Apple Truly is Becoming the Evil Empire

All Things Digital posts about Apple's denial of Sony's e-reader app which should be sending big giant red waving flags at Amazon, Borders, and Barnes and Noble. Let me paraphrase what Apple is trying to say here and then discuss the real life impact on folks like you and me.

Apple's main premise is that if Amazon (for example) wants to offer a book for sale on their website, they must also offer that same book for purchase from inside the iOS Kindle App. When you buy that book via the app, Apple wants a 30% cut. I'd be willing to guess that 30% doesn't even exist in the profit margin of many of these books so either Amazon has to be willing to sell the book at a loss or they must raise the price to cover the cost thereby screwing over you and I so that Apple can add more masses of money to their swelling treasury.

If you've ever surfed the iBook store, you'll note that there isn't much material up there for sale. The reason? I suspect it's because Apple wants such a huge cut of the profits that it leaves little or no incentive for publishers to sell through them. What else could explain why those same publishers gladly sell their wares through Amazon? Smart consumers like me have figured this out. We go to Amazon, we buy the book there (for less), we download the free Kindle App into our iPads and sync the book into it, voila! But Apple's not happy with this democratic process. Instead of waking up and realizing that it's being greedy with the publishers, it closes this door and forces us, the consumers, to pay the margin Apple wants.

My suggestion is that Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Sony and the others should comply with Apple's draconian policy. They should enable in-app purchases of all the material available on their respective sites but they should charge an "Apple-imposed mobile service fee" of 30% with a notification that the same product is for sale for 30% less when purchased from their web site. This would point the consumer in the right direction for their inevitable ire.

Apple is making a huge mistake here. They're making their competitors' hardware look more and more attractive every day by lifting the curtain and showing us that they really do control the content on their customers' devices. To the degree that they exercise that control, fewer and fewer people will buy the devices themselves which HAS to impact Apple's bottom line far more than the 30% they want of my purchase of the latest Tom Clancy novel. I suspect we're going to hear about some lawsuits soon. This will be one of the few times I root against Apple. I'm disgusted right now.

Why I Hate ALL Cable News

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Veiled Criticism
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog</a> The Daily Show on Facebook

A Trusted Friend

Recently, I watched this segment of the Daily show:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Doubtsourced
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor The Daily Show on Facebook

Now, when you juxtapose the clips of Fox News repeatedly (across their news anchors and pundits) stating these exaggerated figures for the president's recent trip to Asia against the actual figures, it really illustrates something but does everyone who watches Fox get it?

Let me put this to you differently. Let's say you were blind or had really bad eyesight. Let's say you had a trusted friend who you counted on to help you read contracts and interpret the world for you. Everything is just chugging along nicely when one day, you have someone else read a contract to you that your friend previously read and discover that your friend was misleading you. Would you continue to trust that friend? I mean, after all, it could be just this one contract. But if you could no longer trust that friend, how useful would he be to you moving forward?

So Fox viewers... when is enough, enough? When does the trust get violated enough times to cause you to doubt what you're hearing and step away from being told what you want to hear to being told what's really going on? This is emphatically NOT an argument for watching CNN or MSNBC. I'm mainly making the point that one must first decide that they WANT to be told what's happening, not be told what makes them feel better/angry/justified. Second, one needs to begin searching for those sources which earn their trust. Trust does NOT mean agreement.

For me, this boils down to these few things:

1) Do they correct themselves and admit when they are wrong?

2) Do they post/link to opposing viewpoints?

3) Do they explain their reasoning?

4) Do they link to their source(s) and encourage their readers to form their own judgments? These sources should be primary sources not secondary sources. Meaning they should be the actual artifact being opined about or the actual person involved or someone who was present.

5) Do they avoid reporting on things that benefit them financially and, at minimum, present potential financial benefits/conflicts of interest in full disclosure when they do?

Ask yourself if your news source does these things consistently. Fox News doesn't. Neither does CNN or MSNBC. 24 hour cable news is not benefitting this country.

Rewriting History

As someone who's been taking a post-reconstruction history course this semester, I must register my protest at the right wing nutjobs' re-writing of history these days. Most recent example here. Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and others like them don't like the way history actually happened. So they do to those in the past what they do to those in the present. They create a reality and ask you to step inside. I'm not only offended by this, I'm outraged. The tactic goes like this: Introduce a side of history that people have never heard that bolsters their case for some fear or hatred message of the day. Then, when someone points out that there is zero evidence that supports it, they say, "Yeah, but that's because there was a conspiracy by the liberal media of that time to erase the REAL story from the history books and write what they wanted us to believe."

BULLSHIT! If there's one thing I've learned in this class, it's that historians take GREAT pride in trying to capture history accurately. They research their theses and present evidence to back it up. They don't always agree completely, but rarely if ever do they all entirely get it wrong. I'm tired of being told I'm unAmerican by these rating seeking tools who do FAR more damage to America by their fictitious so-called history lessons and I hope that when history is written about them, it will accurately depict them as the con-men of the media that they are.

The No BS President?

I just finished reading President Obama's interview in Rolling Stone magazine and I have to say, I continue to be impressed with him overall.

