there to help me? Probably not.
2011 may be that rebuilding year that I need to go through on my own. Do things by hand, building everything back from the ground up. All wonderful and clichéd metaphors....they have to have lasted so long for a reason, right?
Here's hopin.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Um, which room is liberals anonymous in?
The Tree has not been political in a while. It had a run of a year or so where it was dedicated solely to politics. Several posts a day, covering the news of the day or just some pet project of mine. It was good...but it was exhausting...so it stopped. I had decided to make this a very non-political personal blog because A) I didn't feel like being "controversial" and B) if you know me, you know I like writing about myself. But, I suppose since politics is important to me, it should play a small role in my personal blog.
So, I will write three political posts over the next week starting with this one. I will begin by saying I'm sure someone, somewhere, possibly (probably) even someone I know and like we'll think I'm an idiot, will be insulted or offended, or disagree completely. That's fine. Just know that for people I know and like, I don't personally judge a person based on their politics even if I think they are wrong. If you feel I've villainized you or your beliefs, I apologize, but I still like you so don't hold it against me. If I don't know or like you, then I don't care if I hurt your feelings, so that's cool too.
This first post will be on defining liberalism. I'm not talking about classic political science liberalism for all you poli-sci majors...I'm talking about modern era big D Democratic party side liberalism and what it still is or at least should be.
I too often see mischaracterizations of liberals and modern liberal politics. It happens on both sides of the aisle, but mostly (and understandably) on the right. Basically, anything that is liberal in this Fox-news, post Woodstock, stuck in Vietnam War, tea-party having, paradigm shifted political world...is considered "far-left" even by those who consider themselves "moderate".
You want to know who I consider to be mainstream liberal? Nancy Pelosi. That is a mainstream, died-in-the-wool, not too far left, not too close to the middle...liberal. Also, she has the largest balls in the Democratic party.
I can see my "moderate" and right-wring brethren sighing now but just listen for crying out loud. I'll make the case and show you.
An example of a far left, progressive liberal is Dennis Kucinich. An example of a moderate Democrat is Harry Reid. An example of a mainstream liberal is Nancy Pelosi. The reason why is simple...the policies they would support.
I'm going have a hypothetical "debate" in my head where these three are on the stage and I ask them to raise their hands for the policies they support. The purpose is to show you the left wing political spectrum.
If I asked anyone who supports registration of guns, keeping social security public, and supporting a progressive tax system (all fairly moderate positions, pretty much pre-requisites for the left side of the aisle) you would more than likely get all three to raise their hands.
If I asked whoever supports the idea of single-payer health care (medicare for all), returning to Clinton era tax rates, (3 percent difference I believe), and supporting gay marriage/women's right to choose (all mainstream liberal political policies that you find in just about every single other first world, purely capitalist, industrialized, western nation) to raise their hands, you would get Kucinich and Pelosi on all. However, you likely lose Reid on single payer, and possibly lose him on gay marriage and some women's rights. I believe he'd support the Clinton taxes.
If I asked whoever supports cutting the military budget by 50%, treating all capital gains as regular income, returning to tax rates of the 40's through the 70's (top marginal tax rate ranging from about 70% to 90%, it's now about 35%), or breaking up large banks who are "too big to fail" (all very progressive policies that are to the left of mainstream) to raise their hands, you would get a gleeful Kucinich on each one, you would not get Reid on a single one, and you might be able to get Pelosi on the capital gains, but likely no others.
See what happened there? As the policies slide on the scale to the left you quickly lose Reid, slowly lose Pelosi and never lose Kucinich. This is the actual political scale of liberalism...not what the media and those who consider themselves moderate or republican would likely lead you to believe. Pelosi, and mainstream liberalism IS NOT far left. They hold basic liberal beliefs, that most other capitalist nations practice, that are in no way fringe politics. They hold some beliefs towards the middle, some beliefs towards progressivism...but are mostly somewhere in between. That's me! You might call "liberals" the "moderates" of left wing politics, lying somewhere in between progressives and moderate Democrats.
Ever since there losses on civil rights and the embarrassment of the Vietnam War the right wing of American politics has done an absolutely astounding and admirable job shifting the political scale to the right. Now, as you'll see in a later post, things that were once Republican policies (the public option was originally Nixon's idea) are now considered liberal and things that were once so far right as to be considered fringe politics (Patriot act anyone?), are now the beliefs held by virtually every nationally elected/campaigning Republican leader.
