It appears, by the way, that “Night of the Frozen Elf” has finally found a home.

More to come.

Looking at the current Presidential election, I can’t help thinking of parallels with the 1980 Presidential election. Not that I remember a whole lot, since I was 12 years old at the time and more caught up in other interests besides politics, but I’ve read some history on line and I do have some memories. Consider:

• In both years the incumbent party was saddled with a major international crisis involving the Middle East; Carter and the Democrats were facing scorn for their handling of the Iranian hostage crisis, and this year Bush and the Republicans can’t seem to get out from under the shadow of the Iraq war.
• In both years, the main challenger to the incumbent party had a well-run and well-executed campaign, while the incumbent party’s campaign was disorganized and shoddy.
• In both years, the main challenger was an unlikely candidate. Ronald Reagan was an actor, for crying out loud, and even though he’d served as governor of California, he was still better known as an actor, not a politician. And Barack Obama will very likely go down in history as the nation’s first African American president.
• In both years, the incumbent party was reduced to nothing but negative campaigning. I seem to recall that Carter’s ads toward the end of the campaign focused pretty much on the fact that Reagan was an actor, not a politician. I’ve seen ads from that period and they’re pretty nasty. In 1980 this tactic arguably led to a landslide victory for Reagan, and McCain’s negative advertising will very likely lead to a landslide victory for Obama (according to many sources and in my own humble opinion).
• Reagan seemed to be made of Teflon, and Obama does as well. And not just Teflon, but Teflon infused with heavy amounts of rubber. Not only are McCain’s charges against Obama not sticking, but they’re bouncing back and sticking to McCain himself.
• Finally, in both years the challenger brought with them a positive message about change and renewal. Reagan’s slogan was “It’s morning in America”, and Obama’s is the inspiring “Change we can believe in”.

I’m not a political scientist or analyst by any means. These are just some random thoughts I had, and I’m interested in some feedback.

It was my friend Ed Gyles Jr. (edgylesjr) who gave me the first line of this story. It was a challenge. Or possibly a dare. Maybe a double dog dare. The point is, he gave me the first line and said I should write a story with it.

So. Here it is. It’s a weird one (as opposed to everything else I have written). So enjoy.

(more…)

Current Mood:  chipper

Here’s what happens if Proposition 8 fails:

• Homosexual couples will retain the right to marry in California

Also:

• Churches will NOT lose their tax exempt status if they choose not to perform same sex weddings

I haven’t been keeping up on the “Yes on 8″ literature and advertising, but I understand that the fear of churches losing their tax exempt status if they refuse to perform same sex weddings has been the centerpiece of their campaign. It is, however, not true. In fact, from the state ruling: “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”

• Schools will NOT be required to teach children about same sex marriage

Nothing in the text of Proposition 8 mentions this anyway. Nor does the ruling which legalized same sex marriage. Furthermore, California state law forbids the teaching of anything about health and family issues without their parents’ consent.

There’s quite a bit more, which you can find at the No on 8 website. Ultimately, though, the only reason to object to same sex marriage is the “ick” factor. It’s what’s driven anti-homosexual sentiments in so many societies throughout history, even in societies which were nominally atheistic (I would NOT want to be a homosexual man in China, for example, or in the Soviet Union before it collapsed). In all honesty, I get icked out by the thought of homosexual sex myself. But that does not matter. What it comes down to for me, and what it has always come down to, is that you don’t get to vote on rights in a democracy. Especially in a democracy, I would say.

Anyway. Vote no on 8.

I don’t ordinarily do memes and such in my main blog but this morning I’m bored. So here’s my liberal taxonomy.

My Liberal Identity:

You are a Reality-Based Intellectualist, also known as the liberal elite. You are a proud member of what’s known as the reality-based community, where science, reason, and non-Jesus-based thought reign supreme.

Take the quiz at www.FightConservatives.com

That’s all. Nothing to see here. Move along.

First of all, a message from Governor Palin to the AIP:

Now, a little bit of history:

Vogler’s greatest moment of glory was to be his 1993 appearance before the United Nations to denounce United States “tyranny” before the entire world and to demand Alaska’s freedom. The Alaska secessionist had persuaded the government of Iran to sponsor his anti-American harangue.

Yep, Iran. As in, “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran!” Of course, it’s not particularly relevant that Iran supported Vogler’s speech, but neither is it particularly relevant that Obama sat on the same board of education that Ayers was a member of (a board which many Republicans sat on as well).

