(no subject)
Oct. 3rd, 2008 12:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alonewiththemoonMy own private shoe store arrived yesterday. It was pretty nice trying on shoes at home with all different socks without the pressure of sales people, or feeling silly jumping around. I approve of this process. One of the pairs of boots I ordered fits like a dream, so I declare this a success. The boots that fit were Rockports, ordered in wide, and happily they were also the least expensive pair on the menu. I'm still going to need something for when it really snows, but for the fall I'm all set. Maybe by the time heavy snow arrives my foot will be able to tolerate my Fluevogs again. I start my second series of foot shots today. Yay giant needles!
While trying on boots and working on costume stuff, I kept one ear on the VP debate. I made a conscious effort to be as unbiased a listener as I could. In that spirit, I was struck by the relative lack of rancor in the tone of the debate; Biden and Palin did sound genuinely respectful of one another. Everybody's been slamming Gwen Ifill's performance as moderator, but I think she did help keep the debate calm and steady. I don't like aggressive moderating. Both candidates occasionally said things that made my eyes roll. Palin, of course the past of the Republican party's leadership matters, it's your party! Biden, the jury is still out on the causes of global warming! (though to me, that doesn't mean it's inappropriate to take steps to counter act global warming or prepare for it. I don't know if my foot problems are man made or natural but I still get treatment for them) Palin did come across as intelligent at times, quick on her feet when she knew the terrain well, awkwardly lost when she didn't ("We're the party of mavericks! We don't have to make any sense!" "Well, I don't know how they do things in Washington..." then why do you think you're qualified to help run the place?). Biden reined in his impulse to be too talky and I think managed to come across as likable, a challenge next to the former beauty contestant who knows how to work a stage. The issue of civil unions and gay marriage was an interesting one. I think Palin initially spoke from the heart on that one--arguing essentially for some kind of civil union for gay partners--but when challenged by the moderator to repeat her answer, you could see a wall slam down behind her eyes as she realized she'd screwed up from the party's perspective, and she ducked repeating her own words. Of course I am disappointed that Biden, as the representative of the Democratic Party, spoke catagorically against gay marriage, but otoh, he repeated the same argument that many of us, myself included, make that the government should only govern over civil unions and leave marriage to the religious institutions, giving marriage no secular or legal meaning*. I'm skeptical that a shift like that could happen in the relatively near future, the terminology is too embedded in the way we think about relationships, but to hear a prominent politician lay it out like that on the national stage is something. I liked the bit where Biden invited Palin to Scranton, a classic picture of decline and decay. Also, during the energy debate--you just don't argue with a man from Scranton about his knowledge of coal ;-)
*I should note that this is not how my co-worker understood him at all, so perhaps I am wrong, but I think my next sentence speaks to the perception of people like my co-worker.
In the end I would give Biden the win, but I think if you were predisposed towards Palin and didn't care that much about facts, it wouldn't be that hard to argue it for her either. She certainly benefitted from the low expectations of her going in--all she had to do to become credible was not be a disaster, and while she had her bad moments, she wasn't a disaster overall. I find I have some respect for her, even as she irks me with her darns and dontcha's. I very much respect that she is not afraid in interviews to call herself a feminist, something Republican women have not dared to do by and large. I fully believe she is way out of her league at the moment. If she truly had national aspirations of her own and wasn't just shoe-horned into this, she should have campaigned for Ted Stevens' spot once he gets the boot, gone to DC and built up her knowledge and networks. I think right now she's acting like a true fundamentalist, confident that God will carry her through because she's part of his plan. I used to have fundamentalist in-laws, I recognize the speech patterns so clearly.
Anyway that's my thoughts on that.
Busy weekend ahead--chilling and sewing tonight, more sewing Saturday afternoon, Bellyqueen Sat. evening and also potentially a sort of high school reunion of nice people, a gig on Sunday plus more sewing... It must be fall!
