Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day brings me back

It reminds me of my favorite TV show when I was a kid: Reading Rainbow!

I demand chocolate

chocolate
No matter how bad your day gets, a little bit of chocolate can go a long way.

Zombies!

Zombies scare me. I think when they come I will probably hide behind someone else. Honest! I'm a total wuss when it comes to zombies. I like my brains intact, please. Maybe if they're the Shawn of the Dead kind, I'll try mimicking them, see if they notice. That looks like fun!

This is one classy act

It's totally up to you. I'm classy, all the way!

Just Cause Obama Said It, Doesn’t Mean It’ll Happen

… At least not right away.

I was just as excited as everybody else to hear Obama talk about bipartisanship and working together to fix the nation’s problems. Bravo to getting rid of the “stale old ideas” that leaders on both sides have been trying to use for decades. But as Congress moves into the trenches of the stimulus battle, it seems that just because “Obama said it”, doesn’t necessarily mean it’ll happen.

My favorite soundbite from early on in the stimulus discussion was about how the stimulus bill was going to be a mix of tax cuts and spending. To paraphrase: Dems traditionally look at spending to stimulate the economy, and Repubs look at tax cuts, and this is where they differ. But the Obama administration has come up with a stimulus bill that includes both spending and tax cuts! Amazing! As though no one could have imagined such a solution! But out of that brief ray of pragmatic sunshine, we quickly got a bunch of grumbling from the Repubs about the ratio of tax cuts to spending (“it’s gonna be 50/50, no, it’s 60/40, etc”). Yawn. We just got done with 8 years of tax cutting “stimuli”, so maybe it’s difficult to find more to cut?

That being said, I was disappointed with some of what the House Dems threw into their version. It seemed like they just dug up a wishlist they had been saving and adding to since 1992. Do all of these things need to be in an “economic stimulus” bill? Why not the regular appropriations bill? It feels like the Speaker (or someone in the House leadership) needs to take the caucus aside and ask, really, is this the appropriate time to ask for this? Nationally, Americans are being told they need to tighten their belts and budgets, and while we do want the government to start creating jobs, I don’t think it makes sense for the government to go on a spending “spree”. Tightening your budget is really more about responsibility, knowing where every dime and dollar goes, and not just about how much money you spend. While there is certainly an argument to be made for the government increasing its spending during this time, it sets a HORRIBLE example for the nation if that increase is made at the expense of careful fiscal responsibility.

Congressional Repubs, naturally, have reacted quite harshly to the House Dems version of the stimulus. However, they’ve been doing this by 1) digging in their heels (not one House Repub voted for the stimulus, and only a handful of Senate Repubs did) and 2) offering up their own “solutions”. But the solutions they have offered thus far have been, in a word, stale. I mean, seriously, “House Minority Leader John Boehner has called for an end to the capital gains tax”? An end to the capital gains tax? That’s the best you could come up with? What kind of rock have you been under? First of all, the market has plummeted over the past 6 months, meaning most of us don’t or won’t have any “capital gains” to speak of. For many middle class Americans, it’ll take decades for their portfolios and 401Ks to recover. So just as this proposal was out of touch in 2006 when it was argued that it would mostly benefit the top 1 percent of U.S. households, it is WAY out of touch in 2009.

Pres. Obama I think has done an excellent job of trying to get involved and move the measure forward, but also stay above some of the really messy arguing that is going on in Congress. That’s his job. And I totally get his impatience with Congress – I feel it, and I think a lot of Americans feel it too. I’m kind of upset with the Dems for trying to turn this measure into their personal omnibus spending spree. But then again, just because Obama said on January 20th that we as a country were moving in a direction of personal responsibility and bipartisanship, doesn’t mean it’s going to happen overnight. I’m also disappointed in the Repubs for seemingly refusing to hear any proposals but their own. Working diligently on a Republican version of the stimulus is important, but anyone with a legislative brain knows the vehicle for the stimulus will be the majority one, and Republicans won’t get any concessions if they keep refusing to make any.

