Riba Rambles:
Musings of a Mental Magpie

Posted by Lis Riba at 11:42 PM

Tied again in the top of the eighth inning. If I had any sense, I'd not listen to the game and just catch the closing score after it's over...

Just heard on the radio: "Three men on; Two men out." And in my mind, I'm hearing a similar phrase in a similar tone of voice: "Two men enter. One man leaves." Very different context, though... Have I mentioned that my mind is a steel sieve; I retain all kinds of strange trivia for recall at the oddest moments.

Posted by Lis Riba at 11:15 PM

Susan has found something scary:

According to White House and Washington Beltway insiders, the Bush administration, worried that it could lose the presidential election to Senator John F. Kerry, has initiated plans to launch a military strike on Iran's top Islamic leadership, its nuclear reactor at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf, and key nuclear targets throughout the country, including the main underground research site at Natanz in central Iran and another in Isfahan. Targets of the planned U.S. attack reportedly include mosques in Tehran, Qom, and Isfahan known by the U.S. to headquarter Iran's top mullahs.

The Iran attack plan was reportedly drawn up after internal polling indicated that if the Bush administration launched a so- called anti-terrorist attack on Iran some two weeks before the election, Bush would be assured of a landslide win against Kerry. Reports of a pre-emptive strike on Iran come amid concerns by a number of political observers that the Bush administration would concoct an "October Surprise" to influence the outcome of the presidential election.

The terrifying thing, IMO, is how unsurprising something like this sounds for this crew.

The Sox are back in the lead, but the umpires seem to be arguing over the scoring of something else.

I'm listening to the game, but I'm tired and bored. I'm staying awake to give Ian a ride back from work, whenever he gets out, but otherwise I'd probably be going to bed. There's some writing I have to do (for the blog, largely), but I'm just not feeling terribly inspired at the moment.

How are you?

Posted by Lis Riba at 10:35 PM

The game is now tied 7-7 in the sixth inning. Aren't the Red Sox amazing?

Posted by Lis Riba at 8:50 PM

One more:
          

Posted by Lis Riba at 8:29 PM

Three run homer in the first inning!!!

Four-nothing first inning. wow.

Posted by Lis Riba at 8:12 PM

So how do you follow the baseball games? I listen to it on the radio (AM 850) with MLB.com's Gameday applet. [As Ian put it, all it took was for me to find the right tool with which to follow the game for me to get into the sport.] I don't actually watch the game on television. [Considering all the complaints about FOX's announcers on Boston Common, I think I may be better off for this decision.]

How 'bout you?

Added later: Regarding predictions of how the series will turn out, I did hear somewhere that every Red Sox trip to the World Series since 1918 has run for seven games. Though the full moon on Game Four could make matters interesting...

Oh, and for Harry Potter fans, how about Professional curse-breaker Bill Weasley takes on the Bambino?

Posted by Lis Riba at 4:20 PM

I am not in a mood to read books. There are a ton of books in the library that I've been wanting to read -- I've even checked out a few, but returned them unread. For some reason, I just don't feel like I'm in a headspace to read any of them.

What is wrong with me?

I suppose it could be the impending election and current events feeling more urgent than my histories; I don't know. It's certainly odd, however. [When I told Ian, he replied, "Who are you and what have you done with my wife?"]

Posted by Lis Riba at 7:55 PM

A comment in Teresa Nielsen Hayden's Making Light:

God, I hope the Sox win it all.

Then I'll never have to hear about the curse again.

Around inning 6 or so, Ian and I started talking.

What happens if the Red Sox do win the World Series?

I'm not talking about how it would affect the team itself or short-term aftermath of celebrations (or riots), but take the long view for a moment.

The Red Sox and the myths surrounding them play a powerful role in the region. How will we deal when we no longer have the Bambino to blame for our regional bad-luck?

Will the Storrow Drive "Reverse the Curse" sign finally, permanently come down for good?

Ian quipped that we might see a brief uptick in the mortality rate, as all the seniors who have been sticking around for the Red Sox no longer have that to live for.