My point isn't to villainize those beliefs or for that matter Republicans. If you hold them in good faith, more power to you. What I take umbrage with is how I am labeled or regarded in this spectrum. If someone asks me what I am politically I begrudgingly call myself a liberal because I'd say 80% of what I believe falls in line with where Pelosi is, so it's just easier. I do support some progressive policies (capital gains, breaking up banks), some "moderate" policies (Clinton era tax rates) and yes, even some Republican policies (federalist gun policies, immigration, criminal justice), but by and large, I fall in line with mainstream liberalism. But when I do say I'm a liberal, or explain what policies I support, I'm painted as far left or extreme somehow. I do not like this, especially considering it is completely wrong.
I understand different parts of the country feel different ways about things and that it's hard to see from a very liberal district or a very conservative district that this definition of mainstream liberalism is accurate. If I said this to my own brother (him being to the left of Kucinich) he'd yell at me. If I told this to some of you who are more conservative, you'd yell at me. I get it. That's fine. But if you just take a step back, turn off Bill-O and Wolf Blitzer, and look at the full spectrum, you'll see it.
So, I will write three political posts over the next week starting with this one. I will begin by saying I'm sure someone, somewhere, possibly (probably) even someone I know and like we'll think I'm an idiot, will be insulted or offended, or disagree completely. That's fine. Just know that for people I know and like, I don't personally judge a person based on their politics even if I think they are wrong. If you feel I've villainized you or your beliefs, I apologize, but I still like you so don't hold it against me. If I don't know or like you, then I don't care if I hurt your feelings, so that's cool too.
This first post will be on defining liberalism. I'm not talking about classic political science liberalism for all you poli-sci majors...I'm talking about modern era big D Democratic party side liberalism and what it still is or at least should be.
I too often see mischaracterizations of liberals and modern liberal politics. It happens on both sides of the aisle, but mostly (and understandably) on the right. Basically, anything that is liberal in this Fox-news, post Woodstock, stuck in Vietnam War, tea-party having, paradigm shifted political world...is considered "far-left" even by those who consider themselves "moderate".
You want to know who I consider to be mainstream liberal? Nancy Pelosi. That is a mainstream, died-in-the-wool, not too far left, not too close to the middle...liberal. Also, she has the largest balls in the Democratic party.
I can see my "moderate" and right-wring brethren sighing now but just listen for crying out loud. I'll make the case and show you.
An example of a far left, progressive liberal is Dennis Kucinich. An example of a moderate Democrat is Harry Reid. An example of a mainstream liberal is Nancy Pelosi. The reason why is simple...the policies they would support.
I'm going have a hypothetical "debate" in my head where these three are on the stage and I ask them to raise their hands for the policies they support. The purpose is to show you the left wing political spectrum.
If I asked anyone who supports registration of guns, keeping social security public, and supporting a progressive tax system (all fairly moderate positions, pretty much pre-requisites for the left side of the aisle) you would more than likely get all three to raise their hands.
If I asked whoever supports the idea of single-payer health care (medicare for all), returning to Clinton era tax rates, (3 percent difference I believe), and supporting gay marriage/women's right to choose (all mainstream liberal political policies that you find in just about every single other first world, purely capitalist, industrialized, western nation) to raise their hands, you would get Kucinich and Pelosi on all. However, you likely lose Reid on single payer, and possibly lose him on gay marriage and some women's rights. I believe he'd support the Clinton taxes.
If I asked whoever supports cutting the military budget by 50%, treating all capital gains as regular income, returning to tax rates of the 40's through the 70's (top marginal tax rate ranging from about 70% to 90%, it's now about 35%), or breaking up large banks who are "too big to fail" (all very progressive policies that are to the left of mainstream) to raise their hands, you would get a gleeful Kucinich on each one, you would not get Reid on a single one, and you might be able to get Pelosi on the capital gains, but likely no others.
See what happened there? As the policies slide on the scale to the left you quickly lose Reid, slowly lose Pelosi and never lose Kucinich. This is the actual political scale of liberalism...not what the media and those who consider themselves moderate or republican would likely lead you to believe. Pelosi, and mainstream liberalism IS NOT far left. They hold basic liberal beliefs, that most other capitalist nations practice, that are in no way fringe politics. They hold some beliefs towards the middle, some beliefs towards progressivism...but are mostly somewhere in between. That's me! You might call "liberals" the "moderates" of left wing politics, lying somewhere in between progressives and moderate Democrats.
Ever since there losses on civil rights and the embarrassment of the Vietnam War the right wing of American politics has done an absolutely astounding and admirable job shifting the political scale to the right. Now, as you'll see in a later post, things that were once Republican policies (the public option was originally Nixon's idea) are now considered liberal and things that were once so far right as to be considered fringe politics (Patriot act anyone?), are now the beliefs held by virtually every nationally elected/campaigning Republican leader.
