Perfect definition of Nate humor.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Letter to Ron Paul
I wrote this letter to Ron Paul (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/). What I would like is some:
1) Feedback as to the validity and logic of my arguments
2) Any grammatical and/or spelling issues
3) Your overall opinion
I am going to send this letter before too long, I just want to let everyone proof read it (mainly my mom :) ) so that I don't sound like a moron.
Thanks.
PS Yes I am still very influenced in my thinking by Ayn Rand.
Dr. Paul,
I am a Christian and grew up in a church pastored by my father. I always looked up to him as an intelligent man of faith. During the years George H.W. Bush was President I remember many people in the congregation having difficulties making ends meet as the tax cuts for the upper class did not trickle down to the lower classes. I remember vividly the election of 1992 and waiting up with my dad as the results were tallied. I was 9 years old in 1992 and had no idea what was happening only that a “good guy” was winning and the “bad guy” was losing. I was overjoyed when, in my mind, the GI Joes beat Cobra.
In 1996 the same thing occurred, the only difference being that I was 13 and understood the process by which Presidents were elected and some of the politics that went alongside the election, making one person “better” than the other. The only issue in my mind, however, was to choose the same guy my dad did because I could never defeat him in an argument and he always picked the “right” guy.
A funny thing happened between 1996 and 2000. Not only did I stop believing that my dad was always right, but I began to date a girl whose father was the most conservative Republican I had ever met. These two people profoundly influenced my thoughts and decisions right through the election in 2000. I became a Republican the first time I had a serious talk with my girlfriend’s dad about politics. For him, the only issues were faith based. George Bush was a Christian, a Baptist no less, and Al Gore was, in his words “The Antichrist.”
Needless to say, I was not going to side with the Antichrist so I staunchly defended Bush in front of my parents and siblings even though my parents were the only ones in the house old enough to vote. I was 17 in 2000 and had finally become a Republican.
I consider myself an intelligent individual and as such I decided that Gore was not the Antichrist, since the Antichrist would have won the election, attempted to brand all of us with the Mark of the Beast, and martyred me as a supporter of the God and the Republicans. I was not, however, willing to admit defeat to my four younger sisters and my two highly educated parents let alone start that argument with my fire and brimstone "in-laws".
Thankfully, while I was dealing with these issues, my girlfriend and I parted ways and I was free to think about considering myself a Democrat without immediately being thrown into the fiery pits of Hades.
Another relationship soon started and this girl was also a Republican and a Christian, as were her parents, but they were Reagan Republicans believing that the Republicans had saved the country during the years of 1980-1992 and that Clinton had merely reaped the benefits of Reagan’s amazing ideas. Laissez-faire economics, the trickledown theory, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and many other nuggets of Republican theory and propoganda were pumped into my brain.
Fortunately, having dealt with crazy Republicans in the past, I knew better than to adapt their ideas for my own and decided to do my own research. What I found was a morass of political speak with little to no actual politics. What I realized was that most people were affiliated with one party or another based on one or two personal experiences.
This realization led me to seek out the foundation of both the Republican and the Democratic Party and why they believe what they believe. What I realized was that the difference goes all the way back to, and was the cause of, the Civil War. The South believed in the right of states to govern themselves, to make decisions that were best for their state. The North believed that a strong and central national government was the only way for a true nation to function. I apologize for this brief history lesson, but most people think that the war was about slavery, which it never was, and the struggles of the Blacks after the Civil War show just how little it had to do with civil liberties.
Currently, Republicans are the south and the Democrats are the north, at least theoretically. While I cannot comment on the politics of the first Bush, Reagan, or Clinton since I had no vested interest in their presidencies; I can, however, comment on Bush the second.
He is not a Republican. No true Republican would ever usurp the power of Congress in order to declare a war on a foreign nation. No true Republican would ever increase the power of the national government to a point where state, let alone individual, rights and privileges are not taken into consideration in foreign, fiscal, or educational policy. I am a Republican because I believe that the more levels of abstraction you have between an individual and the person making decisions on their behalf, the less those decisions take into consideration the feelings of the people and the more muddied the waters become with lobbyists. I also strongly support laissez-faire almost everything. Centralized power is an anathema to every true Republican. George W. Bush is not a Republican.
I am writing this letter because you are the first person that I have ever seen who kind of says what the Republican Party believes and this makes me proud. You do not, however, follow a true laissez-faire Republican government, which is the other reason for this letter.
I do not agree with your treatment of immigrants since a true laissez-faire Republican economy would allow any immigrant to enter the country and make a living and live out the American Dream, much like all of our ancestors did at one time or another. Social services for immigrants should be available to all. The poor of the world are just as poor, if not more so, than the poor of the United States and we should not discriminate based on their parentage.
I also vehemently disagree with your treatment of Social Security. I believe that the demise of the family and the poor quality of life for senior citizens is because of Social Security not because the system is broken. Senior citizens deserve to be taken care of and should be taken care of by first themselves, then their families, and finally the government. The demise of the family structure in America today is because we take our elderly, warehouse them, and wait for them to die. The policy that I believe is the most just is to discontinue Social Security all together and to envelop the poor elderly into the exact same bracket as the poor single mother. After all, the only difference is age. Too many Americans think that Social Security is their retirement; the phasing out of Social Security in favor of a private retirement plan should be the priority of any true Republican.
