Anyway, every election cycle I have a tradition of endorsing candidates here. Sure, it’s not like a) anybody reads this or b) my endorsement carries any weight, but someday when I’m making millions as a linguist, my opinion will be sought from far and wide.

First, a little truth-in-advertising moment. I am not a registered member of any political party. I’ve given myself several labels, but the best I can come up with is “Resentful Centrist.” I’ve never voted a straight ticket, and likely never will. I support both liberal and conservative causes, but I generally favor establishing a consensus between the two extremes. Now, let’s begin.

President: Barack Obama (D)

Once upon a time, I considered John McCain a different kind of politician. He bucked the party line on, what I consider, moral issues pertaining to detainee treatment and Republican doctrinal issues like tax cuts. I was even willing to overlook his stance on the Iraq war. A lot has changed since he started running for president again. He started to show his true colors: pandering to the religious right, backtracking on tax cuts, and faltering on his stance on detainee treatment. Enter Barack Obama. This man is a new kind of politician. One who I genuinely feel will heal the wounds this country has suffered over the last eight years. Despite what the Republican machine (especially here in Utah) keeps spouting, Barack Obama is not calling for handouts. Barack Obama is not a socialist (though, for my LDS readers, look here. He seeks only to restore dignity to the American working man and woman. In Obama, I see a chance for the United States to become united once more.

Governor: John Huntsman, Jr. (R)

This is driving some of my friends insane. Let me explain myself. John Huntsman has performed the job he was elected to do in 2004 brilliantly. While I have my share of complaints (he’s a little too academic in his approach to government), I’ve been very satisfied with my vote in 2004. His stances on climate change and alcohol laws are very favorable. What I like most about Huntsman is what I would like to see in more Republicans in Utah: while the majority of those who elected him are Mormons, he understands that, in a secular society, he has to govern for non-Mormons as well. I think Huntsman will go down in history as one of Utah’s best governors.

U.S. House District 2: Jim Matheson (D)

Since I’ve been able to vote I’ve been voting for Matheson. He’s a moderate and a compromiser. I doubt his challenger will be the same.

State Legislature District 25: Christine Johnson (D)

I’m going to be up front. I’m only voting for her because Utah Republicans generally frighten me. I’ve only been in this district for a month, so…if I lived two blocks north, I’d be endorsing Joe Jarvis (R) for his health care credentials, but he won’t win up there anyway.

Attorney General: ??

I haven’t decided on this yet. I have issues with Mark Shurtleff, but he’s done well at what he’s been elected to do. I’ll let you know how this goes.

I know nothing about school board races

Constitutional amendments

A, B, C, E: Yes

D (redistricting): No

Bond elections

Zoo: Yes

Aviary: Yes

I’m in Provo for school, a senior studying English and editing at Brigham Young University. I have limited experience with reading the Deseret News, but the article I read (Oct. 4) could well turn me off from reading it again. While berating the BYU team, Dick Harmon riddled his column with countless and highly offensive sexist comments. These weren’t just vague, in-passing turns of phrase that could be argued to be bolstering his style. They were blatant and chauvinistic. He equated everything that went wrong with the Utah State game on Friday with femininity, and his tone is so outrageously disparaging that your readers can’t help but mentally equate those feminine things with weakness. Since when is “a Band of Sisters” a negative term? Don’t forget his list of “chick flicks” as parallels to the way the offense played. And of course the most offensive: his use of the sexist term “chicks” and apologizing for the offense that they “were playing without (their) Midol.”
How did this article ever get past the editors? I would appreciate reading an apology.

Cassie Randall

Provo

Well reasoned, right? Here’s some of the responses:

I’m also a student at the Y and I thought the article was funny. No need to get worked up

-Chris

You’re a guy.

I read Harmon every day. While I haven’t been bothered by his “sexism”, I normally find his columns to be full of errors, omissions, and poor grammar.

-Dick

You’re a guy

I hadn’t read the column, but I’ve read it now.