My point isn't to villainize those beliefs or for that matter Republicans. If you hold them in good faith, more power to you. What I take umbrage with is how I am labeled or regarded in this spectrum. If someone asks me what I am politically I begrudgingly call myself a liberal because I'd say 80% of what I believe falls in line with where Pelosi is, so it's just easier. I do support some progressive policies (capital gains, breaking up banks), some "moderate" policies (Clinton era tax rates) and yes, even some Republican policies (federalist gun policies, immigration, criminal justice), but by and large, I fall in line with mainstream liberalism. But when I do say I'm a liberal, or explain what policies I support, I'm painted as far left or extreme somehow. I do not like this, especially considering it is completely wrong.
I understand different parts of the country feel different ways about things and that it's hard to see from a very liberal district or a very conservative district that this definition of mainstream liberalism is accurate. If I said this to my own brother (him being to the left of Kucinich) he'd yell at me. If I told this to some of you who are more conservative, you'd yell at me. I get it. That's fine. But if you just take a step back, turn off Bill-O and Wolf Blitzer, and look at the full spectrum, you'll see it.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Take Me Out to the Ballgame...
You always get a special kick on Opening Day, no matter how many you go through. You look forward to it like a birthday party when you're a kid. You think something wonderful is going to happen.
- Joe DiMaggio
Today is the most important day of the year...it is Opening Day. And while it is said that today everyone has a chance, as a Mets fan, I know this not to be true. That doesn't matter. Above being a Mets fan, I am a baseball fan. So, while I know in my heart the Mets will falter, likely embarrassingly so, I hold out hope for a wonderful baseball season. It begins today.
I recall opening day in my Little League meant a parade. We would start on the southern tip of the island (of Staten) and march every single team (probably 60 teams) to the field where everyone would crowd the outfield of the DeYoung Field and listen to the national anthem and some director from little league HQ's give a speech. It was fun. However, in 2005, after 17 years of organized ball, I hung up my cleats. Now Opening Day is strictly about the big guys.
Baseball has always been my life. It is my favorite sport to watch, favorite to play, favorite to talk/argue about, and favorite to attend. It is both a thinking mans game and the physically hardest to do. Physicists have written that hitting a moving round ball with a round bat squarely is the hardest single achievement in sport. My sinking batting average as pitchers got better, as well as my transformation from a lead off batter to a relief pitcher, can attest to that fact.
 |
| Me, two hours after the Mets lost the last game at Shea Stadium and therefore missed the playoffs. Notice the guys 10 rows down doing the same thing as me. |
Some of the most fun or moving moments of my life have been spent at a baseball game. I once watched a Yankee game from the dugout while sitting next to Chip and Dale. I once saw John Olerud hit for the cycle. I ran around the bases at both Shea and Yankee stadium...neither of which exist any more. I was at the first baseball game in New York City after 9/11 when the Mets defeated the Braves on a 8th inning Mike Piazza go-ahead HR that made all 55 thousand people cry. I attended the final games at both Shea and Yankee Stadiums.
 |
| The sun slowly setting on the last game at Yankee Stadium. I may hate this team, but I will always love this stadium. |
It is a long season, and yes, during the Summer, especially seeing as how the Mets are usually fading at that point, I do lose interest for a short time. But once September kicks into gear and I have to root against the Yankee and the Phillies, and for the Cubbies and the Twins, I get back into it. And the World Series is easily the greatest thing ever.
Alright, a little business right now. Prediction time.
AL East: Boston Red Sox
AL Central: Detroit Tigers
AL West: Texas Rangers
AL Wildcard: Minnesota Twins
NL East: Philadelphia Phillies
NL Central: St. Louis Cardinals
NL West: San Francisco Giants
NL Wildcard: Cincinnati Reds
World Series:
Boston Red Sox over Philadelphia Phillies in 7.
The Cardinals will overcome their injuries and barely fight off the young Reds for the NL Central. The Red Sox will cruise with the best team in baseball. The Rangers will fight off the pesky resurgent Angels. And the Twins will have their annual September surge into the playoffs.
The Phillies will dominate the NL all year. The Giants will not be dominant but will win in a very weak division. The Reds will surprise a few by competing for the Central, but will settle for the Wildcard. The Tigers will pull away late.
The Yankees will not make the playoffs. They cannot do it with only 2 pitchers (Hughes and Sabathia) and if they want Felix Hernandez mid year they are likely going to have to give up Hughes...which still leaves them with 2 pitchers.
The World series will be offense versus pitching at it's purest. The Red Sox stout lineup (with the possible mid-season addition of the current Mets SS Jose Reyes) pinned up against the 4 aces of the Phillies staff. It will go 7, but the Red Sox will win because of Josh Beckett out dueling Roy Halladay, as Mr. Beckett typically steps up his game in the post-season.