I know there are some in this country that hate all democrats just because they're democrats. I think that attitude is very nihilistic. I didn't support Bush Jr because there were so many issues I didn't agree with his administration about. Not the least of which was his out-of-control spending and complete denial that lack of financial regulation was going to almost destroy our economy. Republican pundits say that TARP is an example of egregious spending. Obama says:

"The truth of the matter is that TARP will end up costing probably less than $100 billion, when all is said and done. Which I promise you, two years ago, you could have asked any economist and any financial expert out there, and they would have said, 'We'll take that deal.'"

$100 billion. That's 1/8 of the cost of retaining the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. I want to scream at today's republicans who have the nerve to say Obama's spending is out of control: "Where were you eight years ago?!?" Where were you when Bush and the republican led congress passed a $1 trillion prescription drug plan completely unpaid for and with an infamous doughnut hole in coverage that left many elderly facing bankruptcy to buy their medication? Where were you when Bush brought America into two wars? I don't ask, because I know. They were shivering under a blanket of fear that any day a terrorist was going to blow up a Wal-Mart in middle America. What? We could get attacked? Quick! Throw education, the elderly, our children's financial futures, and the Bill of Rights under the bus! We need to send troops to any country with muslims in it to "get the terrorists there before they get us here".

Republicans may be proud of holding up that they're the party of "Hell No!" but I think it's beyond the pale to be the party of hell no when the president is democrat and the party of rubber stamps when he's republican. Obama was asked about when he first realized that he may not get the bipartisan support he campaigned about:

Well, I'll tell you that given the state of the economy during my transition, between my election and being sworn in, our working assumption was that everybody was going to want to pull together, because there was a sizable chance that we could have a financial meltdown and the entire country could plunge into a depression. So we had to work very rapidly to try to create a combination of measures that would stop the free-fall and cauterize the job loss.

I still remember going over to the Republican caucus to meet with them and present our ideas, and to solicit ideas from them before we presented the final package. And on the way over, the caucus essentially released a statement that said, "We're going to all vote 'No' as a caucus." And this was before we'd even had the conversation. At that point, we realized that we weren't going to get the kind of cooperation we'd anticipated. The strategy the Republicans were going to pursue was one of sitting on the sidelines, trying to gum up the works, based on the assumption that given the scope and size of the recovery, the economy probably wouldn't be very good, even in 2010, and that they were better off being able to assign the blame to us than work with us to try to solve the problem.

We hear from so many pundits who make the issues our country faces seem so simple. Politicians dumb down issues to soundbites and rhetoric to appeal to the 5 second attention span of our citizens (are you still reading this?). Republican's recent "Pledge to America" is an example of this rhetoric. What will you do? Balance the budget! Control spending! Cut taxes! How? (cricket cricket cricket):

Yeah. I thought Obama said this best:

One of the things that you realize when you're in my seat is that, typically, the issues that come to my desk — there are no simple answers to them. Usually what I'm doing is operating on the basis of a bunch of probabilities: I'm looking at the best options available based on the fact that there are no easy choices. If there were easy choices, somebody else would have solved it, and it wouldn't have come to my desk.

That's true for financial regulatory reform, that's true on Afghanistan, that's true on how we deal with the terrorist threat. On all these issues, you've got a huge number of complex factors involved. When you're sitting outside and watching, you think, "Well, that sounds simple," and you can afford to operate on the basis of your ideological predispositions. What I'm trying to do — and certainly what we've tried to do in our economic team — is to keep a North Star out there: What are the core principles we're abiding by? In the economic sphere, my core principle is that America works best when you've got a growing middle class, and you've got ladders so that people who aren't yet in the middle class can aspire to the middle class, and if that broad base is rolling, then the country does well.

Read the whole interview here. You won't regret it. Unless, of course, you want to continue to hold on to your beliefs that Obama's a socialist, anti-colonialist, muslim, racist who's out to destroy the very fabric this country's built on. Then you might regret it.

Mob Mentality in Oakland

One of the reasons I don't have much faith in our ability to survive as a race of humans is our inability to reason as individuals during emotional times. I'm certainly not saying that all humans suffer from this inability, but enough do to cause great concern.

Consider the BART police ruling yesterday. Let's set aside the anarchists who are essentially professional instigators and show up at these types of things to get people riled up. Let's also set aside Oscar's family, who can be expected - I suppose - to be unhappy with any ruling other than the death penalty. I'm more concerned about the guy sitting on a park bench who hears the ruling (but none of the testimony, none of the evidence) and says, "Oh that's bad. This is a bad ruling." Really?

The rules of jury trials are that the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt that a given set of circumstances exist before convicting. These rules are in place to protect all of us. If you were accused of a crime, you'd certainly appreciate them. But those who are joining the masses in angry protest aren't concerned with petty details like due process. They want someone's head on a platter - some probably want this literally. These are people who can't be bothered with reasonable thoughts like, "Why should I punish this shop owner who's just trying to make a living by trashing her store and taking/destroying what doesn't belong to me? It's about me dammit! My anger. My frustration. My ___________."

Well, it isn't about you, Mr. protestor. The person it's about is gone now. He had his life taken from him by someone who probably shouldn't have made the cut in officer training because he got panicked and confused under pressure. But that doesn't mean he woke up that morning thinking he wanted to kill someone. Mr. Protestor, you have a right to your opinion. You have a right to express it forcefully. Humanity hopes that you'll reason your opinion with fact. But you do not have a right to destroy or steal other people's property. That is a crime and you will be arrested. When you are sitting in court with a jury, I hope the DA presents your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt before you are convicted.