So, if we’re going to play the “Guilt by association with folks who long ago were terrorists”, why not throw this one into the mix? Because the AIP no longer supports the violent overthrow of the Federal government? So what? Ayers doesn’t either. I’ve already mentioned that I don’t approve of this sort of blame throwing, but as the McCain/Palin campaign continues their strategy of “Don’t vote for the terrorist! He’s going to eat your babies!”, I think it’s important to know who’s saying it.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Sarah Palin.

(Via Boing Boing, via the Jed Report, via Salon.)

McCain/Palin: Afraid of the issues, telling more lies.

Current Mood:  annoyed

First of all, a shout out to the Bad Egg Blog (”Raising Chickens in Sacramento as an Act of Civil Disobedience”) for linking to my third Story of the Week, “Roosterville“. I’m glad to be a part of such a noble cause.

Second, NaNoWriMo is coming up, of course. Having finished the second part of The Solitude of the Tentacled Space Monster for my novelists’ group tomorrow night, I’m happy to put that aside so that I can concentrate on my NaNoWriMo project (and my stories of the week) throughout November. I’m practically bouncing with excitement. This past weekend I visited the Railroad Museum in Sacramento and got some good ideas for my novel (and realized that many of my ideas will only work as anachronisms, which I’m okay with).

Third, thanks to everyone who responded to my request for title suggestions. I got replies from fifteen different people, who gave me a total of 73 suggestions, both here and on my LiveJournal, which is pretty awesome. I’m starting to tabulate them and writing up my outline, and my plan is to use at least one title suggestion from each person who replied. Of course, for some of you I only know your screen name, so I’ll have to get a real name from you (or at least a name you’d like to use). I’ll be getting back to you.

And, of course, I’m still happy to take suggestions. For what it’s worth, the train itself on which the novel takes place is one of those named routes (like the Coast Starlight or the California Zephyr), and it’s called the City of San Augustin.

And on a final note, I bet you can guess why this picture amuses me:

Obviously, the cow’s attempt to try on new armor has failed.

Current Mood:  bouncy

May I just say that Palin’s other new tactic — implying that women who don’t vote for her are going to Hell — utterly unimpressive, and downright offensive? I suspect most of the women I know would feel the same. “There’s a special place in Hell for women who don’t support other women,” Palin said, quoting Madeline Albright. Although Albright — one of the most distinguished Secretaries of State that the US has had in recent decades — never actually said that. What she said was, “There’s a special place in Hell for women who don’t help other women.”

It’s also a very curious tactic, coming from someone who, as former mayor of the town of Wasilia, voted against a measure that would have made the police pay for rape kits and leaving that burden with the victims, and who seems to be opposed to a number of ideals which are demonstrably good for women, including proper sex education and legal abortion.

More glass houses, more stones.

I wonder if McCain really listens to himself when he talks, or does he, like Peter Griffin, just sort of drift in and out every now and then? More to the point, does he listen to Palin?

The McCain/Palin ticket, languishing in the polls at 42-50, has announced that they’re going to go really negative and attack Obama’s character. I guess they didn’t take into account the fact that announcing their new strategy gives the Obama campaign — never ones to let something like this slide — a chance to launch a pre-emptive counterstrike. Before McCain’s new set of ads come out, Obama’s campaign has already launched an ad emphasizing McCain’s erratic behavior during the recent economic crisis. Expect Obama to put out more such ads.

Meanwhile, Palin has decided to play the terrorist card, attacking Obama’s association with William Ayers, one of the founding members of the Weather Underground. Never mind that Ayers has been, since the 60’s, a respected professor of philosophy and an ardent politician (having worked closely with the Chicago mayor’s office to bring about school reform, for example), or that Obama’s association with Ayers was limited to working on two fundraising boards with him and living in the same neighborhood. These facts are supposed to be irrelevant; the point is, Palin insists, that Obama was “palling around” with terrorists.

Well, okay, I suppose that’s fine. But if they’re going to play the terrorist/anti-American card, they should expect to have it played back at them. For example, there’s John McCain’s association with G. Gordon Liddy, one of the men convicted of crimes surrounding Nixon’s Watergate scandal. Liddy served four years for his crime, and extolled more crimes in the name of subverting the Constitution. Said scandal, of course, led to Richard Nixon’s resignation. Liddy is now a conservative radio host, and McCain and Liddy apparently have a close relationship. Of course, Liddy’s radicalism never led to more than a breakin and time served.