Take all that to the sports book in Vegas.
Let's Go Mets! (I USED to sound just like these kids and their accents)
Friday, March 18, 2011
Twitter Be Crazy
Well, apparently we have a crazy on our hands...or at least a screw loose.
So, instead of explaining the story once an hour for two days I decided to write it in a blog post so I can just direct folks here.
Last night, ON ST. PATRICK'S DAY NO LESS, I received a random e-mail from some person saying our twitter "friend" @fmn1986 was not truthful. I don't know the person who e-mailed me, they got my e-mail from this blog and e-mailed me specifically because they noticed we (meaning me and FMN) were making plans to meet. I was told she was a young college student in Michigan and certainly not the NYC assistant district attorney she claimed to be. I was told she lives in Michigan, not NYC, and she is not married.
After consultation with some members of our twitter family, I spoke (gchatted) with FMN. She admitted the e-mail was true and apologized profusely. I was told by her that she started this story a few years ago as an escape from a bad time and it basically snowballed on her. She would not go into detail over why she did what she did, or what the circumstances were....saying "I can't get into it right now". If her words were true, she is deeply troubled and deeply apologetic (though, also quite dramatic)...but who the eff knows if her words are true.
She could either be continuing to BS me, or is genuinely a confused/troubled albeit loopy college student with a crazy creative mind and a lot of time on her hands.
I have never met her in real life. We chatted via e-mail and texted each other. We made plans to meet a few times but they were always cancelled or something came up at the last minute and we never ended up meeting.
She did tell me that the name she gave out was actually her name. She is a real human being, just not what she said she was. I think she took all her accounts down. That picture on twitter was not her picture. When I spoke to her last night I asked that she send me a photo right now as possible proof she is a real person. She did. I believe it.
I have no idea how she knew a surprisingly good amount about the legal field, or areas where people lived, or how she kept up with the level of detail she did within her story. As I've said to a couple of you, the 1/10th of me that isn't intensely creeped out is kinda impressed.
I did e-mail the person who randomly e-mailed me back, asking how they knew and if there is anything else I should know. She told me she followed FMN too and was confused by all her details, like vacations/jobs (I knew ADA's didn't get out at 5 o'clock)/etc. As creepy as FMN is, this person seems just the same. She apparently did "research" and found out and confronted her or something. I don't fully know and don't plan on finding out. But apparently she was right about FMN because everything is gone.
So, there you have it. Feel free to comment any questions. And FMN, if you read this, you're better off not commenting.
[Edit: I want to point out as a grown adult, I don't take all this very seriously. I find it funny and have been making jokes all day. Though creepy, it's all very amusing. Now, ON WITH YOUR DAY!]
So, instead of explaining the story once an hour for two days I decided to write it in a blog post so I can just direct folks here.
Last night, ON ST. PATRICK'S DAY NO LESS, I received a random e-mail from some person saying our twitter "friend" @fmn1986 was not truthful. I don't know the person who e-mailed me, they got my e-mail from this blog and e-mailed me specifically because they noticed we (meaning me and FMN) were making plans to meet. I was told she was a young college student in Michigan and certainly not the NYC assistant district attorney she claimed to be. I was told she lives in Michigan, not NYC, and she is not married.
After consultation with some members of our twitter family, I spoke (gchatted) with FMN. She admitted the e-mail was true and apologized profusely. I was told by her that she started this story a few years ago as an escape from a bad time and it basically snowballed on her. She would not go into detail over why she did what she did, or what the circumstances were....saying "I can't get into it right now". If her words were true, she is deeply troubled and deeply apologetic (though, also quite dramatic)...but who the eff knows if her words are true.
She could either be continuing to BS me, or is genuinely a confused/troubled albeit loopy college student with a crazy creative mind and a lot of time on her hands.
I have never met her in real life. We chatted via e-mail and texted each other. We made plans to meet a few times but they were always cancelled or something came up at the last minute and we never ended up meeting.
She did tell me that the name she gave out was actually her name. She is a real human being, just not what she said she was. I think she took all her accounts down. That picture on twitter was not her picture. When I spoke to her last night I asked that she send me a photo right now as possible proof she is a real person. She did. I believe it.
I have no idea how she knew a surprisingly good amount about the legal field, or areas where people lived, or how she kept up with the level of detail she did within her story. As I've said to a couple of you, the 1/10th of me that isn't intensely creeped out is kinda impressed.
I did e-mail the person who randomly e-mailed me back, asking how they knew and if there is anything else I should know. She told me she followed FMN too and was confused by all her details, like vacations/jobs (I knew ADA's didn't get out at 5 o'clock)/etc. As creepy as FMN is, this person seems just the same. She apparently did "research" and found out and confronted her or something. I don't fully know and don't plan on finding out. But apparently she was right about FMN because everything is gone.
