Good Luck Charm

18.September.2006 at 13:25 (+0000) by Shinzou

Those of you who know our friend Robin here at One Stack Mind would have to agree, he’s never been much of a football fan.  Sure, he’s played some football videogames and sat through a game or two on TV, but he would be the first to admit that it ended there.  That all changed one early January evening.

You see, ol’ Rob (as he loves to be called) was talked into taking a trip to Atlanta for the Sugar Bowl.  At first, he just went along for the fun of travel.  By the time that he left Atlanta, however, he was bleeding blue and gold.  (For those who don’t follow WVU football, WVU defeated Georgia 38-35 in the Sugar Bowl.)

Robin has been to every WVU football game since that bowl win.  The Mountaineers have yet to lose with him in the stands.  They are currently 3-0, ranked 4th in the nation, and have outscored their opponents 139-37 this year (177-72 if you include the Sugar Bowl).

There’s a new Mountaineer fan among us.  And for the rest of the WVU fans out there, he couldn’t be more welcome.  Some may see a fair-weather fan.  I see a good luck charm.

Nintendo is Evil because…

16.September.2006 at 17:35 (+0000) by Robin S.

Aimless Gaming Rant. Please disregard.

I’m fairly certain that when Nintendo is being attacked as a greedy money-grubbing corporation and Sony and Microsoft are being praised by gaming geeks (there’s a lot of overlap between gaming geeks and computer geeks, and the latter group usually despises Microsoft) for being less greedy, something is very, very wrong with the universe.

See, Nintendo is making money every time they sell a Wii at the proposed $250 price point, and since it’s the only manufacturer to make hardware cheap enough to actually sell when priced above its manufacturing costs, that makes Nintendo evil.

Companies make money, or they die. Sony and Microsoft aren’t subsidizing the price of the PS3 and the Xbox 360 because they’re nice, they’re doing it because they think they can make money by selling lots and lots of copies of expensive games. And I hope they’re right, because I rather like gaming, and would hate to see the industry die.

Well, okay. I hope Microsoft’s right, anyway If Sony went down in a ball of fire, I wouldn’t shed a single tear. Sure, I own a PSP and a PS2, but I’ve played the two, combined for less than half the time that I spent on a single game (Pikmin) for the GameCube. (If you count the times I’ve used the PS2 as a DVD player, that’s less true.) They just weren’t fun.

If Nintendo can make a gaming system that is fun to play and cheap enough to make that they can sell it at a profit, more power to them.

I’m also seeing the complaint that Nintendo is using “inferior hardware” in the Wii, so it’s not truly a “next generation” system. It strikes me as a bit amusing that these are very likely the same people who would call me a heretic and burn me at the stake if I pointed out that the original Playstation, hardware-wise, belonged in the same generation as the Sega CD, but I digress…

I apparently need to repeat my basic philosophy on gaming systems, so you’ll have a better idea of where I stand on the issue of Nintendo’s “inferior” hardware: If Nintendo can make a gaming system that is fun to play and cheap enough to make that they can sell it at a profit, more power to them.

See how that says nothing about powerful hardware or cutting-edge graphics? I don’t care if a system can play really, really pretty movies (which, incidentally, was all that the previous Playstation systems could make pretty — the games themselves weren’t particularly impressive, most of the time). I care if the system can have games that are fun to play, and Nintendo has consistently proven that they make fun games, so I’m all for supporting the Wii (even with the stupid name).

Big Daddy Blasts Bush

14.September.2006 at 12:12 (+0000) by Shinzou

I really think that Robert C. Byrd has done a great deal for WV. I also think I liked him better when he didn’t talk so much. Take this for example.

Byrd criticized President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for repeatedly trying “to make the American public swallow whole the line that the war in Iraq is the front line of a global war on terror, which must be continued at all costs. Stay the course, they say, despite three years of discouragingly little progress in Iraq.”

I’m really tired of hearing this stuff. Bush and Cheney tried to trick us. The war is over oil. They are just trying to profit from the war. Blah blah blah. Everyone had the same intelligence (information, definitely not intellect). The Senate voted 77-23 for the war. The House voted 296-133 for it. So, either those who voted for the war thought that Iraq was a threat, or they are complete morons for being duped by a man portrayed as a dumb frat boy. Either way, it makes the current democratic stance weak.

I’m also tired of the complaining about ‘staying the course’. Byrd and others take every opportunity to complain, but have yet to offer a better idea. I agree that the situation in Iraq is far from ideal. So show me a better plan and I’ll be happy to back it. Until then, be quiet. (I’m also not going to accept a John Kerry-type plan as a better plan. You remember…the one that could be summarized as “I’m going to do everything that Bush says he’ll do. I’m just going to do it better and faster.)