I also believe that the public school funding needs to be phased out in favor of vouchers for every student. Bad public schools would not have any students because no students would choose to attend the school. Privatization of every school would increase the quality of life for every student since schools would be competing for the vouchers of students in the area. Non-state funded colleges and universities continue to be the best institutions of higher learning in the world. Remove funding for state schools so that their mediocrity would not be allowed to continue freeing up that money for scholarships to the most promising students to any university. That way promising poor students could attend Harvard for the same price as their nearest state school. The state schools would then be forced to increase the quality of education or decrease prices in order to offer an alternative.
Competition breeds excellence. That is why America is the strongest nation in the world. Unless Republicans continue to foster an environment of competition like they are supposed to do, America will continue to fall further and further behind other nations in terms of quality.
It is my belief, as a Christian, that everyone is worthwhile and everyone has immeasurable abilities. What we need to do as a nation is to foster those abilities. The people in the US who are lazy, in a just system, would reap the rewards of laziness and the people who work, no matter how intelligent they are, will reap the rewards of work.
There is another person, who is my hero, who said those exact words about reaping and sowing and also about laziness and work: Jesus Christ. It is time that Republicans began acting like Republicans and stop name dropping Christianity since Republicans and Christians are doing a disservice to each other by allowing lazy politics to take the place of actual thought.
Sincerely,
Nathaniel Noonen
1) Feedback as to the validity and logic of my arguments
2) Any grammatical and/or spelling issues
3) Your overall opinion
I am going to send this letter before too long, I just want to let everyone proof read it (mainly my mom :) ) so that I don't sound like a moron.
Thanks.
PS Yes I am still very influenced in my thinking by Ayn Rand.
Dr. Paul,
I am a Christian and grew up in a church pastored by my father. I always looked up to him as an intelligent man of faith. During the years George H.W. Bush was President I remember many people in the congregation having difficulties making ends meet as the tax cuts for the upper class did not trickle down to the lower classes. I remember vividly the election of 1992 and waiting up with my dad as the results were tallied. I was 9 years old in 1992 and had no idea what was happening only that a “good guy” was winning and the “bad guy” was losing. I was overjoyed when, in my mind, the GI Joes beat Cobra.
In 1996 the same thing occurred, the only difference being that I was 13 and understood the process by which Presidents were elected and some of the politics that went alongside the election, making one person “better” than the other. The only issue in my mind, however, was to choose the same guy my dad did because I could never defeat him in an argument and he always picked the “right” guy.
A funny thing happened between 1996 and 2000. Not only did I stop believing that my dad was always right, but I began to date a girl whose father was the most conservative Republican I had ever met. These two people profoundly influenced my thoughts and decisions right through the election in 2000. I became a Republican the first time I had a serious talk with my girlfriend’s dad about politics. For him, the only issues were faith based. George Bush was a Christian, a Baptist no less, and Al Gore was, in his words “The Antichrist.”
Needless to say, I was not going to side with the Antichrist so I staunchly defended Bush in front of my parents and siblings even though my parents were the only ones in the house old enough to vote. I was 17 in 2000 and had finally become a Republican.
I consider myself an intelligent individual and as such I decided that Gore was not the Antichrist, since the Antichrist would have won the election, attempted to brand all of us with the Mark of the Beast, and martyred me as a supporter of the God and the Republicans. I was not, however, willing to admit defeat to my four younger sisters and my two highly educated parents let alone start that argument with my fire and brimstone "in-laws".
Thankfully, while I was dealing with these issues, my girlfriend and I parted ways and I was free to think about considering myself a Democrat without immediately being thrown into the fiery pits of Hades.
Another relationship soon started and this girl was also a Republican and a Christian, as were her parents, but they were Reagan Republicans believing that the Republicans had saved the country during the years of 1980-1992 and that Clinton had merely reaped the benefits of Reagan’s amazing ideas. Laissez-faire economics, the trickledown theory, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and many other nuggets of Republican theory and propoganda were pumped into my brain.
Fortunately, having dealt with crazy Republicans in the past, I knew better than to adapt their ideas for my own and decided to do my own research. What I found was a morass of political speak with little to no actual politics. What I realized was that most people were affiliated with one party or another based on one or two personal experiences.
This realization led me to seek out the foundation of both the Republican and the Democratic Party and why they believe what they believe. What I realized was that the difference goes all the way back to, and was the cause of, the Civil War. The South believed in the right of states to govern themselves, to make decisions that were best for their state. The North believed that a strong and central national government was the only way for a true nation to function. I apologize for this brief history lesson, but most people think that the war was about slavery, which it never was, and the struggles of the Blacks after the Civil War show just how little it had to do with civil liberties.
Currently, Republicans are the south and the Democrats are the north, at least theoretically. While I cannot comment on the politics of the first Bush, Reagan, or Clinton since I had no vested interest in their presidencies; I can, however, comment on Bush the second.
He is not a Republican. No true Republican would ever usurp the power of Congress in order to declare a war on a foreign nation. No true Republican would ever increase the power of the national government to a point where state, let alone individual, rights and privileges are not taken into consideration in foreign, fiscal, or educational policy. I am a Republican because I believe that the more levels of abstraction you have between an individual and the person making decisions on their behalf, the less those decisions take into consideration the feelings of the people and the more muddied the waters become with lobbyists. I also strongly support laissez-faire almost everything. Centralized power is an anathema to every true Republican. George W. Bush is not a Republican.