So, there you have it. Feel free to comment any questions. And FMN, if you read this, you're better off not commenting.
[Edit: I want to point out as a grown adult, I don't take all this very seriously. I find it funny and have been making jokes all day. Though creepy, it's all very amusing. Now, ON WITH YOUR DAY!]
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
"There are sober kids all over who don't get Guinness on St. Paddy's Day"
[This is a long post. Feel free to not read, but at least look at the pictures, they're a pain to post. Also, there was a video but because facebook is bad, it didn't work and I erased it]
The last two or three days have completely kicked my ass. That river is wider. I really need some cheering up. Since How I Met Your Mother is for some reason not working, I am going to move on to my next two favorite things...beer and Irish. I'm gonna spend some time going through St. Patrick's Day (fuzzy) memory lane.
It all started as a young'n in college at SUNY Albany where the St. Patrick's Day tradition was Kegs 'n Eggs. Which meant wake up at 6 am and start drinking immediately. The entire University takes part, each bar has a breakfast party, each house has an afternoon Beer-BQ and it's just a general messy affair. But as 18-21 year olds...it was glorious.
My Senior year was the greatest St. Patrick's Day of my life. In fact, that was the greatest two weeks of my life...March 3-18, 2006. It began the weekend of the 3rd when my closest college friend invited about 12 of his friends from home to visit and spend the weekend. I basically lived at that apartment. What resulted was a 48 hour long party, which was incredible. Just, so much fun.
The following weekend was the America East Conference championship game. Albany (us) vs. Vermont. I remember being at Washington Tavern that Friday night and people were discussing possibly showing up Saturday night around 10pm to camp out for tickets to the game. You see, Albany had never been to the NCAA tournament before...but we were the favorites this time to win the conference.
The following morning me and three or four of my buddies headed to the gym to play some basketball. The ball somehow ended up going out an open door towards the football field. When I ran outside to grab it I saw 4 or 5 tents already set up...it was about noon. I walked inside and told everyone to get in the car we were going to Wal-Mart. We were back a half hour later and set up our tent...tenth in line. By midnight that night there were about two thousand people there and probably around 300 tents set up.
You put two thousand college students in tents with the prospect of a big sporting event the next day, you have a party. Each tent had a cooler. Every hundred feet or so there was another stereo set up with a group of people dancing. There were chants of "not a real state" - of course, about Vermont - going on all through the night. The security guards were sharing in the beers. Everyone even behaved themselves.
The next day I was first in line to get into the arena and me and the friends were there 2 hours early sitting in the fourth row behind the hoop. Several thousand people (small arena) chanting "not a real state" and when the dean told us to be respectful, we chanted "we respect you". And then we won and got to rush the court. Some of you may have gone to big schools where big sports happen and this may not seem like a big deal. But to a die-hard sports fan who once signed up for SUNY was resigned to never rushing a court/field, it was one of the greatest moments of my life. I have something in my eyes right now just thinking about it.
Then, the following week me and all my friends were able to attend the NCAA tourney game against UConn in Philadelphia. It was St. Patrick's Day. We arrived early and spent a couple hours in McFaddens Philly before going into the arena. We were the 16 seed playing the 1 seed. We were winning by 11 points with 11:23 left on the clock. This would quite literally be the greatest upset in major American sports. A 16 seed has never defeated a 1 seed. We lost by 13. I still have nightmares about Rudy Gay.
Then we moved on from college and St. Patrick's Day moved to New York City. The day begins at around 9, we have our morning bombs and don't speak to each other until we do. In 2007 we were wondering why St. Patrick's Day isn't treated as Christmas is...so we decided to make it like Christmas. We wrapped "presents" woke up and opened them. My friend Dan (6'4", 250) surprised us with a grown-man onesie.
St. Patrick's Day has always been my favorite holiday. All of NYC gets together for one purpose and all of my friends usually make it. I've shown people their first real St. Patrick's Days and I've shared several with some of my best friends. Below are some of my favorite St. Patrick's Day memories. Some are embarrassing. Some are funny. Some are just special. All make me smile.
 |
| 2007 - My Fav. St. P's pic of me |
 |
| 2005 - Night Pong |
 |
| 2006 - at the Tourney |
 |
| 2010 - Shutup |
 |
| 2008 - Where's Timbo? |
 |
| 2009 |
 |
| 2009 - They be short |
 |
| 2010 - Why? How do you roll? |
 |
| 2007 - I'm 6'1", he's 6"3 - I could see the parade |
 |
| 2009 - I'm an idiot |
 |
| 2008 - Irish and English getting along |
 |
| 2007 - Parade |
 |
| 2008 - Stop interrupting our bombs |
 |
| 2010 - Hate the game. |
 |
| 2008 - Bombing |
 |
| 2006 - Yup. St. Patrick's Day |
Monday, March 14, 2011
What's In a Dream?