“I cannot remember a time in our history when our elected leaders have failed the people so completely, and yet, so far, are not held accountable for costly misjudgments and outright deceptions.”

Of course, at his age, Byrd probably can’t remember what he had for breakfast either.

Bush says we’re not at war?

12.September.2006 at 16:03 (+0000) by Robin S.

McQ, at Q and O, takes offense at a quote from an interview with President Bush in the Wall Street Journal:

“And I think most Americans understand we’re vulnerable. But my hope was after 9/11, most Americans wouldn’t walk around saying, ‘My goodness, we’re at war. Therefore let us don’t live a normal life. Let us don’t invest.’ ” Mr. Bush calls it an “interesting contradiction” that he wants “people to understand the stakes of failure” in this conflict. But on the other hand, he also wants “the country to be able to grow, invest, save, expand, educate, raise their children.” This is another way of saying how hard it is for a democracy to maintain support for a war without a tangible, ominous enemy such as the Soviet Union or Imperial Japan.

The emphasized bit above is the bit that McQ emphasized in his post. He included the entire quote, but you’ll notice that he only highlighted the first bit of it, and then proceeds to act as though the last half never existed. When people in his comments called him out for doing that, he immediately defends himself by saying that the entire quote is there, and that his analysis is correct — President Bush doesn’t want want people to think we are at war.

I’m reminded of a quote from Xrlq’s sidebar. Xrlq quotes Glenn Reynolds as saying, “I… live in my mom’s basement.” The quote is accompanied by a link to the original quote (here), which reads, in its entirity, “I don’t live in my mom’s basement, either”.

The difference here, of course, is that Xrlq’s sidebar quote is (I assume) intended as a joke, whereas McQ (a blogger who I usually hold in very high regard) seems to think that chopping up Bush’s quote and claiming he said something very different from what he actually said is completely fair.

Imagine a Christian leader (we’ll call him “Reverend Doe”) who said, “God doesn’t want His people to say, ‘Adultery is evil, therefore Let us shun every man who even so much as looks at a woman who is not his wife in lust. Let us never forgive him.’” Imagine that the remainder of his speech was filled with all the reasons why we should remember that Christians are not perfect, but that we are forgiven, and therefore we should be forgiving of others who commit sins. Now, imagine that someone else comes up to you and says “Rev. Doe said that we shouldn’t say adultery is evil.” In context, it’s absolutely ludicrous to claim that Rev. Doe said that, yet that’s exactly what McQ is trying to do.

What makes it worse is that the point that McQ makes a good point in the comments:

Maybe its just me Mark, but I don’t want citizens walking away from the twin towers collapsing, the Pentagon getting hit and citizens causing a plane to crash before it could hit the White House and saying, “Nah, we’re not at war. No biggie. Everything is normal.”

That’s why this is all fading after 5 years for heaven sake. We’re no longer mad, we no longer want these pieces of crap dead, stomped on and burned to a cinder. We should still be fighting mad.

Instead we want to pretend everything is normal and peachy keen. Then he wonders why he gets so much static about FISA and Guantanemo, etc and why everything is so polarized.

That isn’t mutually exclusive with anything Bush said in that interview, though, as end of the paragraph quoted above shows (emphasis mine):

Mr. Bush calls it an “interesting contradiction” that he wants “people to understand the stakes of failure” in this conflict. But on the other hand, he also wants “the country to be able to grow, invest, save, expand, educate, raise their children.” This is another way of saying how hard it is for a democracy to maintain support for a war without a tangible, ominous enemy such as the Soviet Union or Imperial Japan.

Not wanting the country to devolve into a nation of citizens who’re too afraid of terrorists to do anything isn’t the same as a desire to see us bury our heads in the sand in an attempt to go back to 9/10/2001.

The American Eleven

10.September.2006 at 10:33 (+0000) by Robin S.

Can someone tell me if there’s a reason that Thunderbird and Firefox react to one another in Windows differently than they do in Linux? When I was using Linux, I got in the habit of clicking links in e-mails without thinking twice, because they opened in a new window. Now that I’ve switched back to Windows for the most part (for reasons that, honestly, I don’t quite recall), I still have that habit of clicking in Thunderbird links, only to discover that Firefox has used one of my already-open browser windows (containing something I’m reading, or worse, writing for this blog) to visit the link. It’s more than a bit frustrating, I have to say.

I spent the last couple of hours working on a point-by-point response to Newt Gingrich’s The American Eleven – A Values Led Plan for Victory in November, but I lost it because an incoming e-mail from Scopes caught my attention and I made the mistake of clicking on the link without making sure I had a new browser window open to catch it.

I may rewrite that post later, but it’s pretty much unnecessary, since I (mostly) agree with all of Newt’s points.

( þ Jeff the Baptist )