Do you really think this is any kind of a serious swipe against women? If you are truely offended I suggest you learn to tell the difference between something which demeans and something which is just talkin trash. They aren’t necessarily the same.

I don’t think there is one person who read this column who afterward has a lower opinion of women that before they read it, it was all in fun and

In case you hadn’t noticed, so far as physical strength, women are the weaker sex.

-re Cassie

Ummm…?

Unfortunately, that’s as specific as I can be on this forum without being brought up on Masonic charges.

I’ve been way the hell too busy to write in my blog since school started. Such is the life of a grad student. I figured I’d give you all an update on how my classes are going so far. There is no way to justify not going to class this semester. First, I only have three; one each day, Monday through Thursday. Second, all of my professors know me by name. Third, there are only four people in my Wednesday seminar. So yeah, I can’t sluff, notwithstanding the graduate student paradox: we’re held to a higher standard in class while simultaneously expected to research. Meh.

So, Syntax III, the last syntax class I will ever have to take at the University of Utah. Unfortunately, that offers no consolation. I still dread every Monday as a result of this class. It’s three hours long, one day a week. Usually by the end of second hour I’ve lost all will to live. When you’ve lost your will to live, time moves very slowly.

Child Language Acquisition, a normal-length class taught two days a week has the distinguished honor of being the only one-and-a-half-hour class to pass slower than my three-hour syntax class. I honestly stopped caring how the little bastards acquire language. That’s not true. The class is actually very interesting…it just…it’s just not fun.

Seminar in Arabic Linguistics is my most interesting class. The topic is diglossia. My variationist tendencies give me ample opportunity to be critical. At some point, once I hammer out the details, I’ll detail my research for this class.

I figure I’ll do my usual “what am I taking” post. I may have already told you. I don’t remember, and I don’t care enough to go back and check.

Advanced Syntax: I really can’t believe I’m doing this to myself. I’m starting off my graduate career with three hours of minimalism. Just shoot me now.

Child Language Acquisition: I’m excited to take this as an opportunity to explore some of the theoretical literature in language acquisition. While the course will be taught from a very Chomskyan perspective, I will have the chance I think to look into opposing literature as well.

Seminar in Arabic Linguistics: This isn’t actually being offered through linguistics, but my supervisor wants me to take it anyway. This time around, the seminar is on diglossia in Arab communities. Diglossia proper doesn’t really exist in Arabic anymore, but if we assume something like it occurs, it would be interesting to look at something nobody has: phonetic variability in Arabic diglossia.

In other news, I’m finally moving out. I move September 3rd to a beautiful cave basement apartment. I’ll be sure to take pictures or something.

I’ve been struggling to find a reason to blog lately. Usually, I use this web space as forum to talk about issues in linguistics during the school year, while I talk about other crap during the summer. I don’t know how well that works. I really don’t want this to be specifically a linguistics blog. I have other things I enjoy talking about, but so often I am bombarded with linguistics, so it’s an easier thing to write about. Today, I’ll be writing a little about politics, and a little about linguistics, only because this man, a linguist, wrote this article, about centrism (or centrists), or rather how he doesn’t believe it exists. As an aside, I know this article is about a year old, but not an entire year yet!

Lakoff has decided that centrism is a self-serving metaphor. One created by more conservative Democrats uncomfortable in their own skin. More specifically, there is no defining value of center. Anyone who reads this blog knows I am not a very gifted writer, so I will address the issues point-counter-point and in seriatim.

There is no left to right linear spectrum in the American political life. There are two systems of values and modes of thought — call them progressive and conservative (or nurturant and strict, as I have). There are total progressives, who use a progressive mode of thought on all issues. And total conservatives. And there are lots of folks who are what I’ve called “biconceptuals”: progressive on certain issue areas and conservative on others. But they don’t form a linear scale. They are all over the place: progressive on domestic policy, conservative on foreign policy; conservative on economic policy, progressive on foreign policy and social issues; conservative on religion, but progressive on social issues and foreign policy; and on and on. No linear scale. No single set of values defining a “center.”