Hypocrisy and Gay Marriage

Anyone who knows me well, knows that I'd rather be called an asshole than a hypocrite. There seems to be something in my past (that I've honestly yet to put my finger on) that really makes hypocrites one of my least favorite types of people. I'd argue that the more you believe in your principles and live your life by them, the less likely you are to do something hypocritical. The most famous hypocrites among us have financial incentives behind their "principles". People like Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Palin profit from riling up the real bigots in this country, while often secretly engaging in the kind of behavior that they protest so passionately. I firmly believe that bigots should be led by real bigots rather than these phony profiteers.

Speaking of hypocrites and bigots, I want to congratulate Rush Limbaugh who just celebrated his fourth marriage. According to Wikipedia, Limbaugh was first married in 1977 and divorced in 1980. In 1983, he remarried again and then divorced in 1990. In 1994, he took vow number three to be there through sickness and in health until death do they part and divorced again in 2004. A few days ago, he took his fourth shot at it.

Now Rush is full of all kinds of uncomfortable golf clap comments about gay people. You know, high school politics like this:

• Democrats will "bend over, grab the ankles, and say, 'Have your way with me'" to African American and gay voters.
• "When a gay person turns his back on you, it is anything but an insult; it's an invitation."
• “…let’s say we discover the gene that says the kid’s gonna be gay. How many parents, if they knew before the kid was gonna be born, [that he] was gonna be gay, they would take the pregnancy to term? Well, you don’t know but let’s say half of them said, 'Oh, no, I don’t wanna do that to a kid.' [Then the] gay community finds out about this. The gay community would do the fastest 180 and become pro-life faster than anybody you’ve ever seen. … They’d be so against abortion if it was discovered that you could abort what you knew were gonna be gay babies.”

So Limbaugh's homophobic credentials are real and valid, but he's also been a strong supporter of Prop 8 and opponent of gay marriage. The main argument being that the sanctity of traditional marriage needs protection. And for once I agree with Rush. Marriage needs protection from serial grooms like him, so let's work on making divorce illegal! Anyone? Anyone?

As Glenn Greenwald said on Salon.com, "As is so often the case, the Traditional Marriage movement is led by people who discard their wives and get new younger replacements the way most people change underwear." Glenn, neglected to mention the ones who end up getting caught with male prostitutes again and again or at gay bars. Let's not forget Newt Gingrich who is now on his third marriage. He divorced his first wife while she was recovering from cancer surgery and married his second wife just six months later. Both his second and third brides were former adulterous mistresses.

So today, as closing arguments for the trial challenging prop 8 occur, I ask this simple question... When do the anti-gay marriage people realize that the people they're following are hypocrites? When do they wake up to the fact that they just need to get over their "icky" factor and realize that gay marriage is about two people loving each other and wanting to publicly commit?

No part of gay marriage is about sex. Everyone knows that sex disappears after you get married.

And the Circle is Complete

I'm sure you've all heard the story of the Apple engineer who accidentally left his prototype iPhone in a bar in Silicon Valley. Gizmodo paid 5 G's to get their hands on it after it was found. They published pictures galore, etc. Millions of hits later, Apple called and asked for it back (thereby confirming it was the genuine deal). It was promptly returned. The employee was probably chained to a wall and whipped for hours until Steve was satisfied that he had lost enough blood. The free press that Apple received over the episode probably benefited them immensely. That should have been the end of the story.

Unfortunately, no. Apple has completed the transition to Evil Empire. It seems that a special computer crimes unit in silicon valley called "REACT", a name usually associated with a complete lack of forethought before acting, lived up to its name and busted down the door (literally) of the Gizmodo editor's apartment and served a search warrant. They confiscated numerous computers and other personal items.

Now forget for the moment that Journalists are protected by law (and a few Supreme Court decisions) from this type of thing. What kind of DICK at Apple or the DA's office decided that this matter was worth pursuing like this? It's not like the editors knocked out a janitor at Apple, stole his badge, put on his uniform, and snuck on campus to steal the damn thing! Some poor bastard left it behind. It was bound to happen eventually. Even in perfect Steve Land. As if this wasn't enough, an Apple employee was fired for showing Steve Wozniak a 3G version of the iPad and Wozniak is not only an original co-founder of Apple, but he's still an Apple employee!

Apple is becoming has become the Microsoft that I've hated for 25 years. Steve Jobs' need for secrecy, once something I understood and agreed with, has become like some kind of paranoid obsession. Steve himself seems to be becoming more and more like Howard Hughes as the years march on.

Those of you who know me well, know that my commitment to Apple has not been surpassed by many. I've devoted at least 25 years to supporting and evangelizing for the company. I don't blame Apple for protecting its designs and I know Steve has been burnt by people he trusted (Bill Gates and Eric Schmidt come to mind) but the reason that there is an Apple cult is because people root for the underdog. Apple fans have always hoped for power and success for Apple because we always trusted that Steve would never do with it what Bill (and increasingly Eric) are doing with it.

Apple's aggression towards Adobe, it's censorship of the iPad and iPhone store, and the recent legal activity (going after the little guy) have convinced me that Apple is no longer the company it once was. Instead, it's become a secretive behemoth dictating how it's devices will be used and threatening and punishing those who dare to "think different". I hope I'm wrong.