While trying on boots and working on costume stuff, I kept one ear on the VP debate. I made a conscious effort to be as unbiased a listener as I could. In that spirit, I was struck by the relative lack of rancor in the tone of the debate; Biden and Palin did sound genuinely respectful of one another. Everybody's been slamming Gwen Ifill's performance as moderator, but I think she did help keep the debate calm and steady. I don't like aggressive moderating. Both candidates occasionally said things that made my eyes roll. Palin, of course the past of the Republican party's leadership matters, it's your party! Biden, the jury is still out on the causes of global warming! (though to me, that doesn't mean it's inappropriate to take steps to counter act global warming or prepare for it. I don't know if my foot problems are man made or natural but I still get treatment for them) Palin did come across as intelligent at times, quick on her feet when she knew the terrain well, awkwardly lost when she didn't ("We're the party of mavericks! We don't have to make any sense!" "Well, I don't know how they do things in Washington..." then why do you think you're qualified to help run the place?). Biden reined in his impulse to be too talky and I think managed to come across as likable, a challenge next to the former beauty contestant who knows how to work a stage. The issue of civil unions and gay marriage was an interesting one. I think Palin initially spoke from the heart on that one--arguing essentially for some kind of civil union for gay partners--but when challenged by the moderator to repeat her answer, you could see a wall slam down behind her eyes as she realized she'd screwed up from the party's perspective, and she ducked repeating her own words. Of course I am disappointed that Biden, as the representative of the Democratic Party, spoke catagorically against gay marriage, but otoh, he repeated the same argument that many of us, myself included, make that the government should only govern over civil unions and leave marriage to the religious institutions, giving marriage no secular or legal meaning*. I'm skeptical that a shift like that could happen in the relatively near future, the terminology is too embedded in the way we think about relationships, but to hear a prominent politician lay it out like that on the national stage is something. I liked the bit where Biden invited Palin to Scranton, a classic picture of decline and decay. Also, during the energy debate--you just don't argue with a man from Scranton about his knowledge of coal ;-)
*I should note that this is not how my co-worker understood him at all, so perhaps I am wrong, but I think my next sentence speaks to the perception of people like my co-worker.
In the end I would give Biden the win, but I think if you were predisposed towards Palin and didn't care that much about facts, it wouldn't be that hard to argue it for her either. She certainly benefitted from the low expectations of her going in--all she had to do to become credible was not be a disaster, and while she had her bad moments, she wasn't a disaster overall. I find I have some respect for her, even as she irks me with her darns and dontcha's. I very much respect that she is not afraid in interviews to call herself a feminist, something Republican women have not dared to do by and large. I fully believe she is way out of her league at the moment. If she truly had national aspirations of her own and wasn't just shoe-horned into this, she should have campaigned for Ted Stevens' spot once he gets the boot, gone to DC and built up her knowledge and networks. I think right now she's acting like a true fundamentalist, confident that God will carry her through because she's part of his plan. I used to have fundamentalist in-laws, I recognize the speech patterns so clearly.
Anyway that's my thoughts on that.
Busy weekend ahead--chilling and sewing tonight, more sewing Saturday afternoon, Bellyqueen Sat. evening and also potentially a sort of high school reunion of nice people, a gig on Sunday plus more sewing... It must be fall!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-10-03 04:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-03 05:22 pm (UTC)*snort*
no subject
Date: 2008-10-03 08:25 pm (UTC)Well, the scientific consensus is that anthropogenic forcing are a major cause of global warming. The IPCC fourth assessment put out last year shows radiative forcings from anthropogenic activities exceed natural radiative forcings by an order of magnitude and the report states "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations" (where "very likely" translates into 90% likelihood).
Of course there are scientists who have issues with the report and the analysis and you will never get 100% consensus on scientific findings particularly in the global change arena - it's a complex system with many variables and interactions. And, yes, there is still more analysis that can be done.
Given the current findings from the scientific community I think Biden's statement is fine although it might have been nice if he stated "based on the current science..."
I really don't hear much debate about cause anymore in the community. What is at issue now are the predictions of how climate change will impact human and natural systems. How, when and how much? And there are many people posing the question - will this really be a bad thing? Although there may be some deleterious impacts in certain parts of the world there could also be some very beneficial effects as well (i.e., increased ag productivity in regions that were previously poor producers). It's more of a winners and losers game.
Personally, I think the less you screw with a complex system the better - there's my learned scientific opinion ;-P.