I am writing this letter because you are the first person that I have ever seen who kind of says what the Republican Party believes and this makes me proud. You do not, however, follow a true laissez-faire Republican government, which is the other reason for this letter.
I do not agree with your treatment of immigrants since a true laissez-faire Republican economy would allow any immigrant to enter the country and make a living and live out the American Dream, much like all of our ancestors did at one time or another. Social services for immigrants should be available to all. The poor of the world are just as poor, if not more so, than the poor of the United States and we should not discriminate based on their parentage.
I also vehemently disagree with your treatment of Social Security. I believe that the demise of the family and the poor quality of life for senior citizens is because of Social Security not because the system is broken. Senior citizens deserve to be taken care of and should be taken care of by first themselves, then their families, and finally the government. The demise of the family structure in America today is because we take our elderly, warehouse them, and wait for them to die. The policy that I believe is the most just is to discontinue Social Security all together and to envelop the poor elderly into the exact same bracket as the poor single mother. After all, the only difference is age. Too many Americans think that Social Security is their retirement; the phasing out of Social Security in favor of a private retirement plan should be the priority of any true Republican.
I also believe that the public school funding needs to be phased out in favor of vouchers for every student. Bad public schools would not have any students because no students would choose to attend the school. Privatization of every school would increase the quality of life for every student since schools would be competing for the vouchers of students in the area. Non-state funded colleges and universities continue to be the best institutions of higher learning in the world. Remove funding for state schools so that their mediocrity would not be allowed to continue freeing up that money for scholarships to the most promising students to any university. That way promising poor students could attend Harvard for the same price as their nearest state school. The state schools would then be forced to increase the quality of education or decrease prices in order to offer an alternative.
Competition breeds excellence. That is why America is the strongest nation in the world. Unless Republicans continue to foster an environment of competition like they are supposed to do, America will continue to fall further and further behind other nations in terms of quality.
It is my belief, as a Christian, that everyone is worthwhile and everyone has immeasurable abilities. What we need to do as a nation is to foster those abilities. The people in the US who are lazy, in a just system, would reap the rewards of laziness and the people who work, no matter how intelligent they are, will reap the rewards of work.
There is another person, who is my hero, who said those exact words about reaping and sowing and also about laziness and work: Jesus Christ. It is time that Republicans began acting like Republicans and stop name dropping Christianity since Republicans and Christians are doing a disservice to each other by allowing lazy politics to take the place of actual thought.
Sincerely,
Nathaniel Noonen
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Winter Meetings
For those of you who do not know, the baseball winter meetings are going on right now. Pretty much what that means is that teams who spend tons of money buy great players and teams that develop great players do nothing while their fans cry.
Today the Tigers traded 6 players for Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis. Now, the Indians could have made a move like that, but they would have gotten rid of great prospects and I understand not putting all of your eggs in one basket. If Dontrelle tears a tendon in his middle finger playing Guitar Hero, there goes that great trade.
The flip side is that teams like the Tigers, Angels, Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, and Cubs continue to purchase the big ticket players while the Indians develop in house. Just once I would like to get a quality established big league player in a deal or via free agent signing. Granted most of the current roster came from trades where the Tribe shipped off guys like Bartolo Colon for a few prospects (Grady Sizemore, Clifford Lee, and some other guys) and I do NOT want to sacrifice the future for a current player. Gone are the rebuilding years.
What I would like to see is a high profile free agent signing. Alex Rodriguez is out of the question, not only do I not like him, but he's too expensive, not worth it, a tool, and a bad man. I would, however, love to see this:
Indians acquire FA Andruw Jones for $16 million/year. With bonuses, the salary could reach $18 million.
Here is my argument:
1) The Tribe needs a right handed power hitter with plate discipline.
2) The Tribe needs a mentor and a quality individual to teach the younger guys how to behave and deal with the major leagues (one of the many reasons A-Rod would not be a good pickup)
3) The Tribe needs an established right OR left fielder.
4) If he gets hurt, they have guys waiting in the wings.
5) He's getting older and would have just as many highlight reel catches in left or right without the grind of center.
6) He is playoff tested, consistent, deals very well with slumps, is intelligent, a family man, and a great guy.
7) This would free up a trade for a good 3B while shipping out some of the outfield depth. Possibly a deal with the Angels for Chone Figgins. As much as I love Casey Blake, he is a utility player not an every day third baseman and Chone would fit nicely into the mix of guys who are willing to do anything to win and who can play multiple positions. The Angels can either have Ben Francisco or Franklin Guttierez and a pitcher (Cliff Lee, Sowers, or Miller).
So here is my prospective depth chart:
1. Sizemore CF
2. Figgins 3B
3. Jones LF
4. Hafner DH
5. Martinez C
6. Garko 1B
7. Peralta SS
8. Cabrera 2B
9. Guttierez (or Francisco) RF
Then for subs you have Jones who can play CF and give Grady a day off putting Blake in LF, you can put Figgins in the OF and give Barfield a start at second and move Cabrera to SS and Peralta gets a day off. Or you can move Cabrera to 2B, Peralta to 3B, Barfield to 2B and give Chone the day off. Or you can just do a swap, Blake for Jones, Blake for Chone, Barfield for Cabrera, etc.
Now, the likelyhood that this will actually happen is almost 0%; however, this takes care of the Tribe's needs perfectly. If the Tribe doesn't deal anyone, I hope and pray that Andy Marte and Josh Barfield decide not to suck this year and that someone (Guttierez, Francisco, or Michaels) emerges as a right handed power hitter.
