Why it’s pointless to shop on Black Friday

As you all know, yesterday was Black Friday, and what did I get?  7 DVDs from Amazon for the awesome price of $25 with free shipping, and 2 sweaters from Old Navy for $35 + shipping.  Are they good deals? You bet.  But what about those big ticket items from Best Buy, Circuit City, and the mall?  I didn’t even bother.

First of all, I already have a nice 32″ plasma that doesn’t beed replacing, so why spend $699 to upgrade to a 42″?  Besides, when I first saw on Gizmodo that Sears had a 42″ Panasonic Viera plasma for $699, I was giddy with joy, and I was SURE that that was going to be the best deal around.  And then I saw on Amazon that the same TV was on sale for $699 as well.  And that got me thinking.  Why go to a store and brave the crowds on Black Friday when I can sit in the comfort of my home on a chilly night with coffee in my hands and buy the same product online.  Not only that, but Amazon also offered their “White Glove” service for the TV.  Basically, they coordinate the best time to deliver to your house and even set the TV up for you!  That definitely beats me carrying the TV to my car and trying to get it to fit myself.  Why do more than you have to when everything is free?

Yesterday was also Pink Friday brought to you by CompUSA and TigetDirect.  While nobel in their cause to donate to cancer research, the deals were a complete scam.  Phone lines couldn’t get through, and products were gone awfully fast.  After watching for a few hours, I got sick of it and left.  That $99 Xbox 360 Halo edition never materialized.  I’m sure of it: I had my twitter feed set and never saw it pop up.  Towards the end of the night, the whole things crashed!  Talk about one shitty promotion!  I don’t care if the money went to cancer research – it’s a good cause, but what about satisfying the customer?!?

Not only that, 1 Wal-mart worker got trampled to death!  This is the  United States of America people!  Try not to behave like savages while living in this civilized country.  Killing someone to get an awesome deal on TVs and cameras shows your lack of morals.

Monday is Cyber Monday.  What are we going to see then?  More deals?  Absolutely, but to be completely honest, really people, how much tech junk do we really need in our homes?

One boy, one girl — one dorm room

(AP) — Erik Youngdahl and Michelle Garcia share a dorm room at Connecticut’s Wesleyan University. But they say there’s no funny business going on. Really. They mean it.

They have set up their beds side-by-side like Lucy and Ricky in “I Love Lucy” and avert their eyes when one of them is changing clothes.

“People are shocked to hear that it’s happening and even that it’s possible,” said Youngdahl, a 20-year-old sophomore. But “once you actually live in it, it doesn’t actually turn into a big deal.”

In the prim 1950s, college dorms were off-limits to members of the opposite sex. Then came the 1970s, when male and female students started crossing paths in coed dormitories. Now, to the astonishment of some baby boomer parents, a growing number of colleges are going even further: coed rooms.

At least two dozen schools, including Brown University, the University of Pennsylvania, Oberlin College, Clark University and the California Institute of Technology, allow some or all students to share a room with anyone they choose, including someone of the opposite sex. This spring, as students sign up for next year’s room, more schools are following suit, including Stanford University.

As shocking as it sounds to some parents, some students and schools say it’s not about sex.

Instead, they say the demand is mostly from heterosexual students who want to live with close friends who happen to be of the opposite sex. Some gay students who feel more comfortable rooming with someone of the opposite sex are also taking advantage of the option.

“It ultimately comes down to finding someone that you feel is compatible with you,” said Jeffrey Chang, a junior at Clark in Worcester, Massachusetts, who co-founded the National Student Genderblind Campaign, a group that is pushing for gender-neutral housing. “Students aren’t doing this to make a point. They’re not doing this to upset their parents. It’s really for practical reasons.”

Couples do sometimes room together, an arrangement known at some schools as “roomcest.” Brown explicitly discourages couples from living together on campus, be they gay or straight. But the University of California, Riverside has never had a problem with a roommate couple breaking up midyear, said James C. Smith, assistant director for residence life.

Most schools introduced the couples option in the past three or four years. So far, relatively few students are taking part. At the University of Pennsylvania, which began offering coed rooms in 2005, about 120 out of 10,400 students took advantage of the option this year.

At UC Riverside, which has approximately 6,000 students in campus housing, about 50 have roommates of the opposite sex. The school has had the option since 2005.

Garcia and Youngdahl live in a house for students with an interest in Russian studies. They said they were already friendly and didn’t think they would be compatible with some of the other people in the house.