But think big. Think longterm. Speculate. What ramifications do you foresee with a Red Sox victory?

Posted by Lis Riba at 2:40 PM

Via DailyKos, The Nation has come out with:

100 Facts and 1 Opinion:
The Non-Arguable Case Against the Bush Administration

HTML
PDF (nicely laid out for handouts)

[And I agree with corrente and Jeneane: Blogger has gotten sluggish to the point of unusability -- it took over ten minutes to merely open the Create Post page, meaning I just missed LJ's hourly check of my feed. grumble.]

Added later: UDecide.org has other PDF flyers for downloading, printing and sharing with undecided voters. [via Atrios]
Hmm... Anybody want to print up a bunch of these and hang out outside Fenway on game days? Which of these flyers do you think would be most effective for that purpose?

Posted by Lis Riba at 1:45 PM

Ian described to me an interesting moment in last week's Sunday school class, which I've begged him to blog, but finally, I will since he hasn't.

He was teaching his third-graders about Ve´ahavta lereicha camocha, and, well, let me just quote our conversation in which he described the event:

I was talking about how you're supposed to love your neighbor as yourself, when [student] totally floored me.

She said, "my neighbor says that's the reason why we can't beat the Yankees!"

I said, "what?"

She explained, "that's from Leviticus 19:18.^*"

"Well, yes. Yes, you're right."

"And because of that, we're never going to be able to win the World Series until we love the Yankees fans the way that we love Red Sox fans.

What an interesting point.

"LET IT BE KNOWN, in the County of Middlesex and all the civilized lands beyond, that on this day and in this place, a proclamation is made, issued by the good citizens of the City of Boston and the surrounding region, and most particularly by enthusiasts of the Red Stockings athletic club, to the worthies of the Borough of the Bronx, the City of New York and contiguous areas, and in specific those followers of the sporting organization known as the Yankees, offering those greetings and felicitations common to well- mannered discourse, all good wishes for continued health and prosperity, and an inquiry as to the identity of their father."
  -- Kurt Busiek (as seen on Khaosworks)

^*For those who don't already have it drilled into their skulls, 1918 is also the last year the Red Sox won a World Series.

Posted by Lis Riba at 1:25 PM

Attended the Actors' Shakespeare Project production of Richard III last night. I'm going to post a review of it sometime over the weekend (in brief, very good -- I not only recommend it, but wish I had the funds to see it a second time to pick up some of the nuance I missed), but I just have to share this tidbit now.

When we walked in, I noticed a stack of press kit folders by the entrance. After we found our seats, I worked up the nerve to introduce myself as a blogger who often writes about Shakespeare and then I asked for a press kit. I got one, and they took my card to put me on their list for future announcements.

This is actually the second Shakespeare troupe I now have press credentials for, since I contacted Shakespeare & Co. after we attended Comedy of Errors opening night and I first saw the press kits.

I mean, Hey, why not? My audience is probably comparable to that of a small college paper, but with more potential attendees for something Shakespearean. And I did establish Bard in Boston as a central listing site for Boston-area Shakespeariana.

Two realizations:

1. I need to have new business cards made. My normal cards are just personal cards; I need something that's specifically for and about my blog.
2. In both cases so far, I've asked for press kits after I paid regular admission to watch the show. I have got to see if I can't get actual press tickets when the A.R.T. performs Marlowe in March. I mean, I already know I will attend and will write a review. What does it hurt to ask? After all, the worst that can happen is they'll say no, in which case I'll buy tickets and join the audience as I've been planning to since I heard about the production.

Posted by Lis Riba at 12:20 PM

How many posts do you display on your front page, and why?

Personally, I show the most recent 15 posts, because that's what my RSS feed can display. After a few incidents last year where several large posts made my RSS feed was too large for LiveJournal to read, I've found it a useful tool for me to see the same information on my main page as in the feed, rather than having to count posts or something. [Before that, I set my journal to the most recent seven days. Another problem with that was that a few busy days could make my front page very very large.]

How about you?