The problem that the Tribe has is that 1-9 they are just a hair above average. 1-25 they are amazing and 1-40 they are probably the best team in baseball. The problem is that in the playoffs, you only need the 1-9 guys to be amazing. The Yankees lost to the Indians because their pitching sucked. Against a team with a quality pitching staff (Red Sox) they just couldn't stack up 1-9 against the Sox. That's the bottom line and until they decide to upgrade one of their 1-9 guys, they will be amazing 1-25 and above average in the playoffs.
Today the Tigers traded 6 players for Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis. Now, the Indians could have made a move like that, but they would have gotten rid of great prospects and I understand not putting all of your eggs in one basket. If Dontrelle tears a tendon in his middle finger playing Guitar Hero, there goes that great trade.
The flip side is that teams like the Tigers, Angels, Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, and Cubs continue to purchase the big ticket players while the Indians develop in house. Just once I would like to get a quality established big league player in a deal or via free agent signing. Granted most of the current roster came from trades where the Tribe shipped off guys like Bartolo Colon for a few prospects (Grady Sizemore, Clifford Lee, and some other guys) and I do NOT want to sacrifice the future for a current player. Gone are the rebuilding years.
What I would like to see is a high profile free agent signing. Alex Rodriguez is out of the question, not only do I not like him, but he's too expensive, not worth it, a tool, and a bad man. I would, however, love to see this:
Indians acquire FA Andruw Jones for $16 million/year. With bonuses, the salary could reach $18 million.
Here is my argument:
1) The Tribe needs a right handed power hitter with plate discipline.
2) The Tribe needs a mentor and a quality individual to teach the younger guys how to behave and deal with the major leagues (one of the many reasons A-Rod would not be a good pickup)
3) The Tribe needs an established right OR left fielder.
4) If he gets hurt, they have guys waiting in the wings.
5) He's getting older and would have just as many highlight reel catches in left or right without the grind of center.
6) He is playoff tested, consistent, deals very well with slumps, is intelligent, a family man, and a great guy.
7) This would free up a trade for a good 3B while shipping out some of the outfield depth. Possibly a deal with the Angels for Chone Figgins. As much as I love Casey Blake, he is a utility player not an every day third baseman and Chone would fit nicely into the mix of guys who are willing to do anything to win and who can play multiple positions. The Angels can either have Ben Francisco or Franklin Guttierez and a pitcher (Cliff Lee, Sowers, or Miller).
So here is my prospective depth chart:
1. Sizemore CF
2. Figgins 3B
3. Jones LF
4. Hafner DH
5. Martinez C
6. Garko 1B
7. Peralta SS
8. Cabrera 2B
9. Guttierez (or Francisco) RF
Then for subs you have Jones who can play CF and give Grady a day off putting Blake in LF, you can put Figgins in the OF and give Barfield a start at second and move Cabrera to SS and Peralta gets a day off. Or you can move Cabrera to 2B, Peralta to 3B, Barfield to 2B and give Chone the day off. Or you can just do a swap, Blake for Jones, Blake for Chone, Barfield for Cabrera, etc.
Now, the likelyhood that this will actually happen is almost 0%; however, this takes care of the Tribe's needs perfectly. If the Tribe doesn't deal anyone, I hope and pray that Andy Marte and Josh Barfield decide not to suck this year and that someone (Guttierez, Francisco, or Michaels) emerges as a right handed power hitter.
The problem that the Tribe has is that 1-9 they are just a hair above average. 1-25 they are amazing and 1-40 they are probably the best team in baseball. The problem is that in the playoffs, you only need the 1-9 guys to be amazing. The Yankees lost to the Indians because their pitching sucked. Against a team with a quality pitching staff (Red Sox) they just couldn't stack up 1-9 against the Sox. That's the bottom line and until they decide to upgrade one of their 1-9 guys, they will be amazing 1-25 and above average in the playoffs.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Noam was Wrong
I was on the El a few weeks ago and I was doing what tons of people on the El do, read what other people are reading. This particular person was studying for a psychology test and I found the study sheet she was reading fascinating because it wasn't an intro to Psych class, or maybe it was, but it seemed to be a Psych Communication class based on how people communicate and how the language translates differently for different people.
One of the items on the page was a theory by Noam Chomsky that a sentence in English could be gramatically correct; however, not make logical sense. I agree with that statement if, and only if, context meant nothing and we were taking language and communication not as a sequence of thoughts but as separate chunks.
If I came up to you and said "The error with the SQL delete statement has to do with a foreign key constraint in T_UDP" unless you were a developer you would have no idea what I was talking about and may think I was speaking gibberish.
My dad is a master at using his extensive knowledge of vocablary to obfuscate a meaningless sentence into something meaningful simply because the listener has no idea what he is saying and refuses to admit it.