Clearly, the last 8 (or should I say 15?) years have cemented some hurt feelings on both sides of the aisle. It’s up to Congress to rise above the grudges they hold for one another and get to doing the people’s business. As the majority, Democrats have the responsibility to reach out to the Republicans – regardless of how they were treated (or mistreated) when the Republicans were in the majority. They have a moral responsibility to do this, but more than that, the American people expect it, and doing so could only enhance their clout. Republicans, on the other hand, are responsible to look for ways to work with Democrats so that their constituencies will not be shut out of this important debate.

How to Dispose of CFLs in Honolulu

I received a very quick and very detailed response from the City and County on how to dispose of CFLs in Honolulu. They will also be updating their website, opala.org with this information. The response was so comprehensive, I thought I’d share.

    If these bulbs (both CLF’s or traditional flourescent light tubes) are from your home, there are no laws prohibiting the disposal of them in your household refuse.  Yes, there are trace amounts of Mercury, but we remove it during the incineration process at HPOWER.  The stack emissions are regulated and are within the specifications of the EPA.  For safe disposal, please wrap the bulbs in newspaper and place them in your normal refuse container.  If you wish to recycle the bulbs, here are two companies who currently recycle them:  1) Enviroservices — 839-7222 — $.20/linear ft. 2) Pacific Commercial Services — 545-4599 — $.25/linear ft.

    If these bulbs are from a business, there are no State Statues, or City Ordinances which prohibit the disposal of fluorescent light bulbs in your refuse.  However, there are regulation against this on the Federal level.  The following is a website with the laws: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/40cfrv24_03.html, 273.13 (d) and 273.33 (d) are the two sections of interest.  If you are not generating a large amount, it would be acceptable to package (sealed cardboard box with absorbent material, i.e. newspaper) these bulbs and dispose of the material in the trash.  Please consult with DOH Hazardous Waste Branch to see if you are exempt, the number is 586-4240.

It’s interesting to me that the GE website and some other websites I’ve read actually specifically say not to dispose of CFLs in the trash if your waste management uses an incinerator (HPOWER). But it sounds like what he is saying is that they remove the mercury prior to incinerating the bulb. I did get to visit the HPOWER plant once when I was in college – it’s very educational if you’re interested, kind of like being on that show, “Dirty Jobs” – and I saw how they sort EVERYTHING before incineration. It’s really amazing.

CFLs Won’t Last Forever

“Green” is good. Indcandescents are out and CFLs are in. Despite the fact that they cost about 10+ times more than incandescent bulbs, we switched to CFLs in most of our light sockets. They are supposed to be more efficient and last longer. But (suprise!) they don’t last forever.

CFL stands for Compact Fluorescent Lamp. There is currently a neat little pile of used CFLs on my kitchen counter, waiting for proper disposal. But is it ok to chuck these in the kitchen trash? Aren’t there toxic chemicals in there like mercury?

I checked the GE website, and here’s what I found about disposing of CFLs:

Like paint, batteries, thermostats, and other hazardous household items, CFLs should be disposed of properly. Do not throw CFLs away in your household garbage if better disposal options exist. To find out what to do first check www.earth911.org (where you can find disposal options by using your zip code) or call 1-877-EARTH911 for local disposal options. Another option is to check directly with your local waste management agency for recycling options and disposal guidelines in your community. Additional information is available at www.lamprecycle.org. Finally, IKEA stores take back used CFLs, and other retailers are currently exploring take back programs. (GE Website)

Ok, great. So I went to that site, and voila! Nothing in my area. So then I went to trusty opala.org, which is the Honolulu City & County’s Waste Management website. It’s actually very informative and I wish more people would check it before asking me about recycling. Anyway, there’s nothing explicit about CFLs on there, so that was a wash. I sent them an email to say that they may want to think about adding something, especially if it’s not cool to throw CFLs in the kitchen trash – since that’s probably what most people are doing. After all, the marketing on CFLs is that they’re “just like your regular light bulb” only more expensive. Oh! I meant better for the environment.