Posted by Lis Riba at 11:45 AM

Is anybody really surprised by this from early voting in New Mexico?

Kim Griffith voted on Thursday ? over and over and over.
She's among the people in Bernalillo and Sandoval counties who say they have had trouble with early voting equipment. When they have tried to vote for a particular candidate, the touch-screen system has said they voted for somebody else.
It's a problem that can be fixed by the voters themselves? people can alter the selections on their ballots, up to the point when they indicate they are finished and officially cast the ballot.
For Griffith, it took a lot of altering.
She went to Valle Del Norte Community Center in Albuquerque, planning to vote for John Kerry. "I pushed his name, but a green check mark appeared before President Bush's name," she said.
Griffith erased the vote by touching the check mark at Bush's name. That's how a voter can alter a touch-screen ballot.
She again tried to vote for Kerry, but the screen again said she had voted for Bush. The third time, the screen agreed that her vote should go to Kerry.
She faced the same problem repeatedly as she filled out the rest of the ballot. On one item, "I had to vote five or six times," she said.
Michael Cadigan, president of the Albuquerque City Council, had a similar experience when he voted at City Hall.
"I cast my vote for president. I voted for Kerry and a check mark for Bush appeared," he said.
He reported the problem immediately and was shown how to alter the ballot.
Cadigan said he doesn't think he made a mistake the first time. "I was extremely careful to accurately touch the button for my choice for president," but the check mark appeared by the wrong name, he said.
Bernalillo County Clerk Mary Herrera said she doesn't believe the touch-screen system has been making mistakes. It's the fault of voters, she said Thursday.
Cadigan, for example, could have "leaned his palm on the touch screen and it hit the wrong button," she said.

This is why they need to have UI designers and QA involved. Because we understand that repeated failures are not the users' fault.

I've got a baaad feeling about this.

Posted by Lis Riba at 11:10 AM

Lots of talk going around about the possibility of an October Surprise, and with less than a dozen days, there's not much time left.

However, several bloggers have noticed a likely culprit.

Bush's official schedule says he's going home to Crawford this weekend. Really odd time for a vacation. Even the Globe notes the strangeness of this:

This weekend -- less than two weeks before the election, typically a time for frenzied barnstorming -- Bush is planning to spend two consecutive nights far from any battleground, at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.

But what if he's not really going to Crawford. What if this empty block of time on his schedule is just a cover story, for say something like his surprise Thanksgiving trip to Iraq? After all, that trip also left from Crawford rather than from Andrews.

But bloggers don't think Bush would actually go to Iraq this time around. Too much bad news over there that he doesn't want to remind voters of. A likelier candidate may be a trip to Afghanistan, which just held elections and thus appears like a more traditional success story.

Anyway, I'm just pointing this out now, so if Bush does take a surprise trip this weekend, you can just go "ho-hum publicity stunt" and hopefully defuse some of the bounce.

Also, don't forget that the poll effects of terror alerts have been quantified! As I wrote two weeks ago, a Cornell University study found conclusive evidence that "terror warnings increased presidential approval ratings consistently." The average increase in the president's approval rating is 2.75%, but the increase only lasts for about a week, maybe two. So be on the lookout.

Posted by Lis Riba at 10:33 AM

Almost forgot it's that time of the week.

Here are some snaps I took earlier in the week of Violet helping Ian with his computer games:

Isn't she helpful?

Posted by Lis Riba at 10:08 AM

cpolk just wrote that Brian Froud's Faerie Oracle is available online.

She noted that "the deck likes to concern itself with boho artsy fartsy questions. so if you're all 'argh this is driving me crazy stupid book' the faeries will give you a good kick in the ass." I'm in exactly that situation, now. I've got this short story where I'm completely stumped around one scene. I've got everything before it and everything after it written, but this bit is a blocker. And I've been stuck there in paralysis for quite a while. So that gave me a question.

Question for the Faeries: How can I finish this damn story?