“I had just roomed with a boy. I was under the impression at the time that girls were a little bit neater and more quiet,” Youngdahl said. “As it turns out, I don’t see much of a difference from one sex to the other.”

Garcia, 19, admitted: “I’m incredibly messy.”

Parents aren’t necessarily thrilled with boy-girl housing.

Debbie Feldman’s 20-year-old daughter, Samantha, is a sophomore at Oberlin in Ohio and plans to room with her platonic friend Grey Caspro, a straight guy, next year. Feldman said she was shocked when her daughter told her.

“When you have a male and female sharing such close quarters, I think it’s somewhat delusional to think there won’t be sexual tension,” 52-year-old Feldman said. “Maybe this generation feels more comfortable walking around in their underwear. I’m not sure that’s a good thing.”

Still, Feldman said her daughter is partly in college to learn life lessons, and it’s her decision. Samantha said she assured her mom that she thinks of Caspro as a brother.

“I’m really close to him, and I consider him one of my really good friends,” she said. “I really trust him. That trust makes it work.”

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press

Creationists seek foothold in Europe

After the Sunday service in Westminster Chapel, where worshippers were exhorted to wage “the culture war” in the World War II spirit of Sir Winston Churchill, cabbie James McLean delivered his verdict on Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.

“Evolution is a lie, and it’s being taught in schools as fact, and it’s leading our kids in the wrong direction,” said McLean, chatting outside the chapel. “But now people like Ken Ham are tearing evolution to pieces.”

Ken Ham is the founder of Answers in Genesis, a Kentucky-based organization that is part of an ambitious effort to bring creationist theory to Britain and the rest of Europe. McLean is one of a growing number of evangelicals embracing that message — that the true history of the Earth is told in the Bible, not Darwin’s “The Origin of Species.”

Europeans have long viewed the conflict between evolutionists and creationists as primarily an American phenomenon, but it has recently jumped the Atlantic Ocean with skirmishes in Italy, Germany, Poland and, notably, Britain, where Darwin was born and where he published his 1859 classic.

Darwin’s defenders are fighting back. In October, the 47-nation Council of Europe, a human rights watchdog, condemned all attempts to bring creationism into Europe’s schools. Bible-based theories and “religious dogma” threaten to undercut sound educational practices, it charged.

Schools are increasingly a focal point in this battle for hearts and minds. A British branch of Answers in Genesis, which shares a Web site with its American counterpart, has managed to introduce its creationist point of view into science classes at a number of state-supported schools in Britain, said Monty White, the group’s chief executive.

“We do go into the schools about 10 to 20 times a year and we do get the students to question what they’re being taught about evolution,” said White, who founded the British branch seven years ago. “And we leave them a box of books for the library.”

Creationism is still a marginal issue here compared with its impact on cultural and political debate in the United States. But the budding fervor is part of a growing embrace of evangelical worship throughout much of Europe. Evangelicals say their ranks are swelling as attendance at traditional churches declines because of revulsion with the hedonism and materialism of modern society.

“People are looking for spirituality,” White said in an interview at his office in Leicester, 90 miles north of London. “I think they are fed up with not finding true happiness. They find having a bigger car doesn’t make them happy. They get drunk and the next morning they have a hangover. They take drugs but the drugs wear off. But what they find with Christianity is lasting.”

Other British organizations have joined the crusade. A group called Truth in Science has sent thousands of unsolicited DVDs to every high school in Britain arguing that mankind is the result of “intelligent design,” not Darwinian evolution.

In addition, the AH Trust, a charity, has announced plans to raise money for construction of a Christian theme park in northwest England with a 5,000-seat television studio that would be used for the production of Christian-oriented films. And several TV stations are devoted full-time to Christian themes.

All this activity has lifted spirits at the Westminster Chapel, a 165-year-old evangelical church that is not affiliated with nearby Westminster Abbey, where Darwin is buried.

In the chapel, Rev. Greg Haslam tells the 150 believers that they are in a conflict with secularism that can only be won if they heed Churchill’s exhortation and never, ever give up.

“The first thing you have to do is realize we are in a war, and identify the enemy, and learn how to defeat the enemy,” he said.

There is a sense inside the chapel that Christian evangelicals are successfully resisting a trend toward a completely secular Britain.

“People have walked away from God; it’s not fashionable,” said congregant Chris Mullins, a civil servant. “But the evangelical church does seem to be growing and I’m very encouraged by that. In what is a very secular society, there are people returning to God.”