Then, of course, there’s Palin’s association with the Alaskan Independence Party. The McCain/Palin campaign has delivered Palin’s voter registration history, showing that she was never a member of the party, but so what? Obama was never a member of the Weather Underground, but that hasn’t stopped Palin. Joe Vogler, founder of the AIP, made a number of statement extolling his hatred of the federal government and the “damn flag”. Palin was never a member, but the fact is her husband was a member for seven years, and she herself contributed to them.

Personally, I don’t care. Ayers’s radical past is behind him. Liddy has served his time. Palin’s association with the AIP ended several years ago. People and their ideologies change, and what matters in an election is the candidate and who they are now. Are any Republicans ever going to disallow Lieberman because he once embraced Democratic ideals? No, I didn’t think so.

Glass houses, stones. That’s all I’m sayin’.

Once again, I need a title for my NaNoWriMo novel. I’m completely stumped, so I’m calling on my online friends to help me out.

The story, essentially, is this:

In the late 1800’s, a train on its way from Chicago to San Augustin, California is swarmed by otherwordly monsters. With the crew dead and the train careening faster and faster toward a monstrous and derailed doom, it’s up to a small group of determined individuals to save the train and all its passengers before it derails, releasing the monsters onto an unsuspecting and unprepared world.

I already have the main characters in mind. Some of them will be familiar names, ancestors of characters I have already written about. I’m planning adventure, intrigue, romance, and a host of Lovecraftian beasties ready to suck out souls and feast on the unfortunate living. It’s going to have more cliches than a George Lucas film, but I’m okay with that.

Anyway, I’m stumped for titles, both for the novel itself and the chapters within it, so I’m asking my online friends to help me out. Just to make it more exciting, if you give me a title I will happily kill you off in the manner of your choosing in the chapter titled with your suggestion. You can be a crew member, a passenger, a hapless bystander, whatever. Or you can have no preference and I’ll use my imagination. Don’t feel like you have to be confined to being eaten by a spawn of Cthulhu or slain by the wizard or something like that.

Any help at all would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

Current Mood:  chipper

Not much to say about this week’s story of the week, save that it’s not quite a children’s tale. It’s also part of a series, Terrible Tales for Tiny Trolls, that my wife suggested. Maybe at some point I’ll clean them up and make them appropriate for children.

Also, by popular demand (well, per a suggestion by one of my three or four regular readers), I’m making these stories available for download in PDF and plain old HTML formats.

Enjoy!

(more…)

Right here in Sacramento there is a young couple, Rachel Bird and Gideon Codding, who have gotten themselves caught up in California’s tussle over gay marriage. They recently decided that signing a marriage certificate with the words “Person A” and “Person B” is somehow offensive, and they want to be recognized as “bride and groom” on the legal certificate. Until that happens, they feel that can’t get married at all.

At all. Did you get that? They’ve chosen not to get married rather than sign a piece of paper that says “Person A” and “Person B”.

I’ll let that sink in for a moment.

Further puzzling the matter is that they seem to believe that they now can’t get married, and because of that, they cannot get the marriage benefits that other people who are married — like myself — enjoy. “We just feel that our rights have been violated,” said Bird. A very puzzling statement, because they haven’t been. Furthermore, Codding says, “We feel that some things are worth fighting for.” Like, the right to refuse to sign paperwork that doesn’t have the words on it that you want. And as the article states, “Because their marriage is not registered with the state, Bird cannot sign up for Codding’s medical benefits or legally take his name.” They worry that if, say, Bird gets very sick, she won’t be covered by Codding’s health care benefits. Or if Codding winds up in the hospital, then Bird won’t be allowed to visit him.

Gee, what’s that like?

Ask a few hundred thousand gay couples in the United States, and they’d be happy to tell you.

Says Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute, “Those who support (same-sex marriage) say it has no impact on heterosexuals. This debunks that argument.” I’m not a lawyer, but I did study philosophy in college, and took several courses in logic and critical reasoning, and I don’t understand Dacus’s position at all. I really mean that. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that it’s just plain stupid. What’s affecting this couple is not a change in wording in legal documents regarding marriage in California, it’s just their own bullheadedness.