Let’s break it down further:

There are two systems of values and modes of thought — call them progressive and conservative (or nurturant and strict, as I have). There are total progressives, who use a progressive mode of thought on all issues. And total conservatives.

The core assumption here is correct. There are conservatives and liberals (which Lakoff arbitrarily decides to call progressives).

And there are lots of folks who are what I’ve called “biconceptuals”: progressive on certain issue areas and conservative on others. But they don’t form a linear scale. They are all over the place: progressive on domestic policy, conservative on foreign policy; conservative on economic policy, progressive on foreign policy and social issues; conservative on religion, but progressive on social issues and foreign policy; and on and on. No linear scale.

This is actually where the core of my disagreement with Lakoff lay. There are those of us, indeed the majority of us, who call ourselves centrists, but are not, ahem, biconceptual. Here, Lakoff is making two assumptions. First, that political ideology is somehow categorical and discrete and second, that people who call themselves centrists are espousing both conservative and liberal views, e.g., I can be conservative fiscally and liberal socially. Most people I know who think this way call themselves libertarians, but whatever.

No single set of values defining a “center.”

And this is where Lakoff goes from being on shaky ground to be outright wrong. There is a set of values defining center, and they aren’t conservative or liberal ones. They espouse compromise and consensus. Not a subtle difference. As centrists, we believe that while either party can be right, very often they aren’t. Often, the extremes create false dichotomies. We see from history that most of our progress has been made from accommodation of the opposition. What we know from the drafting process of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution show that a great deal of compromise went on. The alternative is almost never good.

Lakoff goes on and makes his core argument (I’m skipping over his arguments about liberals being morally elevated above all else):

The very idea that there is a “center” marginalizes progressives, and sees them as extremists, when they simply share fundamental American values. The term “center” suggests there is a “mainstream” where most people are and that there is a single set of views held by that mainstream. That is false.

…

It is important to stand up to the DLC [Democratic Leadership Committee], and to the idea that there is a unitary mainstream center, that they are it, and that progressives are extremists and deserve to be marginalized.

The idea of a center marginalizes nobody. The idea of a center is that we don’t need to fall into lock-step with one side or the other to do the right thing. If anything, this Third Way position has been marginalized in American politics. In short, Lakoff is guilty of exactly what he accuses centrists of doing: complete disregard for and oversimplification of alternative points of view. I think Lakoff should address his own discomfort with being a liberal before he casts aspersions on the center.

Today is one month from the beginning of the fall semester when I officially begin as a graduate student. Here are some of my thoughts:

· I’m already having trouble taking myself seriously. It feels like I’m just going back for another semester, only taking harder classes and getting paid to do it.

· Holy crap, I’ve never actually written a paper longer than 22 pages, and those 20 page papers I wrote were largely BS. I don’t know if I’m capable of writing at the graduate level.

· Grad school politics. I’ve heard the horror stories of sitting in your first graduate seminar and having a professor loathe you for no other reason than that he or she disagrees with you. In short, as a graduate student, I’m treated like a colleague, and will be subjected to the ideological and sometimes personal torment involved in academia. Yay!

Good Lord…what am I getting myself in to?

In the Deseret News’ new Mormon Times segment, Jerry Johnston wrote a rather tame article about the Mormon-Non-Mormon divide being blown out of proportion. I am going to post the article here in full:

“Saturday’s Voyeur,” the revue that takes its name from “Saturday’s Warrior,” is about quirky personalities and politics now. But years ago it was all about the LDS Church. And the humor was acid. LDS missionaries, mothers — even sacred attire — got lampooned as fed-up souls in the audience slapped their knees and sipped Merlot.

They were angrier times.

And not without reason.

Thirty years ago, “cast-iron haloes” were more prevalent in LDS circles. Members feared “outside” influences might contaminate their faith. They stayed away from people of other religions and steered their children away from friends who didn’t share their “standards.” Confusion and pain were often the result.