School curricula generally hold that Darwin’s theory has been backed up by so many scientific discoveries that it can now be regarded as fact. But Mullins believes creationism also deserves a hearing in the classroom.

-from yahoo.com

This is  alarming at best.  That evolution is being attacked even in this day and age attests to the power of religion.  For those who believe in God to call evolution a lie attests to their own stupidity.  Who are they to say what is true when their religion has thousands of inaccuracies and is hypocritical.

“Why I Vote” by Jake Laperruque

I have always viewed this election as incredibly important, not just because it is a presidential election, not just because it is an election during a war, recession, and crisis in healthcare. I view it as important because 2008 is a chance to realign the country, to end the politics and political traditions that have caused all the problems we have and disillusioned the populace to what government ought to do.

This election is about issues, policies, proposals ideas, but it is about much more. It is about reaching out to the people, and acting in their interest, instead of catering to lobbyists and playing the same political games that have been common in Washington for my entire lifetime. It’s about having the courage to stand for an unpopular idea. It’s about admitting when you’re wrong. It’s about telling people the truth, even when they might not like the answer. It’s about looking towards individuals, and rejecting special interests. It’s about putting public benefits before political bickering and personal ambitions. It’s about being idealistic, and finally, for once, having a leader who above all else wants to do what is truly right.

The Democratic nomination is down to two candidates, and the differences between them are clear and obvious for me. One stood against a war when I and the rest of the country called out for it, and the administration and media labeled those who opposed it as unpatriotic. The other not only authorized and approved of it, but to this day refuses to apologize and say that her decision was wrong. One calls for all troops to be out by 2009, the other opens the possibility of leaving troops for training missions, permanent bases, forces to protect bases, and on going combat missions. One went to Detroit to give a speech on helping the environment and rebuilding the American auto-industry. The other says that it is wrong to raise taxes on those who make over $100,000 a year to prevent social security from collapsing. One has not taking a single dollar from special interests during this election and has stated he will not allow any lobbyists in his White House. The other takes money from the insurance industries that turn away dying Americans to increase their profit margins, and says that corporations being able to manipulate our government is a good part of the political process. One wears his minority status with pride but never exploits it, never tells you to vote for him because of it, never tries to make the election about black and white, but rather about what is best. The other uses gender stereotypes whenever it can be done to her advantage, has campaign officials say that anyone who cares about women’s issues must vote for her and those who endorse her opponent have betrayed women, and is even willing to engage in racial politics if it might help her. For Barack Obama to respond to his win in South Carolina by saying “I did not travel around this state over the last year and see a white South Carolina or a black South Carolina. I saw South Carolina” is noble. For Bill Clinton to respond to it by saying, “Well, Jessie Jackson won South Carolina” is disgusting.

I see one candidate who is ready to look to the people, all of them, regardless of age, race, gender, or political affiliation. I see another who is willing to do anything – whether it be to ban flag burning, vote for war with Iraq, war with Iran, compromise on environmental policies, sell out to special interests, or use any dirty political tactic – to advance and achieve personal ambitions. I see one candidate who is happy to accept our broken system, and another who wants to create a new one.

Barack Obama is not a perfect candidate. His healthcare policy is not the best I’ve ever seen. His environmental stance is not the best I’ve ever seen. But I’ve never seen a candidate with whom I agree completely, even the one I believed in so much that I was willing to devote months of my life to.

But what I do agree with about Barack Obama’s campaign is its most fundamental principle:

This election is about change. And change does not just mean a Democrat and not a Republican. It does not just mean new policies. It is about changing the nature of the political system, changing the priorities of our politicians, changing the influence that corporations and special interests have, changing the ruthlessness of “the game” that puts winning elections over helping people.

It is about rejecting the idea of simply turning a new page, and instead trying to write a new book.

For my entire life I’ve only seen presidents named Bush and Clinton. For my entire life I’ve lived under leaders who have lied to their people. For my entire life, I’ve had to accept the idea that the country is divided between red and blue, liberal and conservative. I’m sick of it. I’m sick of a government that is unprincipled, unwilling to take risks, and unable to listen to people over politicos and lobbyists advising them on how best to win the next election. And I’m sick of people saying that there is nothing wrong.

I want a New America. And Barack Obama is the only candidate who offers it.

Just One Other Thing I’d Like To Leave You With.

There Are Two Video Links Below, And I’d Ask You To Watch Both In Their Entirety.

The First Is The Moment I Realized I Would Never Be Satisfied To Vote For Hillary Clinton.