No one likes a bully, Steve. You've made an enemy of a blog that mostly writes favorably about Apple, gives tons of free press, and generally helps you build anticipation for your big releases. Nice work.

Atheism vs. Religiousness

I'm finding Sam Harris' book "The End of Faith" and the movie "Religulous" from Bill Maher to be quite convincing on the topic of religion. Both Harris and Maher make the point that religious moderates should consider that their moderate beliefs are still perpetuating (and enabling) the religion that the extremists use to justify all the "bad" things that happen in politics (and terrorism). Both believe that religious moderates (people who don't necessarily go to church regularly but still align themselves to a given religion) should stand up and walk away from their religions and I'm finding it difficult to argue otherwise.

The biggest problem I have with the entire debate, however, is the use of atheism as the opposite of religiousness. Atheism is a belief that there is no God. What of the millions and millions of people who believe in a higher power but don't believe in any structured religion? When I use the word God in conversation, I'm referring to an energy that I believe we are all part of, not some gray-haired man in the sky who judges us. My "God" is a lot more secure than any earthly religions make "Him" out to be. As Maher says perfectly: "Why would God be a jealous god? I know people who've gotten over jealousy." Religionists want me to believe that God is so powerful that "He" can prevent me from lifting my little finger if He so chose, yet He isn't powerful enough to not create me as a gay man if that's what He wished (or defeat the devil who planted it in me if that's what you believe).

The problem with Harris, Maher, Christopher Hitchens and many other Atheists is that they want to throw God out with the religious bathwater. They speak of the proof that the Big Bang happened and can trace molecules from that explosion to our current selves through evolution. Some even go so far as to say that the Big Bang is cyclical and that the universe "exhales" and "inhales" over Sagan's "billions and billions of years without end". Ok fine. I agree. My next question for all of them is, "What or who started that cycle?" Asking that question doesn't mean I believe in a talking snake or a burning bush. It simply means that I'm willing to accept that there is more to this universe than our smartest scientific minds can understand and I'm ok calling that territory "God" even if the line keeps moving more towards the "know" column over time. This belief means that I have to be a good person because I choose to be, not because some religion guilts me into it or because I fear for the repercussions from an angry god upon my death.

I know very few atheists. I know many, many people who believe in a higher power. By "higher", they mean higher than they are. Able to rise above petty human emotions such as guilt, anger, vengefulness, and judgment. You know. The stuff of which almost every religious text seems to be based.

The Toyota Backlash

As an owner of a 2008 Toyota Camry Hybrid, I've had quite a few people ask me if I've taken the car in for its recall. Undoubtably the questions are stemming from an unbelievable amount of negative press that Toyota has been getting lately. To clear things up, there are two recalls: One that can trap the gas pedal under the floor mat and one where the pedal can remain stuck down without interference from the floor mat. My car is involved with the former, but not the latter.

But let's examine this a bit. The most famous case of death from the floor mat issue was when four people died in a Lexus because the gas pedal got stuck under a floor mat. I listened to to the audio of the 911 call. It must have been terrifying and my heart goes out to the family of the victims, but I have to wonder: How could the driver, an off-duty CHP officer, not have had the clarity of mind to simply put the car in neutral and press the emergency break slowly? He had time to call 911, but no time to think of any other maneuvers? I'm shocked that of four people in the car, no one thought to do that (or just DID IT without thinking). In the recording, the driver says, "we have no brakes". I can only assume that's either because these people were extremely unlucky enough to have the brakes fail when the gas pedal got stuck or he'd been holding them down to try to counter the stuck gas pedal for so long and they were probably so hot that they were no longer effective. This means that he'd been trying to solve the problem for at least 5 minutes or so before calling 911. Trying everything except turning the car off or putting it in neutral.

As it turns out, this is a problem if you replace your stock floor mats with some all weather type. You know the kind. The ones with the steep rim around the outer edger to contain any water your shoes bring with them on a rainy day. That edge can trap the gas pedal underneath it. Is it just me or does this seem to be the fault of 1) the owners for using aftermarket mats and 2) the mat manufacturer? Toyota's letter which went out to consumers says that "no defect exists in vehicles in which the driver's floor mat is compatible with the vehicle and properly secured." (my emphasis)

That this issue has resulted in even a single death amazes me. Have you ever taken your shoes off while driving and left them in your footwell? I have. And I've had one of them catch the gas pedal and pin it down. It was jarring to say the least, but I solved the problem in seconds (and have learned not to leave my shoes there). But unless you're in a Corvette, seconds of the gas pedal being stuck are not going to send you into hyperspace ok? At worse, I can imagine a rear-ender where you're at fault.

Now the second recall, where the gas pedal gets stuck down is caused by a different issue. Many of today's cars do not connect the gas pedal directly to the motor. Instead, the gas pedal is like the dimmer switch in your living room. It merely sends voltage to the computer and the computer decides what to do. For example, in my car, if I put it in neutral and floor it, nothing happens. The car just rejects the command for more gas. In my Corvette, this would also happen if the rear wheels lost traction. No matter how much gas I'm giving it, the engine's computer would just say, "Nope."