• Past: G. HOBYAH- Imaginary fears. Unreal hazards. Realistic caution.
• Present: THE OAK MEN- Strength. Ancient wisdom. Depth.
• Future: THE SINGER OF TRANSFIGURATION- Transformation. Transcendance. Metamorphasis.

Whoah!

Even just looking at the summaries above, before reading the details behind the links... Kick in the pants is right. I'll try to get on it this weekend.

Posted by Lis Riba at 4:55 PM

Just caught last night's episode of Smallville.

Okay, who can point me to some Bart-Clark slash (Smallville, not DC continuity)?

I thought the kid they got for the Flash was great, and I hope they find some way to bring him back. Also, some nice in-joke nods to the comic fans.

But, dude! The ending. Slash openings-a-rama! So blatant that even Ian commented upon them. Of course, I managed to crack Ian up with my quips on the concluding scene. White-on-white text to minimize spoilers:

After Bart puts on the extra burst of speed and Clark stops running, "Okay. Where am I. No. Seriously. I'm lost. Where am I?" The fact that Clark starts dumbly looking around him made it even funnier.

Posted by Lis Riba at 4:45 PM

I've mentioned before how our tenant's kittens come up to our apartment to hang out and filch Boopsie's food.

Boopsie's a bit of a fussy eater. We feed her dry food, but she refuses to eat anything that's been sitting a few hours. Goes "stale" or something. But the kittens would eat that, so we put another cat bowl outside our door and put the stale kibble there so the kittens wouldn't steal from Boopsie and to reduce waste.

And, impressively enough, it worked. The kittens at the kibble that Boopsie otherwise wouldn't touch.

But we're a little uncomfortable with growing kittens eating diet catfood. Boopsie needs to keep her weight down, but these kittens still have room to grow. So I had Ian buy some Science Diet regular to feed the kittens with -- same brand as Boopsie's but a little better balanced nutritionally.

We tried it today.

Boopsie's foodbowl was nearly empty and she was begging for more. But Violet was queued up behind Boopsie, clearly waiting for her chance. So Ian carried Violet to the distant foodbowl and fed her the new kibble, while I fed Boopsie her usual food.

All seemed well in the animal kingdom, until I heard a hiss much closer than expected.

I peered out the door, and there was Boopsie, eating the kittens' kibble, while Violet cowered a few steps away.

Oh well, best laid plans of mice and other catfoods...

Posted by Lis Riba at 3:15 PM

Just a few things I've seen along my wanderings that piqued (not peaked!) my interest. This is in no way intended to shill for gifts; just reminders for when I'm a little better off.

• Shortly after Worldcon, I discovered the War for the Oaks screenplay is now for sale.
• And I just got notice via email that the 2005 Renaissance Library Calendar includes an image of the Boston Athenaeum. The end of December, they held a sale on shipping; I hope they do something similar this year
• Both Library of Congress and Monticello had a lot of merchandise with Thomas Jefferson's quote "I cannot live without books." (though I find the phrase even more interesting in context) At any rate, when the LoC reroofed a few years back, they kept all the original copper and have been making mementoes out of it, including an ornament with that quote.
• Meanwhile, I've noticed that the PropStore of London still has Tybalt's prop script from Shakespeare in love.
• I'm sure I could name other things -- beloved shows now out on DVD, or books I've been hunting for for years now, but no sense dwelling on such matters now.

Of course, what I want most of all is a job (that, or a winning lottery/sweepstakes ticket, but since I don't play the lottery or sweepstakes, that's a real long shot). So, hey, if you're new here, if you're just discovering this site through one of the links to my Pat Robertson stories, take a gander at what I can do, and think if you know anybody looking for someone with my set of skills.

Posted by Lis Riba at 11:56 AM

Someone has created replicas of Bush & Kerry in Sims 2 and moved them into a house together, hoping sparks would fly. They did, but not always as intended. Click hear to see the results.

Oh, the horror humor!

Posted by Lis Riba at 10:25 AM

And going in the wrong direction.