But if the “Saturday’s Voyeur” crowd has matured, so has the “Saturday’s Warrior” crowd. Mormon Tabernacle organists now give concerts at the Cathedral of the Madeleine, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is getting awards for “going green,” and there is a new sensitivity — prompted, in part, by President Gordon B. Hinckley’s advice: Don’t just put up with others, put your arms around them.

Both sides have grown. And the “divide” that was once wider than the Grand Canyon is down to, well, about the size of the Snake River Gorge. With luck, it’ll soon be the width of the Jordan River.

Pessimists say things stink. That we optimists lack information.

We think they need to take a second look.

We see a state coming together, not coming apart.

The continents may be drifting, but Utah’s people are pulling together.

Do abuses still occur? Of course. But — as with racism — mean-spiritedness is no longer acceptable. The ugly side of the divide is being driven into the shadows, where it belongs. Ridicule Mormons — or “non-Mormons” — at your peril.

So, to those who see the battlefield today and wonder, “How can we ever bridge this divide?” — keep in mind some of us, longer in the tooth, are less worried.

We remember when the divide was a real battle zone littered with land mines — a battle zone that was seldom, if ever, mentioned.

“Saturday’s Voyeur,” the revue that takes its name from “Saturday’s Warrior,” is about quirky personalities and politics now. But years ago it was all about the LDS Church. And the humor was acid. LDS missionaries, mothers — even sacred attire — got lampooned as fed-up souls in the audience slapped their knees and sipped Merlot.

They were angrier times.

And not without reason.

Thirty years ago, “cast-iron haloes” were more prevalent in LDS circles. Members feared “outside” influences might contaminate their faith. They stayed away from people of other religions and steered their children away from friends who didn’t share their “standards.” Confusion and pain were often the result.

But if the “Saturday’s Voyeur” crowd has matured, so has the “Saturday’s Warrior” crowd. Mormon Tabernacle organists now give concerts at the Cathedral of the Madeleine, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is getting awards for “going green,” and there is a new sensitivity — prompted, in part, by President Gordon B. Hinckley’s advice: Don’t just put up with others, put your arms around them.

Both sides have grown. And the “divide” that was once wider than the Grand Canyon is down to, well, about the size of the Snake River Gorge. With luck, it’ll soon be the width of the Jordan River.

Pessimists say things stink. That we optimists lack information.

We think they need to take a second look.

We see a state coming together, not coming apart.

The continents may be drifting, but Utah’s people are pulling together.

Do abuses still occur? Of course. But — as with racism — mean-spiritedness is no longer acceptable. The ugly side of the divide is being driven into the shadows, where it belongs. Ridicule Mormons — or “non-Mormons” — at your peril.

So, to those who see the battlefield today and wonder, “How can we ever bridge this divide?” — keep in mind some of us, longer in the tooth, are less worried.

We remember when the divide was a real battle zone littered with land mines — a battle zone that was seldom, if ever, mentioned.

Are you done reading it? Good, because here is one of the comments:

So Jerry’s one of the righteous few who have labored to “bridge the gap” between Mormons and…those of different faiths. If only I were that good.

What Jerry fails to point out, though I’m sure the handful of you who read his self-serving article can easily see, is that this “bridging” is done by putting aside our moral compass, God’s commandments, and doctrine and accepting the many philosophies that are tossed about as being just as good. You have to denounce the idea of Jesus being the only true way to salvation, and embrace Buddha, Krishna, etc.

The fundamental flaw in Jerry’s Unitarian views is that they have no foundation in truth. If his positions on gay marriage, going “green,” allowing liquor sales on Sunday, etc. were paramount to our “getting along,” then there is no need for Christ or Joseph Smith. Just follow the crowd.

Jerry reminds me more of a pre-conversion Zeezrom than any Joan of Arc. He doesn’t have the fortitude to stand for truth or right, unlike those I know who are “long in the tooth.”