I recall last night my last conscious thought before falling asleep was "oh great, my dreams are gonna be fucked up tonight". I had taken some get-to-sleep pills that were not working. This meant at some point I was going to be slipping in and out of consciousness without actually being tired.
I remember at the beginning of my sleeping I had a vision of a ghost coming at me from across a courtyard and it morphed into a black cat and ran into an alley next to me. This scared me to no end and I woke up...frightened. I didn't fall asleep again for an hour and a half.
I don't remember much of my dreaming from last night, just the last few minutes of the last dream. The good news is it was a doozie mentally.
As is probably the case for most people a lot of the occurrences in my dream don't make a lot of sense both mentally and physically. What I mean is things happened that can't physically happen in real life.
I got into my father's SUV with him and my brother and we were on our way to a children's party, sort of like a Chucky Cheese type place. I have a 4 year old niece. We were being followed another car which I presume had my sister-in-law and my niece in it. In our car was to be my mothers family.
My Uncle got in, who immediately started fighting with my Dad. I can't explain this, but I got into it with him...literally. I punched him in the face a few times. EXPLAIN THAT!? I can't...I like that Uncle.
A few missed turns, a few bad directions, a lot of yelling, my brother leaving our car for the other, and a few forgotten people later....we arrive at a bridge overlooking an epic river. And when I say epic I mean it. I couldn't see the other side. And when I say bridge I mean a rinky-dink wooden bridge like one you might think Huck Finn would cross.
This is where the physically unexplainable only-in-a-dream change occurs on the spot. Suddenly, instead of in an SUV with my father and some family who I barely recognize, I'm on a go-kart of some form, sitting in the front seat with my mother.
We turn into the bridge's on-ramp and just as we're about to begin making our way across the bridge two hooks SLAM into the edge of the bridges sides. I look to my left and there is a boat waiting. I realize that this machine I see in front of me is going to draw this bridge so that the boat can pass.
Having now realized we were in for a wait (we weren't, in about 2 seconds the bridge was drawn and the boat was gone ---- ahhh dreams) I started checking on our situation. The kart I was in had one wheel hanging off the edge of the ramp and this made me feel real unsafe. My mother started asking attendant if there was any way across the river without having to use this ramp...she apparently didn't like the looks of it.
Then I turned and stared across the water. And my alarm went off.
So there I was...having been brought to this place by an arguing family, a father trying his best but failing, a mother looking for a short-cut, going from a big SUV to a tiny go-kart, one wheel hanging off the side, my brother having gotten out a while back....staring across what had to be the mightiest river in the world and there was no bridge.
I woke up drenched in sweat.
That final view I had, looking across a bridgeless river...that's how I feel right now. I've extended school as much as I can. The bridge is drawn. It's now time to sink or swim. I'm terrified.
I remember at the beginning of my sleeping I had a vision of a ghost coming at me from across a courtyard and it morphed into a black cat and ran into an alley next to me. This scared me to no end and I woke up...frightened. I didn't fall asleep again for an hour and a half.
I don't remember much of my dreaming from last night, just the last few minutes of the last dream. The good news is it was a doozie mentally.
As is probably the case for most people a lot of the occurrences in my dream don't make a lot of sense both mentally and physically. What I mean is things happened that can't physically happen in real life.
I got into my father's SUV with him and my brother and we were on our way to a children's party, sort of like a Chucky Cheese type place. I have a 4 year old niece. We were being followed another car which I presume had my sister-in-law and my niece in it. In our car was to be my mothers family.
My Uncle got in, who immediately started fighting with my Dad. I can't explain this, but I got into it with him...literally. I punched him in the face a few times. EXPLAIN THAT!? I can't...I like that Uncle.
A few missed turns, a few bad directions, a lot of yelling, my brother leaving our car for the other, and a few forgotten people later....we arrive at a bridge overlooking an epic river. And when I say epic I mean it. I couldn't see the other side. And when I say bridge I mean a rinky-dink wooden bridge like one you might think Huck Finn would cross.
This is where the physically unexplainable only-in-a-dream change occurs on the spot. Suddenly, instead of in an SUV with my father and some family who I barely recognize, I'm on a go-kart of some form, sitting in the front seat with my mother.
We turn into the bridge's on-ramp and just as we're about to begin making our way across the bridge two hooks SLAM into the edge of the bridges sides. I look to my left and there is a boat waiting. I realize that this machine I see in front of me is going to draw this bridge so that the boat can pass.
