cos: (Default)
Apparently some Mormons stopped by my house last week, when I wasn't home, so I heard about it from Valerie later. She was not aware that the Mormon church funded California's proposition 8, donating the bulk of the money to run ads in the final weeks; it's quite likely that it would not have passed without their help.

If I were home when they came, I would have asked about it. I don't necessarily presume that young canvassers agree with their church, but it played such a pivotal role in passing the gay marriage ban, and here they are canvassing for converts, so they're at least acting in support of it. Mormon canvassers are, as far as I can tell, always polite, so I'd be polite. I'd also make it clear that I believe their church is a terrible influence on the world and I actively advise my friends to avoid it.

If Mormons come to your door, remember to ask them about prop 8? I'm curious to hear what they say.
cos: (Default)
My first impression of Los Angeles was not so good. We were on a several-week camping trip when I was about 9, starting in San Francisco, then to Wyoming and Utah and Arizona, and finishing up in southern California. I remember my first sight of LA, driving down from the mountains (we were probably coming in via I-15 through San Bernardino, though I don't remember): A vast sea of dark gray smog, out to the distant ocean, with tall buildings poking up above it here and there.

In Los Angeles, you couldn't really see the sky like in other places. It was lighter above, and grew steadily darker the further down you looked, a smooth gradient to gray well before the buildings hiding the horizon.

We saw the sunset from Disneyland one or two evenings, a beatiful orange sky I'd never seen before - really orange, solid orange, a thick band covering much of the sky. During the day, the sun was a diffuse focus of brilliant light spread out larger than a harvest moon.

I didn't go back to southern California until 2003, almost a quarter century later. California had made great strides on air quality in the years since. The pollution capitals of the US had mostly moved to Texas by then, and the sky in Los Angeles was unexceptional, just the sky like in most other cities I've been to.

Today, I took a flight from San Diego to Boston by way of Los Angeles, and got a view of the city from 25 or more years ago, for several minutes as we approached the airport. When we got out of the plane, I saw that same gradient sky, and that same sun. We left before sunset; I wonder if it's as orange as it was back then.

P.S. Glad to be back in Boston, where the air is cold but breathable. Although our plane waited over 50min after landing before they had an open gate for us and I'm waiting for my bags but missed the T. Yay for [livejournal.com profile] dreams_of_wings coming to pick me up.
cos: (Default)
Ever since mid-March, when it became clear that Barack Obama would be the Democratic nominee, I've been cautiously confident that he'd be elected. Today, I think it's time to change that to "confident".

It's now less than a week before election day, which means asking people "who would you vote for if the election were held today?" in a poll is relevant to predicting how people will actually vote next week. Currently, there are 286 electoral votes in states where Obama has led by more than 5% in multiple recent polls and has been over 51% in the pollster.com average for at least a week. (It takes 270 to win)

Obama can afford to lose up to 16 EV worth of states from the "over 51%, greater than 5% margin" set and still win. And that set of states does not include Ohio or Florida. The only state in the set that's large enough that isn't really safe is PA, where Obama leads by only ~9%-11% in recent polling averages; other than PA, he'd have to lose at least two states from that set to go under 270. And of course winning Ohio or Florida would make up for it, and he's been leading in polls in both of those. But Obama wins without either Florida or Ohio as long as he holds at least all but one of the states where polls show him stable at above 51% and more than 5% above McCain (as long as that one isn't PA).

Also, of course, this confidence presumes:
- No completely unexpectable major event happens in the next few days (chances of that: very low)
- Obama's campaign continues at the pace it's set so far, including fieldwork (I'm confident of that)

If neither of those changes, I think it very likely that he will win.

P.S. Of the "above 51% and margin over 5%" states, CO is the only one where the stable margin is below 8%. If you only count states where Obama has been above 51% and has more than an 8% lead in stable poll averages recently, that's 277 EV.
cos: (Default)
I'll be in San Diego all of the second week of November.

Remind me who I know there, if you know? Or who I should meet?
cos: (Default)
Quick quiz: In which continent is Spain located?
If you know the answer, you just might have a better grasp of geography than John McCain.