Well, this fly-by-wire mechanism can feel kind of light on the loafers, so Toyota installed a metal bar that resists the motion of your foot to make you feel like you're actually moving something when you press the gas. In some rare circumstances (and I'm guessing colder/saltier climates), this mechanism can cause the gas pedal to get stuck. This IS Toyota's fault, but I still fail to see how anyone could die from this. The same response applies. Neutral, Emergency brake slowly applied. Let me make this easy. If the car's in neutral, it doesn't MATTER what the gas pedal is doing. Problem solved. So the only people who are dying from this appear to be people who are panicking. I want to get a bumper sticker that says, "I can put my Toyota in neutral in less than 3 seconds. Can you?"

I recently read that a lady who drove through the wall of a store while parking is suing Toyota because her gas pedal was stuck. Lady, you're parking. Why do you have the gas pedal down at all? If it's stuck anywhere, it should be UP. I suspect that she did what many inexperienced or older drivers do which is press the gas instead of the brake while she was parking but might as well cash in on Toyota's red face, huh?

I think Toyota has acted responsibly and quickly and all this negative press (and congressional hearings? Are you frigging kidding me?) are waaaaay over the top. But isn't that who we are now as a people?

To the president of Toyota, I apologize for the way my country has treated you. You'll have to excuse us. For many years, we made pieces of shit that used to go through recalls all the time (with no congressional hearings) and we're a little upset that yours have been relatively great. So now that there's a nick in the armor, you can count on us to tear you to shreds. Ford's new slogan: "Buy Ford, because Toyota's trying to kill you."

As Dennis Miller says, "It's time we started taking responsibility for ourselves instead of suing the inventor of the fork because we have a fat ass."

Apple iPad Falls Flat (For me at least)

They've already started. Text messages, emails, and phone calls about what I think about Apple's latest device. As the Mac evangelist in my social circle, it might surprise you to know that I'm pretty disappointed.

While there's plenty to be excited about with iBooks and iWork, the rest is pretty much an overblown iPod Touch complete with all the limitations of that device plus a few extras. For example, I can't for the life of me understand why Apple continues to shun Adobe Flash support. It's ubiquitous on the Internet! It even showed up in Steve Job's demo when he went to the New York Times website. The camera just sat there staring at a giant broken gear icon that took up a bunch of the screen. Lack of Flash support is my single biggest complaint with my iPhone. Period. I can't imagine my demeanor about it would improve while looking at that same broken gear on an even bigger screen with a faster processor and a bigger battery. Steve thinks Flash is a CPU/Battery hog. Fair enough. I think $500+ is a lot of money for a computer with that kind of handicap.

Steve pointed out that YouTube looks amazing, blah blah. Okay, the problem is I still run into 40-50% of the videos on YouTube that are "unsupported" on the iPhone/iTouch/iPad, presumably because they're formatted in Flash FLV files (see above).

Another disappointment: No front facing camera. Imagine the possibilities if that were included. Families and businesses could have face to face video phone calls across the Internet using iChat. Including it makes the device a game changer in terms of potential market.

Another disappointment: No Infrared transmitter. Imagine the application potential if this thing had an IR transmitter that was accessible to the SDK. Another game changer in terms of potential market. This thing could be the smart remote everyone dreams of for their home theaters.

No multi-tasking? Yeah I get it with the early phones. Not powerful enough, not enough battery. But what's the excuse now? Why can't I launch the XM Radio app, tune into my favorite channel, then switch to iWork and work on a spreadsheet?

I'm getting comfortable with built-in batteries, but I still can't figure out why Apple won't put a damn flash memory slot on the device. It would allow users to move files around and expand storage. Its omission makes no sense.

I also noticed that the Mail app seems cobbled and oversimplified just like the iPhone's version is. In the iPhone version, I can't, for example, color-code messages, edit rules, create folders, add an attachment while creating a message (like from my iDisk or photo collection). The iPad Mail interface looks the same so I doubt that any of these shortcomings are being addressed.

And what about wifi syncing? Give me a friggin break, Apple! I'm sitting on my couch with a fast wireless network and you won't let the device talk to my main machine to give and get information and media? I should be able to do this from any wifi hotspot. It's absolutely an insane and intentional omission.

And I still can't make a friggin folder on the home screen? Really? I've actually stopped buying applications because I'm tired of reaching across five screens to get to them all. Have you factored THAT into your "billions downloaded" statistic?

People accuse me of "drinking the Kool-Aid" all the time when it comes to Apple. I always reply that I'm one of Apple's biggest critics. I just don't often find much to criticize. The iPad is definitely worth criticizing. I think Steve Jobs is flat out wrong when he says that the iPad surfs the Internet better than a laptop. Why? Because it's touch screen? Hey Steve, go touch that broken gear and see if that helps you see 30-40% of what's worth seeing on the Internet.

Most of these issues can be resolved in software. But since we're looking at the 3rd generation of the iPhone OS, I'm quite pessimistic about Apple adding them or they would have done it already.

I'm not buying one of these things. As much of an Apple guy as I am, I don't think this rises far enough above the experience I already pay for - my iPhone - to justify another $500+ device that still can't do the things much less capable devices from competitors can.

This thing is perfect for technophobic people who just want to get email and surf the web. For those of us who do more than that, well, it just falls flat. Back to the drawing board Apple. I wish I could share your excitement, but I can't.