So then I thought, why not ask Jade Moon? After all, she’s the one on those PSAs telling everyone to switch to CFLs in the first place. She should know how to throw them away. Of course, we’re told that they will last SOOO long that who should worry about how to dispose of them? But the bottom line is, they don’t last forever.

Well I should’ve started with Jade Moon, because once again, she does have all the answers (thank goodness!). I found a column she wrote in Midweek about this very issue, and here’s what she had to say:

I turned to Hawaiian Electric’s Peter Rosegg for answers. Right now, he says, neither the city nor state offer a bulb recycling program. “Currently CFLs used in households are considered ‘universal waste’ and are not regulated, so home owners can send their used CFLs to the municipal landfill. Since bulb recycling is not yet available in Hawaii, the Department of Health provides the suggestions for properly disposing of CFLs.

“Homeowners are encouraged to wrap the bulbs in sealable plastic bags so if they break in the trash can or dumpster or after they are picked up the chances of mercury impacting the surrounding area or opala handlers are reduced.” In other words it’s OK – for now – to throw them in your regular trash, just be thoughtful about it. Seal it in a plastic bag so your trash guys won’t be affected should the bulb break.

On the national level, the EPA is trying to get manufacturers and retailers to develop their own recycling programs, but that is still a work in progress. For us, Rosegg says, “Locally, longer-term, Hawaiian Electric is looking into ways to encourage a CFL recycling program, through some kind of incentives, and perhaps partnering with another agency or organization. As Hawaii has learned from the HI5 program, it will not be easy. But as the use of CFLs increases (something we are all working very hard to make happen), we are going to have to find a solution. We’ll keep you posted.” (Jade Moon’s column in Midweek, June 20, 2007)

So the bottom line is, you can throw them away, just wrap them in a plastic bag. Nice!

Oh, shoot – I don’t have any plastic bags anymore now that I only use reusable bags at the supermarket… LOL!

 

Edit: The image I posted says that the CFL should last 6.8 years. The CFLs we used lasted less than a year. Granted, incandescent bulbs last about 3 months in our house, but I was suprised the CFLs lasted so short a time. Part of it is because those lights are on A LOT. Part of it is because some of the sockets that we were using CFLs in had dimming switches or were 3-way lamps – GE’s website says that you should use CFLs designed for those purposes in those kinds of sockets or else risk reducing the life of your CFL. And finally, it may also be because some of those sockets are old as all hell and probably just broken to boot.

Killing it

I try to keep my music out of this blog as much as possible, since this blog is supposed to be a personal blog, and pretty much every other blog I have is a music blog. But this is some personal stuff about music, and I didn’t want it to go into my music sites, since I try to keep personal stuff out of them.

So yesterday I got an email that said that I am “killing house music”. I told my roomate about it and we joked that it was amazing that I’ve been djing this long (since 2001) and this is the first time someone told me I was killing house music. With all of the haters out there, you would think it would’ve happened sooner. Guess I’ve just been lucky. Bottom line is, I got yelled at for a track I posted on our website that included a “download” link. My understanding was that it was cleared from the artist/label through the distribution guys that I work with, but the label owner apparently didn’t understand that that is what would be happening and so he sent me a nasty email, saying:

“One day when you finally realize that u are attributing to killing the house music industry… STOP THE FREE DOWNLOADS and help our community. One day You will finally produce or become a label and understand!!!”

Ok, so technically speaking, he didn’t say that I was “killing house music” per se, just that I was “attributing to killing the house music industry”. It may just be semantics, but I believe that I can now rest easy knowing that the soul of house music *may* just still be intact. Actually, this is serious and I shouldn’t be joking, but I can’t help it.