I never expected to like McCain's foreign policy. He sold out everything I used to think he believed, to support the invasion and occupation of Iraq. If he thought supporting Bush's foreign policy was the transcendental issue of the day, the thing worth throwing everything else away for, he obviously wasn't going to have a foreign policy I'd be on speaking terms with.

However, I expected McCain to differ from Bush in this way: I thought he knew something about the rest of the world and foreign policy. At least he'd offer a break from the cluelessness and incompetence of Bush. Turns out, McCain is confused and clueless about foreign policy, more so than Bush. Very dangerously so. This was a genuine surprise to me.

I ignored the evidence at first, as McCain did things like repeatedly refer to Czechoslovakia in the present tense even though it hasn't existed in 15 years, or repeatedly confused Sunni and Shia and thus confused who was allied with whom in Iraq. I "knew" that McCain had a lot of foreign policy experience, so I thought these incidents were weird, puzzling, and somewhat funny, but they didn't really reach me.

Then came a stunning, eye-opening exchange about Iran... )

This is a basic fact. McCain was selling himself as the experienced foreign policy expert specifically on the issue of dealing with Iran, and not only did he get something so fundamental flatly wrong, he showed complete confidence in his wrongness and mocked a suggestion that he might be wrong. Sound like Bush?

In light of this, I started looking at things that McCain said without assuming to begin with that he knows what he's talking about, and it was unsettling... )
So on Iraq, just like on Iran, McCain is fundamentally clueless about the most basic facts.

Now when I hear about McCain making a stupid error like calling Sudan "Somalia", or talking about the nonexistent "Iraq-Pakistan border" I see it differently. Some wonder if it's his age causing him to slip up like this so frequently, but I think these are the kinds of mistakes he wouldn't make if he really knew about the rest of the world. You don't repeatedly confuse who is allied with whom in Iraq simply because the words "Sunni" and "Shia" get mixed up in your head - you do that if you don't know, and you're trying to remember the roles of the various groups in Iraq as if they were just similar-sounding words.

And then... and then... this happened and completely boggled my mind.

Interviewed by a reporter from one of Spain's largest newspapers*, El Pais, John McCain... seemed unaware that Spain even existed! Asked about Spain, he answered about Mexico. Asked about meeting with Spanish president Zapatero, he talks about "friends and enemies" and about US relations with "Latin America". She had to explicitly remind him that Spain was in Europe and he still didn't get it. He suggested that he'd meet with Zapatero if he were dedicated to "human rights, democracy, and freedom" (Spain is already a US ally, in NATO, and has troops in Afghanistan).

Maybe McCain is losing his mind. But this goes far beyond mixing up words, and it's dangerous.

* Correction: It was a radio reporter, whose station is owned by a Spanish company that also owns El Pais; the reporter herself does not work for that newspaper.
cos: (Default)
[livejournal.com profile] mechristy's boyfriend Michael is in a very multi-instrumental contra dance band called Giant Robot Dance in which, among other things, he plays a digeridoo!

Because he lives in DC, I've never seen him play for a dance, though I have gone with them to the Glen Echo contra dance a couple of times on visits there. This week, though, they're playing in Massachusetts. On Thursday I'm planning to go to the Thursday NEFFA-sponsored dance in Concord:

Giant Robot Dance is also playing the Greenfield contra dance on Friday evening, for those of you in western Mass who wonder what it's like to contra to a digeridoo :)

Want to come to the Concord dance on Thursday?

Never contra'd but curious about it?
cos: (Default)
I'm in Santa Fe for several days for [livejournal.com profile] listgirl & Elena's wedding, and I'll probably have some free time. Suggest somewhere I should go, something I should do or see, someone I should meet, somewhere I should eat, or any permutation of the above?