Having now realized we were in for a wait (we weren't, in about 2 seconds the bridge was drawn and the boat was gone ---- ahhh dreams) I started checking on our situation. The kart I was in had one wheel hanging off the edge of the ramp and this made me feel real unsafe. My mother started asking attendant if there was any way across the river without having to use this ramp...she apparently didn't like the looks of it.
Then I turned and stared across the water. And my alarm went off.
So there I was...having been brought to this place by an arguing family, a father trying his best but failing, a mother looking for a short-cut, going from a big SUV to a tiny go-kart, one wheel hanging off the side, my brother having gotten out a while back....staring across what had to be the mightiest river in the world and there was no bridge.
I woke up drenched in sweat.
That final view I had, looking across a bridgeless river...that's how I feel right now. I've extended school as much as I can. The bridge is drawn. It's now time to sink or swim. I'm terrified.
"Dreams are often most profound when they seem the most crazy." - Sigmund FreudHe'd probably have a field day.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Twitter Be Good
I've been twatting since late 2008. Back then I used it only to plug the old Tree here, (no, the blog, get your head out of the gutter), which was brilliant since I didn't have any followers. I didn't start twatting with gusto© until last summer. I didn't know what was going to happen but I didn't have a whole lot to do, ya know having recently become unemployable a Juris Doctor.
When I mention my twittescapades to friends and the such they either chuckle or mock me. I guess I can get that. In a prior life I probably would have done the same. I guess it's easy to assume these kids and their social networks and their friendbooks and twitspaces are for teenagers and loners. In reality, it's very different. OK, not that different, but shut up and let me blog.
I fully agree 95% of what comes across my timeline slash I type myself is absolute moronic dribble. I know most of what I say is either terrible jokes, inane flirting with strangers, or something about Scotch and boobs. Not exactly Leaves of Grass.
However, there is that occasional intelligible tweet that has meaning. I've had conversations that have genuinely helped me. Also, in tough times, like say during/preceding the bar exam, post bar panic attacks, terrible days, and Mets losses there is a ton of people ready and willing to throw some support your way. This is nice even if it comes from people you've never met in real life.
Even betterer...sometimes you can make an actual real life connection with people. It may be a new NYC drinking buddy (this week!), a bean-town sweetheart who has talked me off a ledge more than once, or a Chicagoan who is willing to have the very frank conversations I can't have with any local people...believe it or not, you can find real life friendships on this crazy thing.
Last week during the Oscars I saw someone complain on twitter about how everyone was live-tweeting the show. Someone else informed them there was a simple solution...turn off the twitter. The original tweeters response? "What, and be alone!?" This may seem pathetic to some...but I get it. I hate being alone. I fear it like nothing else. This is probably not healthy...but while I work on that I have my twitter friends to keep me company, which is nice. There is always somebody there.
There are practical considerations too. I have had leads on jobs because of twitter. I now have connections with people and lawyers in cities across the country. If I need an idea of where to stay ordrink myself silly go out for dinner in a dozen different cities, I can simply ask and I'll have an answer in a minute. It's nice. I can ask questions and get answers. For God's sake, I got at least one question right on the barzam because of a lunch break twitter question asked and answered within seconds.
My friends and family can mock and chuckle all they want. Twitter is really silly. But I like my twitter family. They have actually helped me. They make me laugh.
Plus it's a nice platform for me to pretend people care what I have to say. I have a large ego. It needs food.
When I mention my twittescapades to friends and the such they either chuckle or mock me. I guess I can get that. In a prior life I probably would have done the same. I guess it's easy to assume these kids and their social networks and their friendbooks and twitspaces are for teenagers and loners. In reality, it's very different. OK, not that different, but shut up and let me blog.
I fully agree 95% of what comes across my timeline slash I type myself is absolute moronic dribble. I know most of what I say is either terrible jokes, inane flirting with strangers, or something about Scotch and boobs. Not exactly Leaves of Grass.
However, there is that occasional intelligible tweet that has meaning. I've had conversations that have genuinely helped me. Also, in tough times, like say during/preceding the bar exam, post bar panic attacks, terrible days, and Mets losses there is a ton of people ready and willing to throw some support your way. This is nice even if it comes from people you've never met in real life.
Even betterer...sometimes you can make an actual real life connection with people. It may be a new NYC drinking buddy (this week!), a bean-town sweetheart who has talked me off a ledge more than once, or a Chicagoan who is willing to have the very frank conversations I can't have with any local people...believe it or not, you can find real life friendships on this crazy thing.