So since late 2006 I have had a section on my website called “Downloads”. You can see it on the front page of my site under “Nice Tracks!” These are tracks selected from releases by artists or labels and given to an online promotional group to distribute and promote via a network of bloggers and podcasters, myself included. The idea is that we play the music, blog it (include it in our website) and provide a download link to our readers. That downlad acts as a “teaser”, and if the reader likes it, he/she  can purchase the whole release, and I provide a link for that, too. I don’t really draw attention to this whole system on my site using a big long explanation, because 1) I think it’s pretty self-explanatory and 2) I don’t want my site to focus on “free downloads”, I want it to focus on the radio show and the podcast. But I have found the downloads section to be a good way to get traffic to the site in general, which generates more interest in the podcast.

NOTE: I used to include the downloads in the body of my podcast, but the download links screwed up my feed since in RSS2 you can only have one enclosure per item. So I made each song a post, and put them in a separate category, outside of my regular feed. Each time I play one of those songs, I include a link to the post in my playlist, and the post for each song includes all the pingbacks from when it got played on the show, so you can see how many times it’s been played, and I don’t have to duplicate code all over the place.

I’ve been podcasting since 2005, but in the past year or so I noticed that I am getting buried under scores of “mp3 blogs” which are popping up all over blogger mostly, and include little more than rapidshare links. Some of these blogs have very little original content, and while I believe that most of these bloggers really do believe they are “supporting the artist” (check out the disclaimer: “This music is for promotional purposes only. Delete it within 24 hours. Support the artist and buy the music.”) they often don’t have clearance from the artist. (I doubt you got permission from Britney Spears’ label to leak the full album of “Blackout”!) Some savvy internet marketers have harnessed the viral ability of the internet to popularize music – Janet Jackson’s “Feedback” was leaked and within hours the whole world had heard it, something you can’t do on radio, resulting in VERY strong album sales.

I digress. Anyways, although I have been careful over the years to 1) provide actual content, not just “free music” and 2) not to monetize my website, I should probably take a cue from those mp3 bloggers and slap some moron-proof disclaimers up on my website. Hang in there, it may take me a while, since I’m not a coding genius and *suprise!* I don’t have money to hire one.

Oh, wow this blog just got totally sarcastic.

The latest in the “John Doe” lawsuit

Read all about it here.

The Honolulu Advertiser article is titled “Kamehameha wants $2 million returned”. The story is, there was a settlement between all parties, and like most settlements, it was made under a confidential agreement. Breach that agreement (i.e. by disclosing the terms), and there are consequences. One of the attorneys for the plaintiff breached the agreement by disclosing the settlement amount ($7 million dollars), so the defendants, Kamehameha schools are looking to make the consequences stick, per the terms of the agreement – specifically, the return of $2 million.

First of all, what is up with HA’s article titles? Shouldn’t the headline be, “Attorney breaches terms of settlement agreement with Kamehameha Schools”? Because that’s basically what happened here. Kamehameha Schools would be remiss if they just let that go – but the headline becomes “Kamehameha wants $2 million returned”, which is essentially the consequence of what the attorney did, the “effect” if you will, and not the “cause”. Talk about sensationalist headlines. Not to mention the fact that it was the Advertiser that was the vehicle for disclosing the amount in the first place – breaching the settlement agreement.

All of that aside, this article just reaffirms my loathing for John Goemans and Eric Grant. Listen to this quote:

Goemans conceived the civil rights lawsuit against the schools, found the plaintiffs on the Big Island and brought them together with Grant.

Read: This is an attempt by the HA to sound “neutral” when what they are basically describing is the fact that Goemans found the piggy bank, and set up the scheme. Good for him.

Goemans told The Advertiser in February that he believed the settlement amount should be a matter of public record, given Kamehameha Schools’ status as the wealthiest and most influential nonprofit institution in Hawai’i.