I believe that this combination of opposite functions of the English language leads to the point where every gramatically correct sentence, given enough context will make sense. The example in the packet was something like "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." The first thought I had, and this is the one that has refused to leave me, is that the sentence makes perfect sense when contained within some context. Everything can be a metaphor, you just need the right base.
the El, or 'L' if you want to ANGER my wife,
is a place where everyone is an isolationist extrovert
crew cut leathery hispanic
blasting his white noise through earbuds
sitting next to
damenite yuppie starbucks fiend
blasting her white noise through earbuds
sitting across from
seventeen year old OG with a teardrop tatoo
concentrating deeply on looking confident
without making
his girlfriend/baby/darling
realize he told his buddy she's his bitch/ho/booty call
and figure out that OG doesn't mean Original Gangsta
but Ordinary Gentleman
the cta is a pile of manure
off of which mushrooms of thought proliferate
and the bacteria grows
with each stand clear of the closing doors
i recieve an invitation
'Messrs Clark and Lake request your presence
at a gala event attended by doctors, lawyers,
and those praying for a green card'
these thoughts must be put to bed
until they return to fertile soil
and my
colorless green ideas sleep furiously
while i attempt to work
One of the items on the page was a theory by Noam Chomsky that a sentence in English could be gramatically correct; however, not make logical sense. I agree with that statement if, and only if, context meant nothing and we were taking language and communication not as a sequence of thoughts but as separate chunks.
If I came up to you and said "The error with the SQL delete statement has to do with a foreign key constraint in T_UDP" unless you were a developer you would have no idea what I was talking about and may think I was speaking gibberish.
My dad is a master at using his extensive knowledge of vocablary to obfuscate a meaningless sentence into something meaningful simply because the listener has no idea what he is saying and refuses to admit it.
I believe that this combination of opposite functions of the English language leads to the point where every gramatically correct sentence, given enough context will make sense. The example in the packet was something like "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." The first thought I had, and this is the one that has refused to leave me, is that the sentence makes perfect sense when contained within some context. Everything can be a metaphor, you just need the right base.
the El, or 'L' if you want to ANGER my wife,
is a place where everyone is an isolationist extrovert
crew cut leathery hispanic
blasting his white noise through earbuds
sitting next to
damenite yuppie starbucks fiend
blasting her white noise through earbuds
sitting across from
seventeen year old OG with a teardrop tatoo
concentrating deeply on looking confident
without making
his girlfriend/baby/darling
realize he told his buddy she's his bitch/ho/booty call
and figure out that OG doesn't mean Original Gangsta
but Ordinary Gentleman
the cta is a pile of manure
off of which mushrooms of thought proliferate
and the bacteria grows
with each stand clear of the closing doors
i recieve an invitation
'Messrs Clark and Lake request your presence
at a gala event attended by doctors, lawyers,
and those praying for a green card'
these thoughts must be put to bed
until they return to fertile soil
and my
colorless green ideas sleep furiously
while i attempt to work
Monday, October 8, 2007
Myers Briggs
In High School I took a personality test and it told me that I was an ENTP. There, however, was a problem with the way that I took the test. I felt, in my infinite wisdom, that introverts had no friends. That did not seem to fit the role that I had defined for myself as a freshman, so I looked at the questions, figured out what the metrics were and how my answers fit me into a profile and manipulated the results to fit how I saw myself.
Up until about a year ago I would have classified myself as an extrovert. That was a miscalculation of epic proportions. I am, without a doubt, an introvert and proud of it. Kimmy has taught me that. So, with my new self realization I decided to take a Myers Briggs test again and this time answer based on my actual tendencies as opposed to how I perceive myself or how I think I should act.
I am, and I can say this with confidence, an INTP. After doing some research I have found that the following quotes taken from http://www.personalitypage.com/INTP.html fit me fairly well:
- see everything in terms of how it could be improved, or what it could be turned into.
- live in the world of theoretical possibilities.
- do not like to lead or control people.
- shy when it comes to meeting new people.
- very self-confident and gregarious around people they know well, or when discussing theories which they fully understand.
- their well thought-out understanding of an idea may not be easily understandable by others, but they are not naturally likely to tailor the truth so as to explain it in an understandable way to others.
- exhibit weakness in performing maintenance-type tasks, such as bill-paying and dressing appropriately.
- intensely interested in theory, and will put forth tremendous amounts of time and energy into finding a solution to a problem with has piqued their interest.
- may have a problem with self-aggrandizement and social rebellion (see the humbility article)
- very tolerant and flexible in most situations, unless one of their firmly held beliefs has been violated or challenged.
- if they do not realize the value of attending to other people's feelings, they may become overly critical and sarcastic with others.
- at their best when they can work on their theories independently
I was born like this. Any of the traits that do not apply to me can be attributed to, in this order, God, Kimmy, my family, my friends, baseball, and pharmacotherapy. The combination of all 6 has made me the man I am today.
Up until about a year ago I would have classified myself as an extrovert. That was a miscalculation of epic proportions. I am, without a doubt, an introvert and proud of it. Kimmy has taught me that. So, with my new self realization I decided to take a Myers Briggs test again and this time answer based on my actual tendencies as opposed to how I perceive myself or how I think I should act.
I am, and I can say this with confidence, an INTP. After doing some research I have found that the following quotes taken from http://www.personalitypage.com/INTP.html fit me fairly well:
- see everything in terms of how it could be improved, or what it could be turned into.
- live in the world of theoretical possibilities.
- do not like to lead or control people.
- shy when it comes to meeting new people.
- very self-confident and gregarious around people they know well, or when discussing theories which they fully understand.
- their well thought-out understanding of an idea may not be easily understandable by others, but they are not naturally likely to tailor the truth so as to explain it in an understandable way to others.
- exhibit weakness in performing maintenance-type tasks, such as bill-paying and dressing appropriately.