The Republican Party... As Told By Monty Python

Before I launch off onto a little rant, let me get some vocabulary straight because in addition to millions, billions, and trillions, we've also been throwing around a few different terms and I think we're getting them all confused:

Progressive/Democrat: A Liberal who doesn't like the word 'Liberal' any longer because it sounds too much like they lie around all day hugging trees and animals. Generally believes that government should even the playing field as much as possible. Centrists believe in equal opportunity, not equal outcome. Leftists believe in equal opportunity AND outcome.

Liberal: Previous term for Progressive. Now associated with the Left Wing Nuts of the Democratic Party.

Conservative: A person who believes in small government, an open, competitive playing field where the haves can have more and the have nots are there to work in the jobs that make the haves, have more. Centrists believe in a base level of dignity and then you gotta fight for what you get after that. Rightists will step on the bleeding bodies of children to get more stuff.

Republican: Used to be conservative. Now they believe in swelling national debts (as long as the debt is created while taking over a country that has oil and is created by a president they elect) and making sure anyone who makes them uncomfortable is denied as many rights as possible.

To quote George Carlin, "Republicans wanna tell you what to do with your baby before it's born. They don't give a shit about it afterwards."

That being said, I consider myself Conservative. If the Republicans ever lose the Palins, go back to their core mission of making government smaller and cost less, I'll be all over it. Until then, I can only pray that they do put Sarah Palin (and her two tits) up against Barack Obama in 2012. I would be glued to the TV during every debate. Popcorn anyone?

When I watched the Tea Party videos, it crystalized the issue for me. Just like the Liberals have ruined the term for Democrats, the Glen Becks of the world are ruining the word Republican. Whenever I get one of these riveting emails about how Barack Obama was not born in the U.S.A. (Incidentally, McCain was born in Panama. Look it up.) it makes me think of this wonderful clip from Monty Python...

The thing about this video is that it shows a few important parallels to the tea baggers. First, the crowd basically just wants to burn the witch and will create whatever "facts" are necessary to do so. Secondly, the logic to do the burning is so tortured and twisted that it makes almost no sense.

Think about this folks. The Glen Beck's and Sean Hannity's of the world are no different than these folks in the crowd screaming "Burn her!". Are you in the crowd? Or are you laughing like I am because of how ridiculous it all sounds? I wish it were funny.

How to Become Cynical of the Media

If you're not already cynical that the mainstream press is all about soundbites and twisting stories into ratings, I have a fantastic way for you to become so. Just pick a day, any day, and listen to a press conference with Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. I catch these almost daily on POTUS (XM Radio Channel 130). One happens just about every day and it is extremely important that you catch one unedited, unfiltered.

It's the only time I scream at my radio.

The questions that these reporters ask are so unbelievably stupid that they border on questionable mental retardation. In response to reporters asking about Jimmy Carter's remark that Obama's opponents are racist, Gibbs will say, "The president does not believe that Senator Wilson is racist." but that won't do. No no. The next six reporters will ask "followup questions" (which is code for, I'm going to keep asking until you say something I can put on the air in under 10 seconds). From this morning's conference:

Q What impact does it have when a former President of the United States, someone who came from the South, someone who worked against discrimination all of his career, says that the -- what was it -- an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity is because he's black? What effect does that have on the country when a former President says that?

MR. GIBBS: Look, you know, it adds to -- it adds to our dialogue. I'm just simply saying I don't think the President agrees with that.

Q Why then -- you're saying -- I mean, should he be participating in this -- I think that seems to be what we're all asking. Will the President -- I mean, the former President is raising this. It's, again, (inaudible), but, I mean, isn't it, at this point, incumbent upon the President to say, you know what, no, I don't agree with him?

MR. GIBBS: I said that on his behalf, Chuck.

Duh duh duh! Then later...

Q Robert, did the President see President Carter's remarks and read them, in full?

MR. GIBBS: I doubt it. Not that he doesn't watch NBC, but --

Q No, but he did not -- you don't think he did?

MR. GIBBS: Not that I know of.

Q Did he talk to President Carter?

MR. GIBBS: No.

Q Has President Carter ever expressed his concern to him privately?

MR. GIBBS: I don't know when the last time they talked was, and I doubt that this was a topic of their conversation.

Q What does he say privately to -- do folks bring this up to him? Do supporters? --Has this been brought up to him?

MR. GIBBS: Chuck, what the President says privately is what I just shared with you publicly as is my role as his spokesperson.

So that was just today. I promise you, you will detest today's media after just one listening. If you want tough questions, hard hitting journalism that's not afraid to go after the truth, you don't want our sound-bite chasers disguised as reporters.

Stay Out of School So You're Not Told to Stay in School

So one of the big stories going on this week aside from healthcare insurance reform is the president's planned speech to school kids across the nation. The right is up in arms over it, claiming that it's the president infusing his communistic doctrine directly into our delicate flower children's ears! Shortly after our kids hear this speech, Jewish people and homosexuals will begin being herded into death camps and Der Furer will have risen! Get a grip people!

I was listening to a right talk show where a (seemingly rational) host said, "By telling my kids to stay in school and study hard, the president is doing my job as a parent and I'm offended by that. I fully intend to hold my kid out of school that day." Really? Way to fail at parenting. Take your kid out of school so instead of learning an entire day's lesson plan, he'll watch violence on TV or play Grand Theft Auto all day on his friend's XBOX bashing old ladies over the head for their money and car.