Back in April, I posted the following horrifying news:

...February 6th announcement by the EPA that their estimates of over 320,000 children per year born with blood levels of mercury that put them at risk for learning disabilities and neurological disorders were off by over 50%. The real number, they now admit, is probably closer to 630,000.

While that number seems rather high, let's put it in a bit more perspective.

630,000 out of 4,000,000 annual US births, or 15.75%.

In even more comprehensible terms, one out of every 6 children born in the U.S. has a mercury blood level above the level deemed safe by the EPA.

These are not children exposed to mercury (unless you live in a sterile bubble, everyone is exposed to some level of mercury), but children who acquired enough mercury through their mother during pregnancy so that their cord blood levels register higher than the maximum safe level

And keep in mind that this only refers to the level of mercury the EPA has deemed a health risk. The EPA (particularly under this administration) is extremely averse to inconveniencing industry, so the actual safe levels of mercury may be even lower.

Of course, not only hasn't this administration done anything to reduce mercury levels, but it has fought safeguards put into place during the Clinton administration. So is it any wonder I check this morning's blogroll and discover things have gotten worse?

Julia has found a Washington Post article which states:

One-fifth of women of childbearing age have mercury levels in their hair that exceed federal health standards, according to interim results of a nationwide survey being conducted by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Asheville.

The article goes on to remind people that mercury "is a neurotoxin that can cause developmental problems in fetuses and young children."

The last major national study of Americans' mercury exposure, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1999 and 2000, concluded that about 12 percent of women of childbearing age had mercury levels that exceeded EPA's safety standard.
The new study found excess mercury levels in 21 percent of the 597 women of childbearing age who were tested.

An increase of 75% in four years, corresponding to the Bush administration with it's more relaxed environmental standards. Coincidence?

Posted by Lis Riba at 2:45 AM

In hindsight, perhaps it was a mistake for the Yankees to raise a "Mission Accomplished" banner above their dugout after Game 3.
 -- Jim Caple, ESPN.com

Okay, I follow the game through the radio and MLB.com's GameDay applet. I don't watch on TV to see many of the visuals.

Did the Yankees really do such a thing?

Why???

What could they possibly have been thinking.

Look what's happened in Iraq since Bush appeared before such a banner.

And if the that quote's timing is correct, the Yankees went straight downhill after they displayed theirs.

Perhaps we should declare a moratorium on the phrase "Mission Accomplished" -- or at least on banners using that slogan. They appear to be ill omens.

On second thought, can we get Bush to appear in front of another one, like right before the election?

Posted by Lis Riba at 1:28 AM

We're going to the World Series. So now what?

Who should we be rooting for in the National League?

On the one hand, a Boston-Houston matchup would lend itself to all kinds of election analogies. On the other hand, the Red Sox has lost two World Series to the Cardinals (in 1946 and 1967), meaning history would be against us. [Besides, just think about the color clash: Red Sox and Cardinals?]

Oh, and who do you think deserves MVP for this series? David Ortiz, twice scoring the winning run, or Curt Schilling for playing so well through injury last night? Okay, Ortiz got it. [I didn't realize they awarded it so promptly.] Good choice.

[You know, my high-school self would've been shocked and appalled to see how much and how well I'm following these games...]

Baseball Nightmare, Part Deux

Anyway, over the past week, I've given further thought to my Red Sox victory affects the election scenario from last week, though I waited to post it until it seemed more probable.

Imagine the Red Sox won the World Series in Game Seven. The whole of New England would be filled with such celebrations to make Mardi Gras in New Orleans resemble a sedate church social.
But that's only two days before Election Day. The entire region could be unable to vote, either due to continued drunken stupor or collective hangovers. And with New England generally considered a Democratic lock, depressed turnout up here could be devastating for Kerry.

Considering the kind of endurance matches we've seen in the last several games, don't you think a Game 7 of the World Series -- played on Halloween at (Bambino-cursed) Fenway with Stephen King in attendance -- would have to run 13 innings? [I just checked. The full moon is on the 27th. When I saw the half-moon in the sky this evening, I worried that we might have to deal with that lunacy as well.]

And then came the ruckus at last night's game.

Riots. I forgot about the possibility of victory riots.

We've got a Republican governor -- would lawlessness be a sufficient excuse to issue curfews or other crackdowns? Just as the Democratic majority is trying to get out the vote...

I know this is pure speculation and may border on the paranoid, but I guess I'm a bit superstitious.

Alternately, though less violently, considering how late the last several games have run (* & *) with its impact on productivity, the aftermath could leave us all too exhausted to vote.

Last year, when we faced the possibility of a Cubs-Sox World Series, people were quite open that a victory for either team could spell Armageddon. I sure hope that a Red Sox win wouldn't presage a Bush victory and the End Times.

Anyway, Go team!!! Woo-hoo!!!

Posted by Lis Riba at 12:01 AM

12:01 am -- we done it!

Posted by Lis Riba at 11:01 PM

Lee Atwater died of AIDS!? How come I never heard this before?

Wow.

I know this makes no real difference one way or another, but my worldview feels suddenly shaken.

Posted by Lis Riba at 9:20 PM

Kevin Drum linked to my previous post, and a commenter pointed out another Robertson appearance which is consistent with the other accounts (emphasis mine):

Robertson said the same thing in JUNE on Hardball--and WH Communications Director Dan Barrett was in the studio!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5277869/

BROWN: I want to ask you how you feel about the war in Iraq. And if God is calling this war a disaster, does that mean that he is actually opposed to it?

ROBERTSON: Well, I don`t think God`s opposed to the war, necessarily, but it was a danger sign. I felt very uneasy about it from the very get-go. Whenever I heard about it, I knew it was going to be trouble. I warned the president. I only met with him once. I said, You better prepare the American people for some serious casualties. And he said, Oh, no, our troops are, you know, so well protected, we don`t have to worry about that.

Oh, and Go Red Sox!!!

Posted by Lis Riba at 7:40 PM

Well, well, well

According to Atrios, Karen Hughes and Scott McClellan are calling Pat Robertson a liar. [See my earlier post for the context.]

We've now got more detail that the alleged conversation between Robertson and Bush supposedly took place in February 2003 in Nashville. Armed with those extra details, I went looking:

CNN: Connie Chung Tonight, February 27, 2003:

CHUNG: Let's turn to Iraq for a moment.

ROBERTSON: OK.

CHUNG: Because I'm wondering if you believe the United States should invade Iraq without U.N. backing.

ROBERTSON: Connie, I have, over the last year or so, been quite concerned about entering into this war. We should have gone in after him in the Gulf War I.
This thing is fraught with danger. And I think we need to understand that. I told the president that just recently, that we have got to prepare the American people for civilian casualties, for possibly our casualties, for gassing, for various chemical weapons against them.

CHUNG: And, sir, in the last 15 seconds, do you believe we need U.N. backing?

ROBERTSON: Connie, I think the U.N., frankly, is a joke. And I think they're becoming impotent and I think they're becoming ineffective. And the dithering on this matter just proves it. So I don't think that's necessary. We've already got Resolution 1141. That's all we need.

CHUNG: So are you saying to the president, go ahead, but warn...

ROBERTSON: I think that's it. We're too far along the way to stop back now. And you have no choice but to go forward, so be resolute, but please tell the American people to expect trouble and don't think it's going to be a cakewalk.

So why did Pat Robertson specifically mention that he warned Bush about casualties? If, as Scott McClellan is paraphrased today, "Bush always has recognized that war 'requires sacrifice' and that there would be American casualties"(CNN) then Robertson wouldn't've had to tell Bush so.

But Robertson has now spoken out about it, twice in eighteen months, using very similar language to describe the conversation. Which also supports the notion that Bush's response was a memorable one, and not the expected.

I'd like to spend more time blogging away at this, but I've got to find a blank videotape for Smallville.

Added later: For those of you arriving at this link from elsewhere, take a look at the post immediately above, which includes a link to a June 2004 Pat Robertson interview. Whether or not he's credible, he's certainly consistent!