I'm sharing a hotel room with [livejournal.com profile] mechristy, [livejournal.com profile] mostlylies, and [livejournal.com profile] rekling. Last night I dreamed that I was away somewhere, sharing a room with the three of them, for an event put on by mutual friends. I feel cheated by my dream-brain.
cos: (Default)
Problem: A lot of banks, insurance companies, and other financial institutions are in trouble, and if a bunch of them fail the economy will suffer severely. They're in trouble through a chain of stuff that starts with a lot more mortgages failing than were expected, and a bad housing market. When someone can't make their mortgage payments they may be forced to sell the house, but in a bad housing market, their house may not be worth enough anymore to pay off the mortgage by selling it, so they can't do that. Glossing over a lot of the stuff in between, and ignoring for a moment the legal changes that let this happen, that's basically where the problem begins at the moment, yes?

Now, assuming that we decide that we can't afford to let all these financial institutions fail, and assuming we decide it's worth spending several hundred billion dollars on it right now - rather than argue the merit of those two points, let's take them as a given - assuming all of that... why would Congress even consider using that money to bail out the financial institutions directly?????

We could take the same money and spend it on bailing out homeowners who can't make their mortgage payments.

We could get more bang for the buck at first pass because we wouldn't have to buy all of the "bad" debt, only enough to make it possible for each homeowner to keep on paying, perhaps with lower payments over a longer period of time. Banks would be stronger simply because all this debt would no longer be poised to fail, and confidence in the banks would recover as soon as the plan was passed, even before actual homeownwers were bailed out, because people would know that a lot of these loans would no longer fail completely, because they'd qualify for the bailout plan. Not only would we save banks, but we'd save jobs, neighborhoods, and families. By preventing mass dislocation of people we'd be saving lots of other pieces of the economy at no extra cost.

I've heard some arguments against the "moral hazard" of bailing out people who took risks that didn't work out... every single one of those arguments applies to a much greater extent to bailing out financial institutions who took vast amounts of irresponsible risk, who risked not just themselves but everyone around them, who were paid to understand finance and to know better than to do this, who lobbied for laws to make it easier for them to do this...

In what bizarre reality does it make any sense to even consider bailing out the financial institutions instead of the homeowners in trouble?

I'm going to call my members of the House and Senate and I hope you call yours.

[ Also on dailykos - if you have an account there, please recommend. ]
cos: (Default)
Today I bought [livejournal.com profile] mzrowan's house, the one I've been living in ever since she first bought it in 2006. She's still here, though she plans to move soon to the place she's been renovating for a few months and will hopefully buy soon.

Although it all went smoothly today, there were a few times over the past month when I feared it'd get derailed, and the conclusion is: mortgage lenders, whoever they are, probablly all suck at communicating with you. When [livejournal.com profile] mzrowan and [livejournal.com profile] redheadedmuse's house buying turned into a mess, it turned out there was an explanation, but the bank just didn't tell them. I dealt with a different lender, Monument, but had almost-similar experiences.

What made the difference was having Joe Cooper, who [livejournal.com profile] redheadedmuse recommended, arranging things. He connects buyers with lenders, so he works with various banks and mortgage lenders, but the best part of the service he offers is communication. When the lender pulls some random inexplicable move and you go "WTF?!?", Joe explains why they did it, how the rules or laws relate, and even what the original purpose of those rules or laws is, and then you know what you need to do to make things work.

For example, when the lender says "sorry, you seem to be $18,000 short of being able to make your down payment" when I've looked at all the numbers and I know I have more than enough, they don't explain anything. They expect that I just take them at face value. Joe explains to me how we got laws requiring documenting the source of my funds, what funds do and don't need to be documented, and the key fact that since I made my deposit to the seller in July, that means they have to consider my July bank statement since that statement documents the deposit, which in turn means I have to document the source of any funds that went into my account in July, even though I thought I only needed to document what went in in August since they said they only need to look at one bank statement.