Last week during the Oscars I saw someone complain on twitter about how everyone was live-tweeting the show. Someone else informed them there was a simple solution...turn off the twitter. The original tweeters response? "What, and be alone!?" This may seem pathetic to some...but I get it. I hate being alone. I fear it like nothing else. This is probably not healthy...but while I work on that I have my twitter friends to keep me company, which is nice. There is always somebody there.
There are practical considerations too. I have had leads on jobs because of twitter. I now have connections with people and lawyers in cities across the country. If I need an idea of where to stay or
My friends and family can mock and chuckle all they want. Twitter is really silly. But I like my twitter family. They have actually helped me. They make me laugh.
Plus it's a nice platform for me to pretend people care what I have to say. I have a large ego. It needs food.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
"that's why you're broke"
While walking along 53rd street on my way home from skoolz I was approached by the most adorable little college student. Note to all charitable organizations: if you want me to stop for your worker and not pretend I can't hear them over my Ipod, have an attractive female do it. Anywho, she stops me and we have this exact exchange word-for-word:
Adorable Charitable Worker: Excuse me, do you like children?
Me: No, not particularly.
Adorable Charitable Worker: Well, do you have a big heart?
Me: No, not particularly.
Adorable Charitable Worker: Ok, would you like to sponsor a child who really needs you?
Me: Sorry dear, I'm about as broke as that child.
Adorable Charitable Worker: How can you be broke? ::looks me up and down:: You don't look broke. How old are you?
Me: ::not wanting to be the broke 26 year old:: I'm 23.
Adorable Charitable Worker: So why are you broke? Are you a senior?
Me: No, I'm a law student.
Adorable Charitable Worker: Ohhhh, so you're smart...that's why you're broke. Have a nice day. ::turns around and walks away::So...what? Is everybody in on the joke but us?
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
The Good, the Bad, and the Confused
In reading a post by the wonderful and talented Amie I was inspired to document an internal quarrel of sorts that has been brewing in my brain-parts for a while now. While not directly on point with Amie's likely more important thesis, I suggest it is not far off. My conflict involves weighing acting in your own self interest versus constantly doing what, as Amie described, is "the right thing".
I am of two minds in this regard. For most of my life I have followed what I thought was a kind of Kantian theory on "doing the right thing". I have always been absent of religion and thus found my own sense of morality from reason. I simply did what I felt was the right thing...in other words, what I would want others to do in a given situation if I were in control of them and were looking out for the whole world instead just myself.
The benefits of this practice are nice. People generally accept it and appreciate your consideration. Also, you get a heightened sense of self satisfaction from "doing the right thing"...a martyr pride so to speak. However, it does have its drawbacks. Specifically, you don't always get what you want. Life appears to be a zero sum game in the end.
This is where my other mind starts screaming. The little red devil on my left shoulder starts asking where the money and the women are. This inner struggle has festered in me for a few years but has started seriously perculating in the last year or so.
I have been playing Poker for about thirteen years now, fairly competitively. If there is one thing I have taken away from the chaos and game theory of poker it is that your best mathematical chance of winning is to always take the option in your own self interest. My question is, do I apply this to life?
When you look around it seems most, though not all, other people are acting purely in self interest. How are you supposed to "win" if you aren't doing that same? Is it not just like the poker table? Or is the act of "doing the right thing" winning in and of itself?
I have found in recent times I am leaning towards acting in self interest. Life is short and all that jazz and I like having things that I want. Women are pretty and money buys fun things. BUT, I still worry I'm not doing the right thing.
I am of two minds in this regard. For most of my life I have followed what I thought was a kind of Kantian theory on "doing the right thing". I have always been absent of religion and thus found my own sense of morality from reason. I simply did what I felt was the right thing...in other words, what I would want others to do in a given situation if I were in control of them and were looking out for the whole world instead just myself.
The benefits of this practice are nice. People generally accept it and appreciate your consideration. Also, you get a heightened sense of self satisfaction from "doing the right thing"...a martyr pride so to speak. However, it does have its drawbacks. Specifically, you don't always get what you want. Life appears to be a zero sum game in the end.
This is where my other mind starts screaming. The little red devil on my left shoulder starts asking where the money and the women are. This inner struggle has festered in me for a few years but has started seriously perculating in the last year or so.
I have been playing Poker for about thirteen years now, fairly competitively. If there is one thing I have taken away from the chaos and game theory of poker it is that your best mathematical chance of winning is to always take the option in your own self interest. My question is, do I apply this to life?
When you look around it seems most, though not all, other people are acting purely in self interest. How are you supposed to "win" if you aren't doing that same? Is it not just like the poker table? Or is the act of "doing the right thing" winning in and of itself?
I have found in recent times I am leaning towards acting in self interest. Life is short and all that jazz and I like having things that I want. Women are pretty and money buys fun things. BUT, I still worry I'm not doing the right thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