The Second Is When I Decided I Would Be Proud To Vote For Barack Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Isi6c2s353c&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iVAPH_EcmQ

-a note by my friend Jake Laperruque, who spent months working for the Edwards campaign and now devotes his time to supporting Obama here at Washington University in St. Louis and the surrounding areas.

Anchor suspended 2 weeks for “lynch” comment

Golf Channel suspended anchor Kelly Tilghman for two weeks on Wednesday for saying last week that young players who wanted to challenge Tiger Woods should “lynch him in a back alley.”Tilghman was laughing during the exchange Friday with analyst Nick Faldo at the Mercedes-Benz Championship, and Woods’ agent at IMG said he didn’t think there was any ill intent.

But the comments became prevalent on news shows Wednesday, and the Rev. Al Sharpton joined the fray by demanding she be fired immediately. Golf Channel didn’t know who would replace Tilghman in the booth this week at the Sony Open or next week at the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic.

“There is simply no place on our network for offensive language like this,” Golf Channel said in a statement.

Tilghman became golf’s first female anchor last year when the PGA Tour signed a 15-year deal in which Golf Channel broadcasts the first three events of the year, weekday coverage of all tour events, and full coverage of the Fall Series and opposite-field events.

The suspension ends in time for the Buick Invitational on Jan. 24, when Woods will make his 2008 debut.

Faldo and Tilghman were discussing young players who could challenge the world’s No. 1 player toward the end of Friday’s broadcast at Kapalua when Faldo suggested that “to take Tiger on, maybe they should just gang up for a while.”

“Lynch him in a back alley,” Tilghman replied.

“While we believe that Kelly’s choice of words was inadvertent and that she did not intend them in an offensive manner, the words were hurtful and grossly inappropriate,” Golf Channel said in its statement. “Consequently, we have decided to suspend Kelly for two weeks, effective immediately.”

Woods and Tilghman have known each other 12 years. She was picked to host a club demonstration with Woods in south Florida when he talked about new products from Nike Golf.

Tilghman was helped when Mark Steinberg, Woods’ agent at IMG, said it was a non-issue and considered the matter “case closed.”

“Tiger and Kelly are friends, and Tiger has a great deal of respect for Kelly,” Steinberg said Tuesday night in a statement released by Golf Channel. “Regardless of the choice of words used, we know unequivocally that there was no ill-intent in her comments.”

Tilghman had said in a previous statement she apologized directly to Woods, and the immediate support from Woods’ camp was critical.

-from Yahoo.com

Saudi blogger arrested, held without charges

Saudi Arabian officials have reportedly detained a blogger whose writing has criticized religious extremism in the country, according to the two press freedom groups and a regional human-rights organization.

Blogger and IT professional Fouad Ahmed al-Farhan, 32, was taken into custody on December 10, the Committee to Protect Journalistsreported on Wednesday. His Arabic-language site now has a “Free Fouad” banner in English across the top.

In a letter sent to friends shortly before his arrest, al-Farhan wrote that he had been told that the interior ministry was investigating him and would pick him up within two weeks. At the time he described the worst case as being jailed for three days, but he was still being held without charge as of Friday, according to Joel Campagna, Middle East program coordinator for the CPJ in New York.

Al-Farhan’s blog promotes political reform and bears the tagline, “Searching for freedom, dignity, justice, equality, Shura and all the remaining Islamic values which are missing,” along with a dedication to his daughters, according to a report on the website of the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information. Some of his more critical commentary has dealt with the question of religious extremism, Campagna said. Al-Farhan also recently posted a blog item criticizing ten well-known personalities who have close ties to the Saudi royal family, he said.

The Saudi government heavily censors Internet content, both political criticism and pornography, Campagna said. Contentious news or political commentary sites are frequently blocked.

-PCWorld.com

Wii bowler beats real bowler in senior videogame tourney

Proving once again that athleticism and real-world experience have little bearing on the outcome of Wii Sports matches, a 79-year-old bowler was defeated by an 84-year-old who’d only recently picked up the game — virtually — in their retirement community’s latest Nintendo tournament. Obviously a popular pastime among the senior crowd, playing Wii has gotten so big at the 3000-resident Riderwood complex in Montgomery County, Maryland that semi-regular tournies are held in the various events, with underdog Nancy Davies upsetting previous champ Hal Winters in the most recent excitement-filled Bowling final. When asked to comment on the 202 to 182 stunner, the few other residents who were both awake at the time and able to remember the action agreed that the match was surely one for the record books.

-Engadget.com