A teacher wrote in to Andrew's blog and said,

"Two years ago we had a student bring what looked like an improvised explosive device into school, toss it in a trash can and flee the building. Luckily it was not explosive, but the school went into a lockdown for two hours while the building was secured and the student apprehended. There was one staff e-mail and one automated phone call to the parents.

The teacher said that this same principal had already updated the school's website to indicate that the speech will not be mandatory, told teachers that parents must be notified if they are going to play it in the classroom, sent out two emails, and used the district's automated phone system to call parents to tell them that no teacher was going to show it live. Wow. You'd think we were broadcasting a message from Osama instead of Obama.

I had a friend ask me, "Would you be this upset about the opposition if it was Bush making this speech?" (In actuality, Bush Sr. DID do this, but that's besides the point.) If George W. wanted to get on TV and tell all the kids to study hard and stay in school, I'd be all for it! Who wouldn't? Ohhhhh.. Idiots who put their politics ahead of common sense. That's who. I happen to think it means more coming from a black president who fought racism and worked his way up from being poor to going to law school to becoming a law professor to becoming a Congressman to a Senator to the President of the United States than it means coming from a guy who got into Harvard because his dad was a politician and who's remembered by one of his Harvard professors as a "pathological lier" who would "deny saying something he just said 30 seconds ago" but I think the message is important and valid no matter who says it.

Yes, I heard that, before it was changed, the study guide that went along with the president's speech said something like, "Write a short paragraph about how you can help the president." Would it be less offensive if it said, "Write a short paragraph about how you can help the country."? Where have I heard that before... Oh yeah! "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." It's pure brainwashing I tell you.

The loud, extremes of both sides of politics need to calm the fuck down. I'm getting so tired of hearing from the five loudest assholes at the town hall meeting just because they bring ratings to the news channel.

If you're a parent who's holding your kid out of class because the president is going to tell him or her to stay in school and study hard, you should really stop, face a mirror, and take a long look at the parent you are. I hope your kid drops out when he's 15 and tells you that his pregnant girlfriend is moving in with you. You should be pretty proud of your boy at that point because he went directly against advice from the president that you so hate.

What's Wrong With This Generation?

It's rant time again. All I can say is OMG. I mean, Oh my GOD! This generation is getting so lazy these days. Have you noticed? The final straw that severed the proverbial camel's back was when I watched a trailer for the National Geographic Channel. Did you know that they are no longer called the National Geographic Channel? Nope. Way to many syllables. It's now called "Nat Geo". Are you kidding me? National Geographic Channel takes too long? Do they realize by dropping the last word (Magazine or Channel) the title isn't even proper English any more? Nat Geo has good company. Mickey D's, IHOP, KFC, BK, hell even the President of the United States' previously internal nickname POTUS is starting to go mainstream.

I think this is stemming from an overall laziness that is pervasive in this generation. If it can't be completed in under 10 minutes, it is worth procrastinating about, abbreviating, or ignoring. We're heading for a wall at 100 MPH. Am I the only one who sees this? Almost everything I've achieved in my life that was worth having took lots of time (and no insignificant amount of failure along the way) to get. This generation is so ADD ridden that they move on when gratification isn't instant enough or it doesn't come easily and that doesn't bode well for our future as a society.

At the risk of sounding like my parents, here are some of my pet peeves about this generation.

• It's "Lose" not "Loose". I know it's confuusing but not all long vowel sounds need too bee doubled up. If you fail at life, you're a loser, not a looser. Looser describes how your jeans fit after *losing* weight.
• It takes more syllables to say "WTF" than it does to say what it stands for. Yes I know it's to save typing but people are saying it now too.
• If someone asks you a question and your default response is "I don't know" or "I don't care", you fail. Take 10 seconds (throw an "um" in there if you need a stall tactic) and actually think. I know this is really hard, but pretend you're learning a new video game or something. It's bad enough that we're getting obese in this country because we sit around like the fat humans in WALL-E, but now our brains too? Take a few seconds, form an opinion and be open-minded to change it. Not too tough and your brain will thank you for the exercise. Oh, and the person who asked you the question won't think you're a lazy, illiterate, mouth breathing water head.
• If you boil all of your responses into three different words: "Ridiculous", "Snazzy", and "Unfortunate" you are missing out on a rainbow of very descriptive terms that encourage conversation much more effectively. For example, if someone spends 30-60 seconds explaining why they're frustrated and you respond with "That's unfortunate" what you're really telling that person is, "Shut the hell up."
• If someone says you seem angry and you respond with, "I'm not mad", I'd argue you haven't said anything. You're also not a chicken. Why not cut to the chase and say what you are instead of wasting both of our times with what you aren't. Stop telling me what you're not thinking, feeling and wanting.
• If you believe that everything happens TO YOU and that you're just an unfortunate punching bag for life, here is your professional victim badge. Get away from me in case it rubs off.
• No one "Makes you feel" anything. They do what they do and you feel how you feel. Try it on and see how it fits.
• If you're a person who thinks all things worth knowing can be achieved 1) Without a book, 2) On the Internet, or 3) Inside of one hour, I'm sure your boss at the construction site will agree with you. The owner of the construction company likely will not, however.
• Conversely, if you think all great things in life follow achieving a PhD, I'd suggest that you haven't fleshed out what "great things in life" means yet. There's learning while you go and there's learning instead of going. All things in moderation.
• If you need something and that something isn't nourishment, oxygen, shelter, sleep, or a bathroom, I'd suggest you've gotten priorities mixed up. If you want to watch someone from this generation go crazy, take away their cell phone. You'd think you were depriving them of life itself. Needing something makes it very powerful. How do you control someone? Control what they think they need. Want to avoid being controlled? Avoid needing things that you can't control yourself and even then, be able to drop it whenever other real needs take precedence.
• If your boss tells you that he wants to know when you're going to be in next week and you think that's too restrictive, you really should get the silver spoon out of your mouth and come down from whatever cloud you're on to plant your feet here in the real world. Slap your parents while you're at it.
• If you think you're being rebelliously different by doing stuff to your body that your parent's wouldn't, you're a follower, not a leader. Enjoy the whistling sound those giant holes in your ear lobes make while you're 82 having a double-shot, decaf, two-pump, non-fat, extra hot, vanilla latte with your friends.
• If you're under 30 and smoke, you are probably one of the stupidest people I know. You should definitely look in the mirror and decide why making Johnny like you in high school was more important than not becoming Phillip Morris' personal bitch.

