On Experience

I have recently experienced several interesting difficulties hunting for a job, which, inevitably, have led me to think about the upcoming election. For instance, were you aware that positions available for Editorial Internships at local magazines actually require their applicants to have a background of at least two years writing for a publication? WTF? Why the hell would I be an intern if I could be writing for a magazine? Why yes, ma'am, I'll fetch you your coffee without being paid instead of sending in my writing for lots and lots of money. 

Instance second: three different restaurants here in the Portland area have stated that their dishwashing applicants need at least 5yrs experience in that capacity in order to apply... I don't even want to get into what they want from their wait-staff. 

Is this the effect the election is having on the country? The media has been going on and on and on for so long about Obama's lack of experience that now local businesses think that they, too, should turn down perfectly qualified candidates just to join in the fun? 

I understand the desire of business owners to hire the most qualified people for the job that they  possibly can, but there is a fine line between not wanting to train lazy teenage employees and requiring yourself straight into a corner. 

Sarah Palin Fun Fact of the Day

She watches comedy shows with the sound off... so while she did see the Saturday Night Live that I have posted below, she just thought that it was hilarious. All she knew was that Tina Fey looked like her, and she had no actual concept of what was actually being satirized in the sketch. Go figure.

Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton

Tina Fey does a startlingly good Sarah Palin impression. I hope you enjoy this.

Wanna Smell Like a Country Music Star?

While watching television yesterday, it suddenly came to my attention that Tim McGraw was launching his own fragrance. Tim McGraw? Really? I mean, I'm used to the likes of Paris Hilton and Sarah Jessica Parker selling their signature smell to the world, but who wants to smell like a country music star? Am I missing something? 

Well, this sparked my interest. Suddenly, I decided to look around a bit and see what other people had decided to bottle themselves up. To my surprise, almost everyone is doing it these days! Like I said, Madonna I can handle, Beyonce, Jlo, even Prince. But Derek Jeter? David Beckham? Michael Jordan? These are some seriously sweaty men! Do we really want their disciples running around reeking of professional sports? But I suppose that isn't really the point, is it? 

The real point is that, apparently, you're not established in the world of fashion or celebrity until you have your name on a fancy bottle for everyone to see. What I really want to know is who is buying these things? Chanel no.5 I can understand, but even Hillary Duff makes no sense. Granted, at least Hillary Duff's fragrance would err closer on the side of innocence than on the side of "baby prostitute" (as some of the other scents have been dubbed). 

In a world where people complain about the price of gas, thousands of Americans are dying to smell like the Desperate Housewives. (I'm not kidding. Their fragrance its titled "forbidden fruit") Yay capitalism! 

Obama of Athens

The statements that I am about to make will seem pompous and overly-elitist, of this I am sure. However, my personal infatuation with the following ideas make this writing inevitable, compulsory even, and therefore I beg the forgiveness and indulgence of my audience. 

Earlier this evening, I was studying a book entitled "Clear and Simple as the Truth," a discussion of the elements of classical writing (as expressed in the Greek tradition, the French Revolution, and several documents from colonial America). This, quite clearly, is where my snobbery comes in-- but I digress. Within this book was an example from a writing of Thucydides, a Greek historian that recounts a war in the 5th century B.C. between Athens and Sparta. 

This excerpt is a speech supposedly delivered by Pericles at the end of the first year of the Peloponnesian War. Upon reading it, I couldn't help but to think of the similarities between this speech and the current state of political affairs. In his speech, Pericles seeks to unite Athens by uplifting their communal values and presenting a vision of themselves as an elite class, capable of hope and of making intelligent decisions. Unfortunately, there are always a class of people who would rather 'rush blindly into the sea, swords drawn, and battle ceaselessly with the waves' than slow down and consider the rational decisions that they fear. 

The speech is as follows:

"Our love of what is beautiful does not lead to extravagance; our love of the things of the mind does not make us soft. We regard wealth as something to be properly used, rather than as something to boast about. As for poverty, no one need be ashamed to admit it: the real shame is not taking practical measures to escape from it. Here each individual is interested not only in his own affairs but in the affairs of the state as well... We are capable at the same time of taking risks and of estimating them beforehand. Others are brave out of ignorance; and, when they stop to think, they begin to fear. But the man who can most truly be accounted brave is he who best knows the meaning of what is sweet in life and of what is terrible, and then goes out undeterred to meet what is to come." 

The fear that Pericles so aptly mentions is the aspect I note most when I encounter anti-Democratic propaganda. I came across a myspace bulletin two days ago that took great pains to dissect irrelevant and insubstantial irregularities in Obama's speech in order to insinuate that he is a liar. The list, and I quote is a "list of things that Senator Obama has said that are not EXACTLY correct." It then proceeds to run through a series of inconsequential details to prove, I assume, that Obama is human after all. 

What I simply do not understand is why it is easier for many people to harp after the little things that support their position rather than to acknowledge any other points of view. Is it a fear of being wrong? A fear of personal affront? A fear that, should there be a change in office, they will be held personally responsible for the last miserable eight years? If things remain as they are, does it reaffirm their belief that they were right, the democrats were wrong, and another president turning a blind eye will make Iraq, the energy crises, and global warming just disappear?