I second muse's recommendation: If you're going to get a mortgage without the standard lawyers and brokers, and you're not already very familiar with the process, don't try to deal directly with a lender; call Joe Cooper at 617-969-1441.
cos: (Default)
Lots of posts on my friends' pages about the presidential election recently, not surprising. Right now, though, my focus is on several elections for state house & senate in Massachusetts. Our primary election day is this Tuesday, and state legislature is the most important level of government in the US by far, in my opinion. For those of you in Massachusetts, here are some ways the state legislature has affected us in the past few years:
  • Gay marriage
  • New universal health care coverage law
  • Access to emergency contraception at pharmacies
  • Higher minimum wage
  • New tax rebates for installing solar/wind energy
  • Increased local aid, reducing property tax increases (after huge property tax increases a few years earlier)
  • Green Line extension to Medford & Somerville will probably actually happen, after being on the rocks for a while
... and on and on.

In Massachusetts, there are very few house or senate districts where voters might elect any Republican. As a result, we get some fiercely contested Democratic primaries every year, and most of the elections that really matter in setting the direction of the state are in Democratic primaries. This Tuesday is the election that matters most here, much more than November.

Some of my favorite candidates running in contested elections on Tuesday are:
  • Carl Sciortino, my favorite representative, whose district covers part of Somerville (Teele, Powderhouse, Winter Hill, some of Davis) and part of Medford (including the areas around Tufts). He's being challenged by Bob Trane, a Somerville ward alderman who I think is very sleazy, and has been trying to avoid even giving positions on most issues. Carl was key to reviving the Green Line extension, and his 2004 victory was key to saving gay marriage in Massachusetts. He's amazing, and we need him back.

  • Patrick McCabe, running in the district that covers most of the rest of Medford. McCabe is an SEIU organizer, veteran of Kosovo, and strong progressive. He's challenging incumbent conservative Democrat Paul Donato, who is anti-choice and was one of the last few holdouts to vote to ban gay marriage.

  • Sonia Chang-Diaz, running for state senate in Boston (Back Bay, South End, Fenway, JP, Mission Hill, Roxbury, Chinatown, bits of Dorchester & Mattapan) against incumbent Dianne Wilkerson. I first met Sonia when she worked for Pat Jehlen's run for State Senate in Somerville in 2005 and have often found her on the same campaigns as myself. She and Wilkerson actually agree on almost all the issues; however, Dianne Wilkerson has had multiple campaign finance & tax law violations over her career and as Sonia says, we shouldn't have to choose between the issues and ethics.

  • Jason Lewis, running for state rep in Winchester & Stoneham, where incumbent conservative Democrat Paul Casey announced his retirement a few months after Lewis entered the race. Another Democrat jumped in, so it's still contested. Lewis is DFA-endorsed and my friend Ari Fertig from Brandeis DFA is working on his campaign.

  • Doug Belanger for Ed Augustus' state senate seat in Worcester/Auburn/Grafton/etc.


I made an ActBlue page for contributions to Carl Sciortino and Sonia Chang-Diaz. A little bit of extra money coming in this weekend might allow them to adjust their strategy for the last few days in a helpful way. Give them just $10 or $20 each if that's all you can afford; in small races like this it matters!

Carl Sciortino (MA-HD-Middlesex 34)$
Sonia Chang-Diaz (MA-SD-Suffolk 2)$


Unfortunately the others aren't on ActBlue, but you can donate on their web sites. I'm going canvassing for Carl this weekend. Wanna join me at his office at 78A Cameron Ave (near Teele Sq, walkable from Davis) Sunday at noon?
cos: (Default)
I created a new community, [livejournal.com profile] baystate, for Massachusetts.
cos: (Default)
When [livejournal.com profile] mzrowan moves out of this house she's selling me, I'm going to want a new renter for one of the two big bedrooms. We're not sure yet when she's moving out, whenever she's done renovating her new house - probably around the end of September or in October - so this is just early warning. If you might want to live here, let me know!

Our big bedroosm are 11'x13' and 12'x12', currently occupied by the two of us. I'm not sure whether I'll stay in the same room or move into hers, but either way, I'll want a renter for the other room. Probably about $750/month. I'm going to have one more renter, in one of the smaller rooms - I already found someone, she'll move in in September.

