Jayvie is many things:

I'm a Maryland resident. A self-avowed WordPress Whisperer, I use it in all my projects. I take lovely photos, go to the gym a lot, and opine strongly over design, aesthetics, and politics. I'm a heavy Twitter user, a moderate Flickr participant and in my spare time I help people at the SemperFi WP Support forums. Read more about me.

This is a random image.

It was warm

a ship moored at the Inner Harbor, BaltimoreFor the first time this year the temps hit the 60s and I couldn’t resist spending time outside lounging with my best friends, caffeine and nicotine.

A little rest is always in order for the weary. I hope y’all have had a great weekend. Regular blogging will start tomorrow, with no posts on the following topics: gay marriage, John Kerry, The Economy™, and sex scandals.

The photograph I have included is that of a ship (forgot the name) permanently moored at Baltimore’s Inner Harbor. Other than that I have no idea what it’s about, just that I found it pretty.

Unnecessary

Regular readers of mine know that I comment on gay marriage on a regular basis. After having gone through both intense and sombre rhetorical and logical exchanges, and having written some insightful perspective (which may be called “talking points” by some) of my own, I’m taking a step back from this issue because there can only be so much that I can say before I end up feeling like a broken record.

Early this morning as I was about to turn in for the night I went by The Spoons Experience just for the heck of it. He and I have not had a rapport before — nor do I agree with him regularly (and that would just make him boring if I did) — but this particular entry of his just pulled most of the thoughts out of my head. It pains me as a writer to concede that I find it unnecessary to write more to further someone else’s post. It irritates me more when I consider using bullet points to summarize what I think apropos of Spoons’ entry, so I won’t. It further grates at me, as I read his entry over and over, that I cannot find a single series of paragraphs that I want to blockquote as representative of his post. However there is one that I would like to take very great note of:

Speaking of which, I utterly reject the popular libertarian suggestion that “The government should get out of the marriage business.” Who are we kidding? There are dozens, probably hundreds of instances in which the government needs to decide who is, and who is not, married. Tax consequences. Social Security benefits. Testimonial privileges. Inheritence, where there’s no will. Divorces. Family expense debts. Medical decisionmaking. And the list goes on. Those who cavalierly say that “the government shouldn’t be involved in marriage” may not realize that what they’re saying is essentially that they want to abolish marriage.

I was leaning along these lines for a short while until I, too, realized that it boils down to abolishing marriage. I see that this attitude — one of cutting through this tangled Gordian knot of a social issue — is approaching self-parodic levels in the blogosphere. On one hand I disdain the “destroy what you cannot have” approach, on the other I also see a kind of weariness towards it all. Getting dragged kicking and screaming into rhetorical arguments that have no end can do that to even the strongest of wills.

I have wasted too much time, too many words, to simply tell you all, dear friends, to “go read the whole thing.” I am not a fan of that kind of post. I want to convince you to go ahead and click through to something I find noteworthy.

I hope I have done that today. Now, go give Spoons a visit.

Hail to the Chief (Wiggles, at least)

Having returned from Iraq, Chief Wiggles has quite a mouthful for his dear readers:

In the whirl wind of political debate that is circling around the president regarding his motives for going to war, I find it curiously strange that no one has asked the opinion of those of us who have put our lives on the line to carryout that vary decision. Who better than us to answer the question regarding the existence of weapons of mass destruction as a premise for going to war? Do the self proclaimed political experts write us off, assuming we are like sheep blindly following a miss guided shepherd to the extent of putting our own life in jeopardy? Do they really think we have not thought about the reasons for and justifications behind leaving our families and putting ourselves in harms way?

