This was forwarded to me earlier today by C Lo. Although I know this is meant as a parody, but how close is this to the truth? Let's hope we never find out:
I think I speak for everyone when I say that I'm tired of the US presidential campaign. The economy is a disaster, we're in a war that's costing a fortune in both lives and money, and there's no end in sight.
This election should be a no-brainer. When an administration presides over (or is responsible for) the worst 8-year stretch in our country since I've been alive, the opposing party should be able to put up anyone who meets the requirements for becoming a US president. This is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry about the President of the United States.
Article Two of the Constitution sets the principal qualifications to be eligible for election as President. A Presidential candidate must:
* be a natural-born citizen of the United States; * be at least thirty-five years old; * have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.
Natural-born citizen of the U.S.... check At least thirty-five years old... check Have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years... check
I'm in!
My candidacy has already caused a groundswell of support. Check out the news coverage here.
Most of you who read Jaffe will know that before most (all?) major sporting events in the US someone leads the crowd in the singing of our National Anthem, the Star Spangled Banner. Last night I was sitting at home getting ready to watch game 5 of the NBA finals between the Boston Celtics and the Los Angeles Lakers, listening to the National Anthem being sung by Ashanti:
Those of you who like to click on all of the links in my entries may notice something peculiar about Ashanti's rendition of the Star Spangled Banner. No, it's not that she improvised a bit with the tune. It's that she got a word wrong!
OK, so it was only one word, and a lot of people may not even notice. But if you're a professional singer, and are hired to sing the National Anthem, I think you should learn the words.
One of the things that visitors to the US notice is all the tipping that we do. I don't remember when it started, but Americans tip for everything. I try to avoid it - I still refuse to tip the Starbuck's person for turning around and pouring me a cup of coffee - but find myself tipping more than I did when I lived in London.
One person I'm inconsistent with is the bathroom attendant. I can't really describe my criteria that dictate whether I leave a tip, but handing me a towel doesn't cut it. There has to be something more...
Let's say there are two people at your work who emit, as Charles Barkley once said in an Old Spice commercial, malodorous emanations. The emanations are different - one is a pungent body odor, and the other is an amazingly powerful bad breath. You can smell either of the odors as soon as you enter the office (it's a big office), and the smells remain long after each offender leaves. Thankfully these people aren't actually in the same office as you, so you only have to deal with this every so often, but each time it happens you wonder whether you should pull the fire alarm so everyone can go outside and get some fresh air.
What would you do? Do you quietly ask the person with the bad breath if they would like a piece of gum? Do you ask the person with really bad b.o. if they would like a bar of soap?
It turns out that the 'press' at this press conference were FEMA employees. The press conference was announced only 15 minutes before it began, so the real press didn't have enough time to attend. FEMA's solution was to have their own staff ask questions, rather than wait for the actual press to show up.
This isn't the first time FEMA has been in the news for behaving badly. Their handling of Hurricane Katrina has been widely criticized. Last August, on the anniversary of Katrina, I posted this entry about a guy who drove a replica FEMA trailer to D.C. to thank President Bush for the "millions of FEMA trailers", which smelled terribly like a publicity stunt.
It's clear that FEMA is aware of their shortcomings, but rather than address them, they seem to prefer setting up smokescreens to make it seem like they're doing a great job. Unfortunately, we're not judged by the one guy who thinks we're doing great, and we can't ask our friends to be our straight-men in professional situations.
But wouldn't it be great if we could do just that? I wonder what the reviews for my next paper would look like in The World According to FEMA...
The manuscript by Jaffe et al., addresses the role of Rho GTPase signaling pathways in epithelial morphogenesis, a fundamental biological process. This paper reports the establishment of a novel model of epithelial morphogenesis, and provides data defining the role of specific Rho GTPase signaling pathways in distinct aspects of this process.
Overall, this paper was written extremely clearly and logically. There are many unique and revolutionary aspects of this study. The originality of the approaches used by Jaffe et al., are only superseded by the clarity of the data.
Major Concerns:
1) Figure 1 has too much data and should be either separated into 2 figures, or 50% of it should be 'data not shown' (although it would be a shame to leave such beautiful images to the imagination of the reader).
2) The Methods section should be expanded so everyone will be able to produce the quality of data presented in this manuscript.
3) Although this paper is clearly suitable for publication, this reviewer is left worrying that the Journal won't be setting the bar too high for other groups attempting to publish their work.
This Sunday the Miami Dolphins will play the New York Giants at London's Wembley Stadium in the first regular season NFL (American football) game outside of North America. Although NFL players have no problem affording to vacation in Europe, it's possible that a lot of them are among the many Americans who don't even have a passport.
Certainly Dolphins linebacker Channing Crowder's tongue-in-cheek comments published yesterday in this article in the Palm Beach Post sound like they come from a guy making his first trip across the pond:
I couldn't find London on a map if they didn't have the names of the countries. I swear to God. I don't know what nothing is. I know Italy looks like a boot. I learned that. I know London Fletcher. We did a football camp together. So I know him. That's the closest thing I know to London. He's black, so I'm sure he's not from London. I'm sure that's a coincidental name.