It's a pretty big place, with a great kitchen & dining room, small back deck, several extra rooms besides the bedrooms, a second little bathroom downstairs. I'll be down to just one cat, down from a high of six of them last fall (currently Rowan has one and I have one; she's taking hers with her when she moves). About 3 blocks from the red line in Central Square, very close to the Harvest (and weekly farmers' market), Tosci's, Middle East & TT's, etc.

So, wanna live here? Or know anyone who might?
cos: (Default)
Do I know anyone in Austin who may have somewhere for me to stay for any or all of July 16-20? (Wednesday through Sunday of next week)

I am pre-registered for Netroots Nation and very much want to go, and I can get a free flight with my frequent flyer miles, but I don't think I can spend on a hotel right now...
cos: (Default)
When Richard Nixon said that, it was an impeached ex-president who resigned in disgrace speaking.

But now, Congress is intending to pass a bill that effectively declares Nixon's statement true (while pretending disingenuously to do otherwise).

Nixon said it to justify his spying & wiretapping without warrants. FISA was the law Congress passed in response to the Nixon / Watergate scandal. It established a secret court that could issue warrants for for surveillance related to "foreign intelligence" in the USA, and made clear that any domestic surveillance without a warrant was illegal - something that should've been obvious to begin with. It made it illegal not only for the government to do it, but also explicitly made it illegal for phone companies to cooperate with illegal surveillance requests from the government.

The Bush administration broke the law. Major telecom companies in the US cooperated with this illegal surveillance. AT&T built a special secret room to collect all the data passing through their data centers and siphon it to the National Security Agency. Because the White House asked them to.

When the president asks companies to do something and the law says it is illegal for them to do so, and they do it anyway...

... it's time for Congress to pass a law declaring that the companies who colluded in the illegal spying conspiracy should be excused, that the cases against them in court should be cancelled. Even after some cases have gone far enough that we know the courts have ruled that this stuff was in fact illegal.

If this law passes, it is a declaration from Congress that if you break the law at the request of the president, you have legal immunity; you will be excused. In other words, "If the President asks you to do it, that means that it is not illegal."

"FISA" sounds like some obscure thing you don't need to care about, but this bill is a precedent set by Congress favoring a government by king, instead of rule of law. It also attacks the concept of checks and balances by allowing surveillance without court warrants, but that's a minor problem in comparison. If we don't have rule of law, checks and balances can't hold anyway.

It CAN be stopped. This winter, a similar law passed the Senate and was considered nearly sure to pass the House, but the House declined to pass it because of the volume of phone calls they received against it. Now, we have a supposed "compromise" that still gives everything away, and the House passed it. The Senate plans to vote today (though they may delay it). It has enough votes to pass. Can we generate enough phone calls to block it? Call your Senators (if that tool doesn't work, numbers are here).

Other things you can do... )

Some links if you want to read more... )
Update: Senator Dodd's amendment to strip retroactive immunity for telecoms from the bill, failed 37-61. A list of the 37 Senators who voted for it here.

We only need 40 Senators to successfully filibuster the bill. There are 37 who think retroactive immunity is a bad idea. Can we get them all to support a filibuster, plus turn 3 more Senators? Call!

Update 2: It passed. ACLU and EFF go back to court over it. What to do next?
cos: (Default)
[squid ink ice cream]


Friday afternoon, [livejournal.com profile] silentmachine's roommates took me to Minnehaha Park to see the falls, and we also stumbled onto World Refugee Day. We wandered into Sea Salt and got ice cream, but it wasn't until after I got mine that we noticed this...



We asked and the guy behind the counter said it really was made with squid ink, and tastes somewhat like black cherry.
cos: (Default)
Either St. Louis' airport is the nicest, most helpful airport I've been to in years, or it's got the stupidest portion of the travelling public of any airport I've been to in years. During a 40 minute layover yesterday, I heard a number of announcements following this general format on the airport PA:
    If you just went through the security checkpoint and left a [type of object], please return to the security checkpoint to claim it.
Types of objects named included, most memorably:

- "a musical instrument"

- "a laptop computer"

Does every aiport have such a high rate of people leaving big expensive things at the security checkpoints, and they don't announce it on the PA? Or is St. Louis just weird?