I could say, for the years to come, whether Bush is re-elected or not, that his opponents will hang on to a few core predictable accusations and opinions that are all too familiar. These include such buzzwords as “illegal war,” “lied to the American people,” “unilateral action,” “supporting the troops but not their commander-in-chief,” among so much more of the usual tripe that we come across. I have grown weary and tired of it all, and I am in no position to debate or argue over rhetoric and personal opinion. I am, however, disappointed in so many who remain so hung up and stuck in the past, talking about how “Bush stole the election,” how the WMD will never be found “because Saddam never had them,” that Bush apparently mentioned “something about Iraq being an imminent threat;” we also know this usual tripe. I am dissappointed because their narcolepsy over the past has blinded them to what is going on in the present — or at least has given them a lopsided view of things.

To answer Wiggles’ question that I quoted: Yes, I do think that so many of those opposed to the war have written off the American soldier as an unthinking sheep who doesn’t worry about the motivations of their leaders’ actions and would follow orders, even if it meant baby-killing. That is the only explanation I have as to why so few have considered asking the opinions of America’s sons and daughters who are there. I think they have written the Soldier off as a sheep because these people opposed to the war are probably assuming that if the Soldier is in agreement with their views, then they will put their guns down and demand for a release of duty. I think that a Soldier who one hundred percent agrees with what some of these anti-war people are saying has a moral duty to himself and his fellow people to surrender and be subject to the ICJ.

They have written the Soldier off as sheep for the very reason that they are not sheep.

As we are bombarded more and more with conflicting news, I would like to keep in mind the one thing that is keeping my head on straight. It’s the same thing that has kept so many other bloggers humble, whether they are for or against the war. The fact of the matter is, we only know, and can and may only know, so much. There remains a limit to the amount of information we as citizenry are privy to. This doesn’t trouble me, because I have this gut feeling that a full revelation of all the facts to the American public, at this point, will not sway the opinions of the most fixed minds: the loudest, most charismatic, and most likely to attract others to share their beliefs.

It is a well known human response that in the face of incontrovertible facts to the contrary, a true believer will further buttress his beliefs with self-deception.

(Link to Wiggles courtesy of the Insta-Glenn.)

Anything under the sun

Deb Yoder is examines her dearth of posting on her blog:

I’ve decided that the problem is that the news just isn’t that exciting at the moment. I’m very grateful for that, but it’s playing hell with my writing. Seems pointless to be one more voice talking about what an asshat John Kerry is, and I’m not terribly inclined to tackle the gay marriage thing in any sort of comprehensive or meaningful way. Not that I’ll probably be able to stop myself indefinitely, but the more I read, the more annoyed I get, I rather pride myself on not sounding like I’ve come completely unhinged when I post, and frankly, my door is propped against the wall and I’m thinking I might not bother going to the hardware store at this point.

Everyone needs a break at some point. Even I am tired of the news, which cycles between “gay stuff,” John Kerry, The Economy™, Mel Gibson, well, we all know the drill. However, I don’t consider anything I post “irrelevant” and here at One Fine Jay dot com you can count on me to post about the things that interest me. Selfish, I know, but life is too short, and my brain is too active, for me to start worrying about what is relevant or not to you all, dear friends. I am to entertain and enlighten, but above those I aim to just mix it up and have fun.

Visual aid

Matt Mullenweg recently came up with a collection of links from all over, which led me to this Joe Clark guy’s entry about using BBEdit. In it is this one gem that has helped me for the past few days work faster and better in my word processing and other typing work. Says Joe:

I have meticulously-developed preferences that make it easy to stare at text files all day. As stated in my book’s colophon, I do indeed use black Georgia 17 text on a pink [rgb(242,181,231)] background. I struggle to explain why this backdrop colour works. It merely does. And pink is not a positioning statement of any kind, nor is it an amusing coincidence or “ironic.” I admit I tried it on a lark, but, like a stray cat, it seems to have adopted me.

Working on a 1280*1024-pixel screen I have to deal with smaller stuff all the time. This tip from Joe has helped me a lot and I have modified my Wordpress UI’s CSS to adopt this environment, even if it’s just the editing area. Joe has his screenshot, here is mine (clipped, but it shows enough).

Give it a try; who knows, maybe it’ll help you do your work better too.

Archives

Monthly

Categories