I'm painting with a wide brush, I know, but it's not overly wide. If you don't believe me, go take a class at a college right now. Sit there and watch the almost pathological sense of entitlement we have put into this generation. I don't blame the kids entirely, I blame the parents. Love is not saying yes and shielding your kid from every possible thing that can go wrong. Love is teaching your kid how to cope with life as it happens. Love is paying attention to what your kids are doing instead of getting so wrapped up in your career and hobbies that they're forced to learn these skills from Grand Theft Auto. At this, it is my generation that has failed.

Checks and Balances

So this morning I got a nice surprise when I woke up. An email from Chase (Washington Mutual's purchaser) that my checking account was overdrawn. I thought, "Huh? That's not possible. I just deposited my paycheck two days ago!"

It seems that my bank noticed that the check wasn't endorsed by me so they took the money back out of the account and sent the check back to me via snail mail (I've yet to receive it). The reason this pissed me off is that for at least 15 years, I've never and I mean not once signed a check that I've deposited into the ATM. This applies to at least three different banks. It's bad enough that the bank refused the deposit, but instead of calling me, they just dropped it in the mail - essentially putting the entire deposit in limbo and making me powerless (and nearly penniless) until the post office gets around to delivering it. I was livid.

I mentioned to the supervisor I spoke with this morning that you teach people how to treat you and 15 years is a long time to go to suddenly decide, "You know what? We're going to start enforcing this." A letter would have been nice as would a phone call from the branch when they emptied the machine out and noticed the problem. I would have happily went to the bank and signed the check and learned my lesson. Instead I have to learn it by having all of my money taken away for four days.

It would be like speeding past the same cop at 65 in a 55 for fifteen years then one morning he pulls you over for it. Does it make it right to speed? No. But it's still a little shitty.

Systemic Failure?

Here's what I hear the congressman saying... "Don't confront me with the facts, I'm busy defending my own ass." Wait, incontrovertible evidence? "lalalalalalala, I'm not listening to you lalalalalalala"

What a bunch of political BULLSHIT. I get so tired of listening to these guys dance around the word torture. "Enhanced Interrogation", "Systemic failure" PLEASE!

I'm glad this is all on video. Because when the next captured American gets this same treatment, and clowns like this are interviewed and call for war because "they're torturing our people!" then all of us can juxtapose the two video clips and play them over and over so everyone can see what hypocrites they are.

My favorite part? "Who do you blame?"

"You know, I think we have a lot of blame-gaming."

Yeah. That's it. It's not holding the Executive Branch accountable for defending the Constitution*. It's blame-gaming. I think I'm going to be ill.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

* I'd like to remind folks that the Presidential oath says that they swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. It does NOT say protect and defend the people and land of the United States even if it means tossing the Constitution out the window.

Keep the Hype In Perspective, You Swine

GOD I'm getting tired of reading about the swine flu. Enough, ok? Jesus. According to the CDC, anywhere from 13 to 52 million people get the common flu every year and roughly 36,000 people die of it every year. 36,000. Every. Year.

So far, the swine flu has around 2,000 cases and 149 deaths, but it's taken up 100% more media time than the common flu (to which there is also no cure). Let's keep it together people. Seriously.

Even More Reason to Disconnect

Oh my GOD. Cell phone companies SUCK. I just called AT&T to find out what things will be like while I'm in Canada. Get this:

• .50/sent text message, unlimited received included in my current plan
• Calls are .79/min or if I pay the $5.00 mafia charge, they lower it to .59/min - incoming or outgoing
• Data is $5.00 per MB or I can get $20 MB for $24.99

Here's what this translates to: My phone will be in Airplane mode while I'm in Canada, meaning calls will go straight to voicemail. I will be asking friends and family to email me for communication and will turn it on only when I can use Skype (meaning when my phone has wi-fi). I expect to have wi-fi at most of my hotels and there are some free wi-fi spots along the way. This impacts me from June 18-29. I'm traveling in the states from June 13-18 and re-enter the U.S. border on June 29.

The Gay Lifestyle

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.