Dave

Wow, Dave. Good job on not reading the article. Johnson never implied that you have to compromise your positions on gay marriage, liquor sales, or going green (an action apparently tantamount to Antichrist). He said stop being a dick to people who believe differently. You know another thing we can try? Recognizing that even though we may or may not be religious, we live in a secular society where we must balance the needs of all citizens. Chalk the other crap up to political disagreement and try getting along.

Okay, to bring this back home, I am amazed at how naive Johnston is. If he can’t see how gaping the chasm between Mormons and Non-Mormons is in Utah from reading the comments on his own article, he should ask real people their about their experiences with it. We all have our stories.

The games: I own two games right now: Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots and Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction. I’m impressed with the latest installment of the Metal Gear Solid series. It brings together the best in each game. I am starting to learn about what happened to some characters from earlier games (Meryl, wtf?). MGS4 is also slightly more open than previous games. While the game stages are pretty linear, requiring you to get from point A to point B, you have the option of deciding just how you will do so. While the game still focuses on sneaking, you can sneak any way you please, including my favorite method of sneaking: blending in with local militias. It’s easier to clear a path that way. The latest installment of Ratchet and Clank doesn’t do anything new to the franchise, but it’s still very enjoyable. It’s considerably more difficult than previous games (maybe I’ve just lost my edge), and platforming action has been reduced. This game makes me wish the platform was less powerful. One of my fondest memories of this franchise on the Playstation 2 was blasting the hell out of enemies while watching my frame rate stutter as the massive amount of bolts come flying toward me. It’s more rewarding than it sounds.

I rented Burnout Paradise from Game Fly. I’m a big fan of any game that promotes reckless driving. Online play is great, too. It’s a seamless transtition from cruising the game world offline to cruising it with several other players. Everything bonuses you find in online play gets saved locally. It’s really like you haven’t made any transition. I’ll probably keep this. Next up on Game Fly is Resistance: Fall of Man. All things considered, the PS3 is starting to develop a respectable software library

The interface: The homescreen is intuitive and simple, even if it has a terrible name (Xross Media Bar…I can’t pronounce that). I would like to see the XMB (similar to the 360 dashboard) in game and easier access to the Playstation Store. I think it’s all being adressed in the next update.

Visually: I play the system on my LCD computer monitor. It may be tiny, but I want to play it in HD, and the monitor can push it up to 720p. The last few nights, Dan’s and my parallel gaming nights, where we each play an MMO at his house, have been replaced by me bringing the PS3 down to play on his 1080p capable LCD HDTV. It looks amazing.

1 - Tetris: Don’t get me wrong, Tetris is great and deserves to be on the list, but it seems silly to me to be put at number 1. It’s almost as if the writers made the rest of the list, couldn’t think of a number 1, and decided that Tetris was like, the first game ever made or something. Whatever.

2 - Super Mario World: See, in my opinion, this should be number one the list instead of the falling block game. Nintendo called the Wii the Revolution. Super Mario is probably a better fit.

7 - Super Mario Kart: I would add to this, “Ever Mario Kart game ever made, especially Double Dash.”

8 - GoldenEye 007: This game belongs here. I fondly remember the days of GoldenEye tournaments after scouts and church. This will also go down in history of one of the three (3) good movie games in history.

9 - Grand Theft Auto IV: I’m not entirely sure why they chose this particular installment of GTA for the list. In my opinion, the original GTA III would have been a better choice, as it started the ball rolling on the open, engaging, and interactice crime-noir goodness that is Grand Theft Auto. Then again, I haven’t actually played GTA IV yet. I have it in my GameFly Q.

10 - Metal Gear Solid: I think the entire MGS franchise belongs here. Not only did it invent the stealth genre, but it remains one of the few games to have actually pulled it off. The others would be Splinter Cell and Thief. If you can think of others, I’d like to hear it.

11 - Halo: Combat Evolved: I actually don’t understand Halo or all the Halo hype. I don’t know, I would say the Halo 3 marketing campaign was more interesting than any Halo game.