Well-- continuing darkness doesn't bring the monster out of the closet, and throwing away the bills won't get rid of the debt. Both are fearful and childish acts, and neither could possibly be helpful in the long run. The real question is whether the opposition can be induced to see through their fear to the actual issues, or if 2.5 months simply isn't enough time to draw them out from under the bed. 

Obama for Athens. McCain for Sparta. How simple the decision seems when compared with what we know.

Would You Drink More Water If It Had Some BLING?

I know, I know, you've heard it all before. We all need to drink more water. 64oz/day; and that's if you don't exercise, sweat, or drink alcohol. But how many of you wouldn't drink more water if you were drinking it out of this? I mean, seriously, what's $38/bottle when we're talking about your health? Still not interested? Fine. Maybe this will change your mind:

TEN REASONS TO DRINK ENOUGH WATER

1. It will make you smarter. 

   ---seriously. When a person is dehydrated they lose cell functions in the brain as well as the rest of the body. 

2.You can avoid hangovers

---this is a little harder to achieve. In order to offset one serving of alcohol, you need to have one cup of water. That means, if you are planning to have 3 beers when you go out, you need to drink 11cups of water throughout the day. But I swear it's worth it.

3. You will stay thin.

---Thirst has this tricky way of masquerading firstly as hunger. I don't know why, but it's true. If you feel hungry, chances are you should really just drink a couple glasses of water. And, as an added bonus, if you do drink those extra cups of water before dinner, you will be less likely to eat as much. By the time you're thirsty you're already dehydrated, and probably snacked-out, too.

4. You won't bloat. 

---This one's a bit odd. Your body reacts to thirst the same way that it reacts to anorexia. When you don't eat enough, you go into starvation mode, and your body begins to store everything you take in as fat instead of burning it all into energy. So a 98lb model can eat 500cal/day and still gain weight-- it's weird. But your body reacts the same way to thirst, if you don't drink water for a long time, your body is likely to camel-out on you and try to store the water in an unsightly manner.

5. You will have more energy

---Since drinking water boosts cell function, it also stimulates a high-functioning metabolism. When your body has all of the resources that it needs, it can process food at a rate you won't even imagine. Also, you will likely cut back your sugar intake by avoiding sweetened teas, sodas, and juices, therefore thoroughly avoiding the sugar-low that appears an hour or so after ingesting that beverage.

6. You will have amazing skin

---You are made up of 50-75% water, so sometimes heavily moisturizing lotions just won't cut it. You need to moisturize from the inside out.

7. You will save money

---When you really think about it, most of us spend an unseemly amount of money per month trying to avoid our daily intake of water. You spent how much on tea and diet coke?! C'mon, now. 

8. You will reduce your risk of diabetes and heart disease.

---Type II diabetes is generally found in adults who have been ingesting large amounts of sugar of a period of years and years. Eventually, their bodies just can't produce enough insulin to metabolize all of the sodas, candies, and processed-sugar wonderbreads. Well, water can't do anything about the candy, but at least it should help you cut back on the soda. As for the heart disease, there have been studies done that would (inconclusively) indicate that drinking hard water reduces your risk of coronary failure. It's a long shot, but it couldn't hurt. 

9. You will give your tastebuds a break

---which, incidentally, will help you to eat better. When your mouth is being constantly bombarded by sugary, exciting drinks, you are far more likely to reach for a sugary, exciting snack when you're hungry to complete the process. Drinking water feels healthier, and it will give your body the chance it needs to let you know that it would really prefer a handful of carrots, thank you very much.

10. You will catch fewer colds

---water helps your body flush out all sorts of nasties, if enough is on hand to do so. In addition, a body with enough water is running more smoothly, and is therefore far better equipped to deal with fighting off the little bugs that do latch on.

So that's that. I know you're heard it all before, but I assure you that drinking enough water really isn't as difficult as it sounds. Start carrying a bottle of water around with you all day, and you'll see what I mean. You'll be shocked at how much you'll drink if it's sitting right there. 

Just make sure not to drink too much. Water, like everything else, can be overdosed, so if you're carrying around a gallon jug all day, make sure to be aware that too much water can literally be fatal.

It's All About Multi-Tasking

In light of the ever so quickly escalating global warming crisis, several environmental industries have taken cues from nature herself and begun to create mini self-sustaining eco-systems in furthering their capitalist efforts. 

For instance, recent developments have made raising fish and vegetables in the same aqua-garden a match made in heaven. The fish live down below (obviously), fertilizing the hydroponic system, and the vegetables give back to them by pumping their oxygen by-products back into the area. How cool is that? 

Also recently helpful are a series of color-coded bacteria that scientists in Dublin have just deemed perfect for determining the source and extent of oil spills. Safer than the chemicals that have heretofore tracked these spills, the bacteria can easily be equipped with a protein that lights up around oil... how very convenient.

This Shocked Me

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/30/police_raids/index.html?source=newsletter

http://www.startribune.com/local/27703754.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUnciaec8O7EyUsX

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/08/31/politics/horserace/entry4401722.shtml

It's a few articles detailing massive police raids in Minneapolis a couple days ago. They raided houses in riot gear, arresting people they suspected of planning a protest at the democratic national convention.

Although they did confiscate a few weapons, and a book that details homemade bombs, they detained only five of the many people because of them.


I understand the concerns of the government, as explained by the mayor in the third article, and I understand that they suspected that the protest would lead to "anarchist" violent behavior. What I do not understand is when pre-emptive strikes became acceptable within American society.

I'm scared.