- intensely interested in theory, and will put forth tremendous amounts of time and energy into finding a solution to a problem with has piqued their interest.
- may have a problem with self-aggrandizement and social rebellion (see the humbility article)
- very tolerant and flexible in most situations, unless one of their firmly held beliefs has been violated or challenged.
- if they do not realize the value of attending to other people's feelings, they may become overly critical and sarcastic with others.
- at their best when they can work on their theories independently
I was born like this. Any of the traits that do not apply to me can be attributed to, in this order, God, Kimmy, my family, my friends, baseball, and pharmacotherapy. The combination of all 6 has made me the man I am today.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Albums EVERYONE should own
In my mind there is a distinction between an album and a CD. A CD is a physical object, something created by a machine that contains some semblance of music. Quality of music can be debated etc.
Albums, on the other hand, are masterpiece CDs. Things that are so amazing that they cannot possibly be lumped in together with other music CDs and are almost transcendent in their quality. This list is not debatable, since anyone with an iota of music taste will agree with me on their quality, whether or not they agree as to their universal appeal is a fact to be debated. These are masterpieces and in no particular order.
1) Rage Against the Machine - Self Titled
2) Sufjan Stevens - Come On Feel the Illinoise!
3) Cake - Fashion Nugget
4) Rolling Stones - Let It Bleed
5) Public Enemy - It Takes A Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back
6) The Beatles - White Album
7) Metallica - The Black Album
8) DC Talk - Jesus Freak
9) The Clash - London Calling
10) Elton John - Madman Across the Water
11) Lauryn Hill - Unplugged
12) Nirvana - Nevermind
13) System of a Down - Toxicity
14) Smashing Pumpkins - Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness
15) Dr. Dre - The Chronic (2001)
16) Sublime - Self Titled
17) AC/DC - Live
18) Black Sabbath - We Sold Our Soul For Rock and Roll
19) Beck - Odelay
20) Stevie Wonder - Innervisions
I may add more, but 20 seems like a good round number. Happy Shopping :)
Albums, on the other hand, are masterpiece CDs. Things that are so amazing that they cannot possibly be lumped in together with other music CDs and are almost transcendent in their quality. This list is not debatable, since anyone with an iota of music taste will agree with me on their quality, whether or not they agree as to their universal appeal is a fact to be debated. These are masterpieces and in no particular order.
1) Rage Against the Machine - Self Titled
2) Sufjan Stevens - Come On Feel the Illinoise!
3) Cake - Fashion Nugget
4) Rolling Stones - Let It Bleed
5) Public Enemy - It Takes A Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back
6) The Beatles - White Album
7) Metallica - The Black Album
8) DC Talk - Jesus Freak
9) The Clash - London Calling
10) Elton John - Madman Across the Water
11) Lauryn Hill - Unplugged
12) Nirvana - Nevermind
13) System of a Down - Toxicity
14) Smashing Pumpkins - Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness
15) Dr. Dre - The Chronic (2001)
16) Sublime - Self Titled
17) AC/DC - Live
18) Black Sabbath - We Sold Our Soul For Rock and Roll
19) Beck - Odelay
20) Stevie Wonder - Innervisions
I may add more, but 20 seems like a good round number. Happy Shopping :)
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
I am a Levitical Socialist Objectivist Christian
I finished Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand a few weeks ago and I have finally figured out what it is about the book that fits in with my views of humanity, Christianity, and the world in which we live.
1) I believe that adding value to humanity is the highest goal a person can attain and that when one does add value to humanity, one is truly operating in the image of God.
2) I believe that it is every human's responsibility to create value in one way or another. That the creation of value does not show in our bank accounts but through the productiveness of the mind, spirit, and body that God gave to us. We are stewards of said attributes, and as stewards it is our obligation to use our mind, body, and spirit to further the cause of ourself and those around us.
3) I believe that God created every human being with the ability to create value in one way or another. There are no social parasites in the Kingdom of God because people who do not have the mental capacity to be productive add value through their display of Godly virtues. The giving and receiving of love, laughter, and care adds just as much value as does the production of a car. Money is only one of the forms of value.
4) I believe that the even trading of value for value is the way that our world will operate in the Kingdom of God. Imagine the freedom in knowing that to show someone respect was to gain it yourself or to show love was to receive it. Knowing that love was a commodity to be purchased, not callously, but actually being able to percieve the transfer of love from a homeless man when you gave him $20 or a hug.
5) I believe that the fallen nature of man has devalued all virtues other than the one that we have the specific ability to produce. One man is intelligent and sees people of lower intelligence as worth less. Another man is generous and sees people who are not generous as worth less. The monetary emphasis in our culture today is a direct result of the people in power having money. In the middle ages it was land and people could be classified into castes based on their land ownership. When Christ comes, all of these values will be equal. Having a high amount of money will be worth no more and no less than having a high amount of love. Rich men have a problem entering the Kingdom because they are unwilling to see their money as an equal to another's love.
Let me know what you think and/or if you think this is a crock.
1) I believe that adding value to humanity is the highest goal a person can attain and that when one does add value to humanity, one is truly operating in the image of God.
2) I believe that it is every human's responsibility to create value in one way or another. That the creation of value does not show in our bank accounts but through the productiveness of the mind, spirit, and body that God gave to us. We are stewards of said attributes, and as stewards it is our obligation to use our mind, body, and spirit to further the cause of ourself and those around us.