Nice one, Channing. Why do you think you aren't able to locate London on a map? Anyway, I'm sure you could find the US on a world map, right?
In an interview with The Sunday Times (UK), published on October 14, Nobel laureate Dr. James Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, expressed his concern about the future of Africa, saying that "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really". He went on to say that although his hope is that everyone is equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true". You can read the full article here.
The reaction to Dr. Watson's statements was swift. He was forced to cancel his UK tour to promote his new book after many of his speaking engagements were canceled by organizers, and the Board of Trustees of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York issued this statement regarding his comments. A day later, they suspended Dr. Watson of 'administrative responsibilities pending further deliberation by the Board'.
Since they were published, Dr. Watson has apologized and retracted his statements, admitting that "there is no scientific basis for such a belief." The problem is, the damage has been done. When a scientist with the clout of Jim Watson makes a statement, no matter how outrageous or unfounded, it gives someone with similar beliefs the feeling of credibility. The beauty of scientific method is that it is designed to test hypotheses by collecting measurable evidence or data. Making a blanket statement like 'black people are less intelligent than white people' is inherently untestable. How can 'intelligence' be measured?
In an ironic twist, this paper, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America four days after the Times article, reported that "gossip has a strong influence on the resulting behavior even when participants have access to the original information (i.e., direct observation) as well as gossip about the same information." So, even if quantitative data existed that showed black people and white people had equal levels of intelligence, many would still choose to believe Watson's statements.
Why not? There are already severalwebsitesdedicated to raising money and building support for the Gore campaign, which hasn't officially been launched. The Nobel Peace Prize comes a few months after winning the Academy Award for Documentary Feature for An Inconvenient Truth, and his popularity has never been greater. On the news this morning, former President (and fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner) Jimmy Carter repeated his support for Al Gore as a Presidential candidate, support that he made clear at least as early as February of this year:
The New York Times reported this morning that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has struck a deal with a company called Transit Wireless to provide cellphone access on the platforms of their underground subway stations. The story reminded me of one that I read at the end of last year, which reported that some airlines would be providing in-flight cellphone access.
I'm sure there are a lot of people who want to stay connected 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, but I'm definitely not one of them. Some New Yorkers say that the new subway plan will help during emergencies. The thing is, anyone who has been in a situation where a large number of people are trying to contact their family and friends knows that the networks have a hard time handling the increased number of calls.
So why should subway passengers, who already have to endure hot, dirty platforms, be forced to listen to the ring tones and phone conversations of others while waiting for the next train? If the phone access is really for emergencies, can't they turn the signal on only during emergency situations?
I thought it was good news, but apparently no news is Britney news. She's everywhere, which must mean that either nothing else is going on in the world, or people are finally tired of talking about the 2008 presidential election. Either way, some people are reacting pretty strongly to all of the press Britney Spears has been receiving lately.
Although I've previously posted about the phone addiction afflicting some of the members of my gym, I think it's time to put together a more comprehensive list of things (call them rules if you like) that people should keep in mind when trying to achieve mens sana in corpore sano.
1) Wear clean clothes to the gym. Everyone sweats when they work out, but if you smell before you go to the gym, you should see a doctor. Or at least do your laundry.
2) Let people work in. If you are in between sets, please let someone else work in. If someone asks you how many more sets you have, and your reply is more than '1', you should ask if they would like to work in. If someone asks to work in and you have more than one set left, move and let them join you.
3) Don't grunt or make other noises. Everyone knows you're a big, strong guy, but there's no need to draw attention to yourself while lifting weights by sounding like you're sitting on the toilet and haven't been able to go for a week.
4) When using the exercise mats, make room for other people. There is a limited amount of space available for stretching or exercising on the mats scattered around the gym, so please move over if someone would like to use the space next to you. It doesn't matter what kind of yoga position you're in, there should be room for others to use the mat next to you.
I'm sure this list could be much longer, but even following these 4 simple guidelines will improve the environment at your gym.
My little cousin Cody (who isn't so little anymore) used to skateboard. In fact, I think he spent some time in skating parks, where they have ramps and rails for the skaters to try different tricks.
I never saw Cody skateboarding, but I remember watching the X Games in the late '90s and seeing Tony Hawk's amazing half-pipe runs.
Always trying to push the envelope, the X Games now has 'Mega Ramp', which at some point is almost certainly going to be called 'Death Ramp'.
There's no doubt that the skateboarders in the X Games are athletes. But when the athletic feat is merely performing a task without killing yourself, rather than performing a task better or faster than anyone else, is it still sport?
Even with my (very) short commute to work - a 5 minute walk around the corner from my apartment - the sidewalk congestion can be a little overwhelming. I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling annoyed about having to bob and weave my way down the street. Here are some suggestions which, if followed, would make the commute a bit more pleasant:
1) Stay to the right, pass on the left. It works for cars, why not try it with people? OK, so some people may be a bit too big to pass on the left without hitting oncoming traffic, but those HUMMER limos seem to manage...