17 - Sim City: Yes.

18 - Half Life: The summary in the article is best: the great legacy of this dystopian epic is how it pushed subsequent FPS’s to focus on story and character.

21 - StarCraft: This game should be higher up the list. Among my all time favorites.

23 - Deus Ex: I am unsure there is any game on the face of the planet that could be loved by me as much as this. I hate to say that I discovered this game by accident, as it was bundled with a video card that my dad had bought but never used. It was love. I knew the game had won my permanent affection when it forced me to make the decision to betray my employers (UNATCO) and broadcast an NSF transmission. It was exhilarating

24 - Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 2: Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 1 launched the extreme sports genre, so why did they choose Pro Skater 2?

28 - Bioshock: This game is an experience. Should be higher.

30 - Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic With it’s Star Wars IP and complete user control of the character’s alignment, this game belongs on any list.

I’m a bit tired of writing this, but I’ll mention a few others I’m glad made the list: Psychonauts, WoW, Elder Scrolls IV, and a bunch of others. Find the list and read it.

I never thought I would be proclaiming to the world that I have purchased a Playstation 3 computer entertainment system. Happy birthday to me.

Actually, I did assume that one day I would have a PS3. The PS3 SKU I bought was the Metal Gear Solid 4 bundle released to coincide with the game’s release. I had been waiting for Metal Gear Solid 4 since the credits after Metal Gear Solid 3 started rolling. The package itself was a great deal, too. In the box you get the high-end 80gb model, the game, and the dual-shock SIXAXIS controller all for the price of the standalone 80gb system. This, coupled with Blu-Ray becoming the standard for HD video in the near future, made it seem like the right time to break down and get the console.

I was unfortunately reminded that buying a console is almost never just buying a console — you also have to get required accessories. Given all the stink people made about the Xbox 360 not debuting with HDMI functionality and the PS3 coming with HDMI standard, you’d think that Sony would bundle an HDMI cable with the system. The only AV cable in the box was the standard composite cable. I mean, wtf? Even my Xbox 360 came with a component HD connection. Good work, Sony.

It really is worth it to go out and find an HDMI cable, though. When we plugged it into Dan’s HDTV, we witnessed the Playstation system update in all it’s beautiful 1080p goodness. As if it could get any better than that, we watched the Metal Gear Solid 4 install loading screen in 1080p. Seriously though, once the hour it took to actually start playing games had passed, I started to wonder why it took me so long to take the plunge. The game really looks amazing in HD.

It was a real pain trying to get a hold of the bundle. I have always been a proponent of visiting gaming retailers when purchasing gaming merchandise. I was reminded why that’s a silly policy. No Gamestop had the bundle. I called possibly every location in the Salt Lake Valley, but to no avail. Apparently, the largest exclusive gaming retailer in the world was out of the game system I wanted. The Target across from the Gamestop in Centerville had three systems available. I have also heard a lot of news about a bunch of stores being constantly sold of Nintendo’s Wii console. Every time I’ve been in a Gamestop over the last year and half, somebody has asked if the store had Wiis in stock only to find out they didn’t. When I think about it, every Target, Best Buy, Circuit City, and Wal-Mart I’ve been in over the same period of time has had several available. I could probably write an entire post about this. In the meantime, I am going to consider purchasing all my gaming wares at Target.

Somewhere over the last year or two, I have noticed a dramatic shift in the Deseret News. Once upon a time, I would have called the Deseret News editorial page “moderate.” This is no longer the case, as it has shifted dramatically rightward. I’m not going to go into a lot of depth on this, since I never seem to shut up about it, but I swear the Deseret News only picks the most inflammatory, right of center letters to publish and chooses the least eloquent and thoughtful columnists. Too much Krauthammer, not enough Buckley (or whatever his living equivalent would be). I should take count of how many letters a day are published calling Obama a socialist or (as he was called today, a Marxist).