3) I believe that God created every human being with the ability to create value in one way or another. There are no social parasites in the Kingdom of God because people who do not have the mental capacity to be productive add value through their display of Godly virtues. The giving and receiving of love, laughter, and care adds just as much value as does the production of a car. Money is only one of the forms of value.
4) I believe that the even trading of value for value is the way that our world will operate in the Kingdom of God. Imagine the freedom in knowing that to show someone respect was to gain it yourself or to show love was to receive it. Knowing that love was a commodity to be purchased, not callously, but actually being able to percieve the transfer of love from a homeless man when you gave him $20 or a hug.
5) I believe that the fallen nature of man has devalued all virtues other than the one that we have the specific ability to produce. One man is intelligent and sees people of lower intelligence as worth less. Another man is generous and sees people who are not generous as worth less. The monetary emphasis in our culture today is a direct result of the people in power having money. In the middle ages it was land and people could be classified into castes based on their land ownership. When Christ comes, all of these values will be equal. Having a high amount of money will be worth no more and no less than having a high amount of love. Rich men have a problem entering the Kingdom because they are unwilling to see their money as an equal to another's love.
Let me know what you think and/or if you think this is a crock.
Friday, September 28, 2007
We the winners!!!
We just won another delivery award on my current project. This is the second one we've won. Here's the writeup, which describes what we've done. Sorry if it's unreadable, I can't reveal the customer in a public place.
"
The Oil Company team just delivered Phase I of the application. The application will be available in nine countries and thirteen languages. The team took over the code base from a competitor, migrated the code from .NET 1.1 to .NET 2.0, added new functionality, and improved performance dramatically.
The Avanade team worked on a code base in parallel with our competitor. In the end, Avanade’s code base was selected over the competitor’s to go to production due to overall dominance in the performance capability. Our code base was able to handle 14x more users per server than the competition.
In addition, the Avanade team was awarded development for the next phase of the project which will add an additional 25,000 users to the existing 8,000 user base. The USDC team also delivered new technical design documentation for seven sub modules within a very tight timeframe and the USDC team has begun development on this next phase.
One of the project’s biggest challenges for the USDC team was consistent communication from the customer. The team was able to deliver successfully on Phase I without proper documentation, poor requirements, and lack of communication from the customer. The team also spent considerable amounts of time redoing poor documentation created by the customer. Even with all the hurdles, Avanade is on track to deliver the next phase of the project on time.
"
To paraphrase American Beauty "We Rule"
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Humbility
Humbility (n.) - The act of humbling oneself the way God intended us to be humble.
Humbleness (n.) - Humbling oneself
Humbilosity (n.) - Fake humbleness
Humbiliousness (n.) - Extreme humbilosity
I have struggled with humbling myself in my life. I am immensely proud of the gifts that God has given me and I love to use them, however, humbilosity and humbiliousness come easier to me than humbility.
I think that the reason for this is the fact that in my mind to be proud of one's accomplishments is to not have humbility so I easily oscillate between opposite extremes: pride and humbiliousness. God, through baseball, has taught me a valuable lesson via a man I like to call my hero, Casey Blake.
Casey Blake puttered around the minors for many many years finally getting called up to the Indians for good in 2004. In 2005 he sucked, flat out. If the game was on the line, you might as well start quoting "Casey At The Bat" where the Mighty Casey strikes out with the bases loaded in the bottom of the 9th with 2 out. In 2006 he busted out and became my hero after I watched him destroy the Orioles singlehandedly as I lay in the ER. Casey Blake, the phoenix, taught me that it was possible to rise from the ashes.
This year Casey hit 2 walk off home runs in 4 days. Walk off means that once he hit it, the game was over, Indians win. The baseball equivalent of the Hail Mary. After he hit his second, he rounded the bases triumphantly pumping his fist and "woo hoo"ing his way around the bases. A happy man who had just defeated the rival Tigers in the 11th inning.
The next day he apologized to the Tigers for his display saying that he did not mean to show them up or to disrespect their team with his actions. Casey was proud of his actions and celebrated accordingly but did not forget that there were people around him who may have taken offense to his reaction. Jim Leyland, the Tigers' manager, said that the apology was unnecessary because of the quality of Casey's character and the fact that he was celebrating a joyous occasion. Casey Blake, the man, taught me about humbility.
Humbility is the act of being proud of accomplishments but not gloating about them in a way that may make others feel inferior. In other words, if your boasting runs roughshod over other's accomplishments then it is not good, because you are telling God that His gifts to another are worthless. On the other hand, if your humble feelings detract from the value of the accomplishments God has allowed you to make, you are effectily telling Him that His gifts to you are worthless.
The world appreciates humbiliousness, God is after humbility.
Humbleness (n.) - Humbling oneself
Humbilosity (n.) - Fake humbleness
Humbiliousness (n.) - Extreme humbilosity
I have struggled with humbling myself in my life. I am immensely proud of the gifts that God has given me and I love to use them, however, humbilosity and humbiliousness come easier to me than humbility.
I think that the reason for this is the fact that in my mind to be proud of one's accomplishments is to not have humbility so I easily oscillate between opposite extremes: pride and humbiliousness. God, through baseball, has taught me a valuable lesson via a man I like to call my hero, Casey Blake.