2) Walk your dog on a shorter leash. There is nothing more frustrating than having to negotiate a rat/dog on a long leash that spans the width of the sidewalk. Unless you have the strength of a two-year-old, there's no reason you can't control a dog weighing less than 5 pounds.
3) Don't walk and talk on your phone. There are laws about driving and talking on the phone, and perhaps they should be applied to walkers. I'm not saying people need to use a hands-free set, but if they're not able to have a phone conversation while walking to work, stepping out of the way to make/take a call would be nice. Don't even get me started about texters.
4) If you see someone you know, and want to talk, move out of the way. This is just common sense. Carrying on a conversation while stopped in the middle of the sidewalk equates to chatting with your buddy in the next car after the light has turned green. We've all done it, but it doesn't make it right...
As if anyone needed another example of the risks that come with the lack of gun control here in the States, today's shooting at Virginia Tech provided one. The list of these avoidable tragedies is growing longer, and perhaps the most amazing thing about each one is the speed with which the dialogue about guns following the incident goes away. How easy is it to get a gun here in the States? Although I don't have any personal experience with obtaining one, I can think of two examples of handgun tragedies, which touched my life - albeit at a distance.
The first happened in 1989. Actually, the incident happened in 1988... it just didn't really hit close to home until 1989. On May 20, 1988, Laurie Dann opened fire in a school in Winnetka, Illinois. After killing an 8 year-old boy and shooting others in the school, Laurie Dann fled to a nearby house. A 20 year-old man was shot in the chest as he tried to get the gun from her, and then Laurie Dann turned the gun on herself. The 20 year-old man was Phil Andrew, and a year and a half later I was swimming with him at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. One of Phil's lungs had lost most of its capacity, but even with one good lung, Phil was the swim team captain his senior year.
The second incident happened in December of 1993. I graduated from University earlier in the year, and was living in Chicago with a childhood friend, Paul. A high school friend of mine, Dave, was home from college, hanging out at our place watching TV. We were flipping channels, trying to find something to watch, when a news story caught Dave's eye. He told me to switch back. "Tom Melka was arrested today, after going to his ex-girlfriend's house and opening fire on her and her family." Tom Melka ('Thomas' as we knew him) was on our high school swim team, and just 4 years earlier, graduated with me from Kenwood Academy. At the time, that was one of the strangest moments of my life. I swam with this guy, shared the locker room with this guy, I REMEMBERED this guy. The people who commit these acts are often described as 'loners' or having 'kept to themselves'. All of this was true about Thomas. The reason that evening was one of the strangest moments of my life 'at the time', is because a few years later I met Thomas Melka's defense attorney - he was someone's date at the wedding of my oldest friend, Elmer.
So why is it so easy to get a gun in the States? Gun lovers always cite the second amendment, which gives them the 'right to bear arms'. There's no doubt the second amendment gives this right. But let's look at the entire sentence:
I'm guessing it's been at least a couple hundred years since Americans needed to 'keep and bear arms' to maintain 'the security of a free State', and it seems to me the people with guns who commit crimes similar to the one today at Virginia Tech aren't behaving much like a 'well regulated militia'.
The other day while I was getting ready for work and watching TV, I saw a story about a different type of speed dating event that was just held here in New York. Speed dating is hardly dating - it's a series of 3-10 minute 'dates', which takes place over the course of an hour or two, where men (or women) have a chance to meet (and rank) potential partners.
Apparently, speed dating was started by a Rabbi in L.A. as a way for more Jewish singles to meet each other (Oi Vey!). Now there are speeding dating events for all ages, races, and sexual preferences, and organizers are having to think hard to come up with original ideas to create a unique speed dating experience.
Enter "Natural Selection Speed Date", a speed dating event for 'Rich Guys & Hot Girls', recently held here in New York. The criteria were simple - men had to be rich (yes, there were specific figures that had to be met, and the men had to provide proof), and women had to be 'hot' (no specific 'figures' here). The website of the company sponsoring the event says,'Women want money in a man, men want beauty in a woman - this is a factual force of nature.... This genetic cleansing is how the wealthy stay beautiful.'
Genetic cleansing? Other than their obvious lack of scientific knowledge (for example, that wealth isn't genetic (although it can be inherited)), this idea of beautiful women and successful men producing beautiful, successful offspring reminds me of a line credited to Albert Einstein (which he may or may not have actually said). Legend has it that Marilyn Monroe suggested Einstein and her would have amazing kids, with her looks and his intelligence. He replied,"I'm afraid, dear lady, it might be the other way around..."
Unless you've been living under a rock, you already know that the Democrats gained enough seats in both the House of Representatives and the Senate to have control of the full Congress. What does this mean for the (near) future of the U.S.? Here's one take on it:
I'm only sorry Dan won't be one of the 'tax and spend Democrats who take all your hard-earned money and use it to ... teach evolution to illegal immigrants'.