Read: Kamehameha Schools is a big piggy bank, and everyone deserves the right to know how much they can get out of them! Step right up, you too can get $7 million dollars, and John Goemans is the man to help you get it! Well you know, it would be tough for him to advertise his services if he couldn’t tell potential clients exactly how much they could get out of it, wouldn’t it?

However much of a scumbag he is, you do kinda feel bad for the guy. Goemans says he hasn’t seen a dime of the settlement except for a $20,000 loan, and after he went and blabbed to the HA, he got slapped with a $4,000 fine and an 8-day jail sentence. On top of that, he says he has chronic health problems. What a mess – but he got himself into it.

And in reading the article, I do have sympathy for the Does – to a point. Jane Doe states that “both John Doe and I fear for our safety if our identities are made public.” As much as it saddens me to know that local people, Hawaiians among them would retaliate against this family, it’s true. I’m all for their identities remaining anonymous, and I think it’s in the best interests of KS, too. The last thing KS wants is retaliation against these people.

But like I said, my sympathy extends to them to a point. They chose to align themselves with Goemans and Grant and their ilk and now they are reaping the consequences – legal wrangling, everyone suing everyone over money, and then of course the whole community backlash. They couldn’t have been naive enough to think there wouldn’t be community backlash (and I would consider their counsel greedy, unethical and despicable if they didn’t warn them of the backlash beforehand), and most likely the one thing that bouyed them through the past 5 years of legal hassle was the thought of the millions of dollars of payout that awaited them at the end – which doesn’t exactly illicit my respect.

EDIT: Maybe it wasn’t the thought of millions of dollars of payout that kept the Does in this lawsuit. If it wasn’t, then I can’t see what the heck was in it for them or why they would let themselves be manipulated like this. In which case I still don’t have much respect for them because to put yourself (and your child) through all of that crap when you don’t think you can get anything out of it is just plain stupid. So either they were greedy, or stupid. Either way, it’s shameful. But guaranteed – the lawyers saw a payday in their future from the very beginning.

McCain

He might not be my cup of tea, but he deserves a fair chance, and no one can say he isn’t qualified.

At this point in the presidential race, it’s still a toss up on the Democratic side. We’ll know in the next coulple of weeks whether Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama will be the nominee. But it will literally take an act of God (or the act has already occurred, depending on your point of view) to make a difference in the current GOP nomination race, in which John McCain is way out in front.

Why do conservatives love to hate?

We all know how the GOP will tear into Hillary Clinton if she wins the nomination. And while conservatives have thus far pretty much kept their distance from Barack Obama, you can be sure they’ve done their homework and any indiscretion of his past will be rehashed repeatedly if he wins the nomination. (Ironically, it won’t be a suprise, since Obama has not only been open about his missteps in youth, but written best selling books!) But I’m always suprised at how conservatives treat John McCain.

John McCain is a hero. Hands down. Of course, that’s what we said about John Kerry, but it seems that no matter what you did for your country 30 some odd years ago, you can always dig up some disgruntled vet to tell another story. Now, I don’t know whether that says something about the military, the Vietnam generation, or most likely, the actual reasons that vets have for being disgruntled (their treatment both by the government and society upon returning from war), but it seems to be a trend.

Conservatives are getting ready to tear into McCain right now. Some scandal over a lobbyist, and murmurs about his war service (thank goodness that this isn’t an issue on the Dems side! Thank goodness we have a woman and a man who was too young to go to Vietnam!), and you get the feeling that the vultures are gathering.

I like McCain because he is a moderate, and because he seems to care genuinely about resolving problems, a welcome alternative to the Bush Administration’s policy of digging in their heels whenever a solution that they didn’t propose comes up. The wheels of American Legislative progress grind very slowly, especially on difficult issues such as immigration, poverty, and education, and there are all too few legislators like McCain, looking to end those gridlocks through consensus.

I guess what I’m irritated over, is why do conservatives attack their own candidate in this way? Just because he is reasonable?