Casey Blake puttered around the minors for many many years finally getting called up to the Indians for good in 2004. In 2005 he sucked, flat out. If the game was on the line, you might as well start quoting "Casey At The Bat" where the Mighty Casey strikes out with the bases loaded in the bottom of the 9th with 2 out. In 2006 he busted out and became my hero after I watched him destroy the Orioles singlehandedly as I lay in the ER. Casey Blake, the phoenix, taught me that it was possible to rise from the ashes.
This year Casey hit 2 walk off home runs in 4 days. Walk off means that once he hit it, the game was over, Indians win. The baseball equivalent of the Hail Mary. After he hit his second, he rounded the bases triumphantly pumping his fist and "woo hoo"ing his way around the bases. A happy man who had just defeated the rival Tigers in the 11th inning.
The next day he apologized to the Tigers for his display saying that he did not mean to show them up or to disrespect their team with his actions. Casey was proud of his actions and celebrated accordingly but did not forget that there were people around him who may have taken offense to his reaction. Jim Leyland, the Tigers' manager, said that the apology was unnecessary because of the quality of Casey's character and the fact that he was celebrating a joyous occasion. Casey Blake, the man, taught me about humbility.
Humbility is the act of being proud of accomplishments but not gloating about them in a way that may make others feel inferior. In other words, if your boasting runs roughshod over other's accomplishments then it is not good, because you are telling God that His gifts to another are worthless. On the other hand, if your humble feelings detract from the value of the accomplishments God has allowed you to make, you are effectily telling Him that His gifts to you are worthless.
The world appreciates humbiliousness, God is after humbility.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Post the first
I decided to switch from Xanga to blogger because xanga seems...college. Not that I'm a huge fan of blogging in general, it just seems to have more of a ring to it. I would like for this to be a more professional version of my former love. Xanga still holds a spot in my life, but I could not seem to break the feeling that I was still writing as a sophomore in college.
Anyway, last week at small group we had a discussion on what our passions are and where we find our value. I have many passions most of which are listed in the title above, the main omission being my wife. I realized that of all of my passions, none of them give me value. I have struggled with the extremes of valuing myself too high because of my abilities and too low because of my faults but I do not think I struggle with it anymore.
Let me explain. Value is a comparison of worth. Either I am valued meaning I am worth more than I expect to be worth or I am not valued meaning I am worth less (not worthless). When I think of the value of myself, I cannot define a value for myself without comparing myself to either me yesterday or another human being. Since I could not define a value for myself in the past since Christ has already said that I am immensely valuable as is everyone else, the only way to assign a value to myself would be to tear down my self of the past or to tear down the value of another.
Neither of these seem to be a viable option so I am left with a conundrum when answering questions like that. Do I truly 'gain value' by realizing that I am a child of God? That thought at this point of my life is null since it is the same question as whether or not I 'gain value' realizing that I am a man or that I have freckles. None of these are things that I can change.
I believe that the only time that I gain value from being a child of God is when I feel not valued by being something else. For instance when I am made fun of for being a Michigan fan, I realize that my value from being a child of God far outweighs any loss of value I would have for being a fan of a team that is 1 and 2.
I had a very difficult time explaining this at group because I hadn't ever thought about it. My value is something that I do not wish to think about. I am content with my existence without thinking that I 'need' value. I don't need anything but the grace of God (My Grace is sufficient for you, My Power is made perfect in your weakness) and since I've already got that, I try not to think about anything else. It is hard enough for me to get the sufficiency of Grace and intrinsically loved child of God things through my skull, let alone trying to figure out what my supposed value is and what brings it up and down.
This is where I am right now. Whether this is a continual place of growth or an area that God has completed His work in is yet to be discovered and I'm perfectly fine with that.
Anyway, last week at small group we had a discussion on what our passions are and where we find our value. I have many passions most of which are listed in the title above, the main omission being my wife. I realized that of all of my passions, none of them give me value. I have struggled with the extremes of valuing myself too high because of my abilities and too low because of my faults but I do not think I struggle with it anymore.
Let me explain. Value is a comparison of worth. Either I am valued meaning I am worth more than I expect to be worth or I am not valued meaning I am worth less (not worthless). When I think of the value of myself, I cannot define a value for myself without comparing myself to either me yesterday or another human being. Since I could not define a value for myself in the past since Christ has already said that I am immensely valuable as is everyone else, the only way to assign a value to myself would be to tear down my self of the past or to tear down the value of another.
Neither of these seem to be a viable option so I am left with a conundrum when answering questions like that. Do I truly 'gain value' by realizing that I am a child of God? That thought at this point of my life is null since it is the same question as whether or not I 'gain value' realizing that I am a man or that I have freckles. None of these are things that I can change.
I believe that the only time that I gain value from being a child of God is when I feel not valued by being something else. For instance when I am made fun of for being a Michigan fan, I realize that my value from being a child of God far outweighs any loss of value I would have for being a fan of a team that is 1 and 2.
I had a very difficult time explaining this at group because I hadn't ever thought about it. My value is something that I do not wish to think about. I am content with my existence without thinking that I 'need' value. I don't need anything but the grace of God (My Grace is sufficient for you, My Power is made perfect in your weakness) and since I've already got that, I try not to think about anything else. It is hard enough for me to get the sufficiency of Grace and intrinsically loved child of God things through my skull, let alone trying to figure out what my supposed value is and what brings it up and down.
This is where I am right now. Whether this is a continual place of growth or an area that God has completed His work in is yet to be discovered and I'm perfectly fine with that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)