Minneapolis topped it all, though. Not the airport, the city. From the airport I got on the light rail, and partway to downtown, I heard this announcement on the light rail PA:
    "For the woman who lost a gentleman... we are making announcements on all the trains and we will let you know if we locate him."
(paraphrased from memory; unlike St. Louis, I did not get to hear this one repeated several times.)
cos: (Default)
First, some context: I'm at the ACLU national conference and this evening, we heard from George Soros, who recently made the largest private gift in ACLU history. Introducing Soros, ACLU executive director Anthony Romero announced the $12 million seed gift for the ACLU's ambitious new expansion. The goal is to "fill in the middle": We have strong, long-running ACLU affiliates in places like Massachusetts1, New York, and northern California, but there are many states where the local ACLU is too small and underfunded to deal with the challenges of their coverage area & political climate.

So with that in mind, Romero was describing the plan:

    "Someday there will no longer be civil liberties dead zones in the US ... you can look at the map, and you know what states I'm talking about, It's not places like Chelsea2 where I live. Well, I don't know, maybe in Chelsea... if there's detention, it's the good kind of detention."

(A surprising number of people got it. I like this crowd.)


1. Massachusetts' ACLU affiliate was actually founded shortly before the national ACLU.

2. Chelsea is Manhattan's gay neighborhood, known for having a lot of gay bars & clubs. (Yes, Anthony Romery is gay)
cos: (Default)
Democracy for America, the post-Dean grassroots organization I've been active in for years, is offerring scholarships to Netroots Nation in Austin this summer. It's the blogger conference that used to be called YearlyKos, and I pre-registered for it shortly after attending YearlyKos last year, but I still need a hotel room so I applied, asking for a partial scholarship (I wrote that if they pick me for one, they can use the registration money to give another to someone local who doesn't need a room).

So far, 92 people have applied, and I believe they're raised enough funds for 16 scholarships, so the odds aren't bad.

If you have an account on democracyforamerica.com, or if you wouldn't mind being associated with them and get an account, you can help me get it by declaring your support for my application:
  1. Either sign up for a DfA account or log in

  2. Go to my application.

  3. On the right, in the "Grassroots Supporters" section, click "Add Your Support". (optionally, write a short comment)

  4. If you know other people who would support me but don't read this LJ, suggest it to them.

Thanks!
cos: (Default)
Reading The Rise of the Creative Class crystallized for me the idea, which I already had, that our new age of easy communications actually makes physical, geographic locations more significant, not less. Paul Graham's new essay, Cities and Ambition, presents another view of how cities matter - one that also seems familiar, but that I hadn't thought about in quite that way.

Some cities are centers for particular kinds of activity. Such a city subtly sends you a message related to that activity - by the things you see walking down the street, by the snippets of conversation you overhear, and many other ways. A city's message, he argues, comes from the fact that there is something people in that city tend to consistently view as more important than other things, and this attitude is catching. It's a three-way cycle:
  • People move to that city because they value what it values above other things, and because it is a center for that activity
  • People in that city value that thing because the city is a center for it, and because a lot of them moved there because it was the thing they already valued more
  • It is a center for its activity because it is known for it so people move there to do that thing, and because people living there are encouraged to value that thing, which in turn encourages the activity itself

To really know a city's message, Graham says, you probably have to live there for a while. As examples, he gives the paces he has lived, and the messages they send:
    New York City: You should make more money!

    Silicon Valley: Be powerful. And start companies.

    Berkeley: Live better. Enjoy life.

    Boston, especially Cambridge: You could be smarter. Read more, learn more. Develop ideas.

He also gives a stab at interpreting the messages of some places he's been to but hasn't lived in, while acknowledging that he's not sure and that a local might interpret it more accurately. For example, he thinks the message Paris was sending him was "do things in style; appreciate art and beauty". And not all cities send a coherent message, because not all cities are focused in that way.

Where do live? What message is your city sending you?

Have you lived somewhere else that sent a clear message? What was it?