California now legally allows gay and lesbian couples to get married, though Proposition 8, if passed, would deny that right to them. I’ve already made my own position quite clear: Vote No on 8. There are some things in a democratic republic like the United States that you don’t get to vote on, and among those are peoples’ rights. In this case, judicial opinion simply trumps popular vote, no matter how much the right wing bleats about “activist judges”. The recognition of this truth is part of the reason we have a Constitution in the first place. It’s not a matter of state rights (and, frankly, the fact that Obama says it is is one of the very few qualms I have with him). You just don’t get to vote on this. The fact that it’s on the ballot is not “democracy in action”; it is, pure and simple, intolerance in action.

Of course, among the rights that we don’t get vote on in a democracy is the right to be stupid. Bird and Codding have chosen to exercise that right. That’s fine if it works for them; but the rest of us, including the thousands of gay and lesbian couples in California, shouldn’t have that stupidity shoved down our throats.

ETA: I also recommend this entry on cahwyguy’s blog about the subject.

Current Mood:  annoyed

My relationship with horror has been an off-again, on-again sort of thing. Well, mostly on-again. But when I was a kid, scary stuff… Well, it scared me. Do you remember that movie, Mad Monster Party?, that stop-motion film done in the same technology that did Rudolph and Red-Nosed Reindeer? Probably you don’t, since it first came out in 1969. I saw it for the first time on a re-release in 197x (don’t remember exactly). It was part of a series of Saturday afternoon matinées that parents could drop their kids off and know they were in pretty good hands, since there were other parents there to help take care of the kids. Mad Monster Party? scared me so badly that I cried and one of the other mothers had to come and comfort me, sitting next to me in the aisle. “Don’t you wonder how they do that?” she asked me while we watched the animation.

It gave me nightmares. Here’s the trailer for the film that so traumatized me:

Terrifying stuff, no?

I was also terrified by the Haunted Mansion ride at Disneyland. I remember one time being there with my grandfather and my sister, and the ride broke down. It broke down right in the fucking graveyard scene! I sat there, getting more and more frightened as skeletons and ghouls popped up repeatedly from behind tombstones. The fact that I could hear the hydraulics that powered them, the fact that I knew these skeletons were plastic and styrofoam, did nothing. I was still scared witless. The fact that I didn’t wet myself is a miracle, I think.

I watched plenty of scary movies when I was a kid (Matango, also known as Attack of the Mushroom People was one of the more memorable ones, and one of the scarier ones), always surreptitiously. That surreptitious watching of scary movies was, I think, part of every little boy’s journey into manhood. But my imagination, already overburdened with juvenile hypochondria, was way too strong and too weird when I was a kid. My parents, recognizing how off-kilter my imagination was, forbade me from reading any Stephen King novels until I was eighteen years old. Of course, I still snuck my mom’s copy of The Dead Zone (hey, it was right in the bookcase in the living room, who could blame me?), and read it in secret at school. Strangely, I was not at all scared by that novel. It was neat, I thought, and had plenty of cool moments, and it was well written, but scary? No, not really.

Of course, nowadays I gobble up horror novels and horror movies. I used to go for the scariest, most disturbing stuff I could find; and while I still enjoy a good Romero zombie flick, I find that these days I appreciate more light-hearted fare. I enjoyed The Grudge, The Ring, and [Rec]; but the ones I really like the most and that I will go to more are movies like Shaun of the Dead, the Evil Dead trilogy, and Slither (though of those, Shaun of the Dead is definitely my favorite).

The stories I write over the years have changed as well. Years ago, I tried to write disturbing, scary, horrific stuff, the stuff that I hoped would freak Stephen King and H. P. Lovecraft out of their boots. But around 2005, my writing changed; in November of that year, for National Novel Writing Month, I wrote Fred, Again, which became the crap-draft of The Solitude of the Tentacled Space Monster, and I found that I enjoyed writing comic horror far more. I find that I can still write scary stuff, but I can also write stuff that makes people laugh, and hopefully writing stuff that can make them feel at least a little bit better about themselves and the messed up world around them. If you can laugh at Cthulhu, say, or at Frankenstein (like I do in my short story “The Bride Price”, which will be published in an upcoming issue of Shimmer, so you should definitely buy it), then maybe scary things like the economy, the war on terror, global warming, and so on won’t seem so terrifying and intimidating.

That, at least, is the theory.

Of course, there’s another reason I write the comic horror that I do. It’s a way of telling that little boy terrified out of his wits by an animated monster movie or the graveyard scene in the Haunted Mansion ride that it’s okay to laugh at these things and still appreciate them. And if you can do that, maybe the rest of the world won’t look so scary either.

Current Mood:  contemplative

Pass it on.

sailormur

So very true, it must go viral.