Edit: To clarify, in case you don't click through to read Graham's essay, in his formulation a city's message is both the thing it suggest you should aspire to, and the thing that people generally respect and honor most, and think is cool. So the coolest, most honored & respectable thing you can be in Silicon Valley is someone who started a now-influential company; in Boston, it's a smart person who had a great idea or created something new; in New York, it's being rich.
cos: (Default)
You've heard of people who grew up and ran off to join the circus.

My friend Jacob just graduated college, and the circus ran off with him!


[livejournal.com profile] folzgold, [livejournal.com profile] shadowofrain, and a bunch of their Hampshire friends formed a circus, put together a show, got a big blue school bus, had it converted to run on vegetable oil, and set off to tour the country for the next month.
[bendy frick]
    We are in dark times...

    Dependence on oil and unchecked consumerism has driven us past the brink of environmental collapse. Civilization as we know it has ended.

    What remains is a troupe of 11 performers touring the territory originally known as the United States. Traveling from city to fallen city, we are gathering a community of survivors in our effort to rebuild a sustainable society.

    This post-apocalyptic landscape is the backdrop for the Criss Cross Circus summer tour. These 11 college students are driving from east to west in a colorful, rusted old school bus that runs on used vegetable oil.

    While the setting is tragic, it is with the humor and magic of circus that we hope to entertain and educate audiences across America.

[molly, tara, jacob]
They began the tour with a show here in Cambridge on Thursday night, and their second show is tonight in Chicago. You can follow along on their blog, and their flickr photos, but of course the best experience is seeing them in person! I loved the Cambridge show, and they'll only get better as they see how things go with real audiences.
Tour Itinerary...
  • Sat, May 24th: Accountants of Homeland Security variety show (with comedy and improv), Conservatory Theater, Chicago, IL, 11pm

  • Sun, May 25: University of Chicago, Social Sciences Quad, Chicago, IL, 4:30pm

  • May 26, 27, 28: Do you know anywhere they could perform in Madison or Minneapolis/St. Paul or places en route? Write them at crisscrosscircus@gmail.com

  • Thu, May 29: Rochester, MN, 12:00 noon & 5:00pm

  • [criss cross musicians]
  • May 30: Do you know somewhere they could perform in, say, Des Moines or Cedar Rapids?

  • Sat, May 31: CAMP, St. Louis, MO, 7:30pm

  • May 30 - June 2: St. Louis

  • June 4-7: Denver/Boulder, CO

  • June 9-12: San Francisco, CA

  • ... know of an opportunity for them to perform in Eugene or Portland?

  • June 14-18: Seattle, WA

Dates subject to change. Especially if you can find a good show opportunity for them on this route :)
cos: (Default)
A month ago I posted to show that Obama would win the Democratic nomination - that he'd already won enough votes and delegates to ensure his eventual victory, and there was no reasonable scenario for Clinton to campaign her way to a win.*

Yesterday, Clinton won West Virginia 67% - 26% - 7% (Edwards), her second-biggest percentage win so far, and only the second state where she's hit 60%. She gave a victory speech where she implied she could still win. In case this leaves you wondering whether she's making a comeback, or has a chance, here's an update on the delegate math... )

Short answer: No. She's so far behind that her WV win actually left her worse off.

Oregon will probably finish it.

Update: Last night, John Edwards endorsed Obama. How this affects delegates... )
Overall, this probably means a +11 - +17 delegate gain for Obama, and cuts Clinton's possible advantage from seating Florida by ~6-13 depending on how Florida is handled.

* Clinton could still be nominated if some big unexpected thing happens, such as a Spitzer-like scandal, but that's not something she can campaign for; if it happens, it'll happen, regardless of what she does.
cos: (Default)
"I'm in favor of dating evil."

"Yeah, you never know when someone's in a tunnel."

"I curse my beeper a lot, especially since it has the unique ability to sense when I'm naked. [...] It has a special nudity-detection system."

Note: [livejournal.com profile] farwing was there, but none of these were from her.
cos: (frff-profile)
I picked Country Club Castelfusano, a "tourist camping village", for our last night because of its proximity to Fiumicino airport, to make it easier for us to catch a 10am flight. Castelfusano is, by the way, apparently an actual old castle, though rather small. It and its surrounding grounds are penned in by a fence in the middle of the giant camping village - which contains a pizzeria plus two restaurants, swimming pool, jacuzzi / "fun area" (closed until later in the spring), games room, dance hall, meeting rooms ... oh, and some wild pigs and their cute little piglets. They're in a separate little fenced-in forest between the castle grounds and the camping bungalows. The castle is guarded by a bull, marked on the map by a picture of a bull.

Indeed, they do have a shuttle bus to Fiumicino for 3 euro, but the earliest shuttle each day leaves at 8:30am, and with morning commute traffic that would not necessarily have gotten us to the airport in time, so we came up with another plan: take Castelfusano's free shuttle to the nearby commuter train station, take that train a few stops towards Rome, get off at Ostia center, and catch a public bus.

We got the 7am shuttle bus, a 7:13 train, and were in Ostia center by 7:25. Ostia is very close to Fiumicino, but the co.tra.l bus meandered its way first through the center of Ostia, then Fiumicino (a town as well as an airport location) before dropping us off at the airport in front of a daunting series of terminals. None of their signs said "American Airlines" so we asked, and were directed to get on the airport terminal shuttle. As were people taking US Air, Continental, and others that were listed on the signs.

According to a bit of fragmented Italian conversation I overheard on that airport shuttle, a brand new Terminal 5 had opened just one week earlier, and all flights to the USA now depart from there. This is apparently because the US was dissatisfied with security at the rest of the airport.

After a private shuttle, a commuter train, a public bus, and an airport shuttle, we reached Terminal 5 and quickly found American Airlines check-in. Well, not check-in exactly, just some booths where they checked our documents and determined our worthiness to enter the USA. Then through some doors to another big hall, and there was check-in... where they checked our documents again, checked our bag, and gave us tickets. We were told to go to gate C25, directed through another door... and herded with the rest of the USA-bound travelers onto a bus.

Everyone got off the bus into another airport building, where upon entry we saw a great big map of this new terminal with its gates numbered C20-C33, and up the escalator we went... not to the gates, it turns out, but to a platform to catch a light rail. As far as I could tell, the structure we were in served no other purpose than to be a transfer station between the buses and the light rail. Everyone got on the same little train, which had only one other stop: the actual C20-C33 gates structure.

Despite all of this, we got to sit for over 45 minutes before boarding. The agents at the gate checked our passports again (passport check #3) and, after not choosing either of us for the random extra screening, allowed us to proceed down the normal-looking gate extension, onto the plane. Err, no, that would be too simple. First came passport check #4. Then: another bus.

(We're at JFK now, where there's real Internet. When we got past passport control & customs, someone tried to offer us a shuttle bus.)

Edit: Home! Transport used: Private bus, commuter train, city bus, airport shuttle bus, airport bus 2, light rail, airport bus 3, plane, plane, private car. #1 through #8 to leave Italy, #8-10 the rest of the way home. Goodnight!
Apr. 23rd, 2008 07:52

Italy

cos: (Default)
I'm on Capri for the Inbar family "reunion". I put that in quotes because there's never been one before, so it's not really a "re"-union, especially since my generation keeps growing and growing due to divorces and remarriages - I've acquired a bunch of non-blood-related cousins, for example. Also it's not really a "re"-union when there are several people here I'd never met before :)

We're here for the week, then most of my family are returning home and I will meet [livejournal.com profile] magickalpony in Sorrento and spend another week on the mainland, and return on May 3rd. If you're my friend on Facebook, follow my profile for occasional photos and videos this week from Capri (I don't know how much net access I'll have next week). If not, I'll post a bunch of links to the photos here on LJ after I get home.

In the meantime, here's the video I posted last night, my cablecar ride from the ferry port below Capri town up the cliffs to the town:

Page generated Mar. 18th, 2026 18:43
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios