<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">

<channel>
<title>Peevish</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/</link>
<description></description>
<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
<dc:creator>annezook@allmail.net</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2012-05-08T12:40:07-07:00</dc:date>
<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.movabletype.org/?v=2.64" />
<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<sy:updateBase>2000-01-01T12:00+00:00</sy:updateBase>

<item>
<title>In Passing</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003895.php</link>
<description>Personally, I think that if your marriage stands or falls based on whether or not two other people are allowed to get married? The problem is in your marriage, not theirs....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3895@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Politics and Liberalism</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2012-05-08T12:40:07-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Do You Know Peter?</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003867.php</link>
<description>Reading The Peter Principle Revisited: A Computational Study made me regret that &quot;fashions&quot; in business-think mean this valuable insight is much less familiar to today&apos;s workforce than it was to my young one. This analysis--combining ecology, game theory, and computer science--is a way of looking at the Principle that I don&apos;t think was possible thirty or forty years ago. Fascinating. A lot of scattered thoughts--going nowhere in particular with any of them. Although the article does a good job of summing up the principle in the Abstract, let me add my own definition: &quot;In traditional corporate structure, any highly competent employee will be promoted into failure.&quot; The part that I&apos;m thinking about today--I never quite looked at it like this before--is the underlying corporate perception that someone who is a good worker will be good at any job. That people who are &quot;good&quot; at something are just, you know, naturally...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3867@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Aimless ranting</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-09-30T11:01:17-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Long, Little Privacy Rant</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003863.php</link>
<description>Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google + - they&apos;ve all gotten kicked in the teeth recently over the same thing. Privacy. Just this week, we found out that LinkedIn had sneaked in permission for themselves to take information from our profiles and use it for their advertising. Many users are leaving in disgust--others are simply fighting their way through the system to the place where they can block the practice. At the same time, Facebook is getting their tenth (or is it twentieth?) kick in the teeth--this time it&apos;s over the issue of harvesting and displaying people&apos;s phone numbers. Notable in the vast majority of the wars over personal privacy in the last year or so is one, simple concept--opt out vs opt in. Every time a new privacy-violating element is added to these services the companies opt everyone in and it&apos;s only thanks to the handful of people who monitor their...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3863@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Aimless ranting</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-08-11T11:50:48-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Gotta share the funny</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003849.php</link>
<description>The infamous Blackwater corporation (now alias Xe and whatthehell is that when it&apos;s at home?), frequently under fire (bad pun) from allegations of drug use, theft, murder, and general misdoing is gettin&apos; itself some ethics. It&apos;s hired John &quot;there&apos;s ho&apos;s and homo&apos;s everywhere!&quot; Ashcroft as it&apos;s ethics chief--although the exact euphemism they&apos;re using is &quot;subcommittee on governance.&quot; Ashcroft. The man qualified for nothing and appointed to everything. Sheesh. From Wikipedia: Political career In 1972, Ashcroft ran for a Congressional seat in southwest Missouri, narrowly losing the Republican primary to Gene Taylor. After the primary, Missouri Governor Christopher Bond appointed Ashcroft to be state auditor, the office Bond had left when he became governor. In 1974, Ashcroft was narrowly defeated for election to that post by Jackson County County Executive George W. Lehr, who argued that Ashcroft, who is not an accountant, was unqualified to be the state auditor. Jack Danforth,...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3849@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject></dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-05-05T13:47:29-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>My Takeaway</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003848.php</link>
<description>I read this article, as I read dozens of others in a week, with a ready grain of salt alongside my willingness to be educated. It&apos;s about internet marketing, as you can probably tell from the title of Is Search Dying – and Will Your Business Die With It? First, I should point out that I&apos;m unconcerned with the idea of the entire world going to the &quot;cloud.&quot; Amazon&apos;s recent data storage misadventure combined with the PlayStation hack where a bazillion users had their data stolen tells me that this rush to cloud living is a bit ahead of itself.* I don&apos;t doubt they&apos;ll solve the purely technical problems--data storage and retrieval within the near future but I also don&apos;t doubt that human nature will continue to be what it has always been and any encryption one person uses, another person (or their computer) can hack.** Anyhow. Not to sidetrack...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3848@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Aimless ranting</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-04-28T09:10:53-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>If I Had It To Do Over Again</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003842.php</link>
<description>* The corporate personhood debate refers to the controversy (primarily in the United States) over the question of what subset of rights afforded under the law to natural persons should also be afforded to corporations as legal persons. Wikipedia As a matter of interpretation of the word &quot;person&quot; in the Fourteenth Amendment, U.S. courts have extended certain constitutional protections to corporations. Opponents of corporate personhood seek to amend the U.S. Constitution to limit these rights to those provided by state law and state constitutions.[4] The relevant Amendment opens this way: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. Are corporations &quot;born&quot;? Are they capable of being &quot;naturalized&quot;? No, and no. Semantic fancy-dancing aside, a corporation is an artificial legal construct without independent life or purpose. It is a legal fiction...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3842@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Aimless ranting</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-04-10T10:39:02-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Made Me Think</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003839.php</link>
<description>I’ve dispatched Hillary to the Middle East to talk about how these countries can transition to new leaders — though, I’ve got to be honest, she’s gotten a little passionate about the subject. These past few weeks it’s been tough falling asleep with Hillary out there on Pennsylvania Avenue shouting, throwing rocks at the window. President Obama, during a stand-up comedy act last week, making light of Hillary Clinton’s strong feelings for supporting the opposition in the Middle East protests. (From http://officialssay.tumblr.com/) I&apos;m not mocking President Obama - I&apos;m sure it was a good joke and a funny moment. It&apos;s just that this got me wondering how a President Hilary Clinton might have reacted to recent events?...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3839@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject></dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-03-18T14:39:47-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>TNSTAAFL</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003836.php</link>
<description>Finally caved in and got back onto FB. I refuse to give them my cell # so they can text me, but when they offered the option of an automated call, I used my work line for the verification. (Hah! When they sell these lists, I will not be spammed with sales calls.) It drives me absolutely batshitcrazy how people don&apos;t understand that these sites are invading your privacy with all this stuff. There is, in fact, absolutely NO reason FB needs to verify that everyone with an account is a real, individual, human being. They&apos;re only doing it to create a cleaner list to sell to advertisers. I&apos;m not unreasonable and I know things have to be paid for. I&apos;d accept the option of paying for access with the understanding that none of my personal information would ever, under any circumstances, be published or sold to advertisers. (I&apos;d actually...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3836@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Aimless ranting</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-03-17T12:25:24-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>The next book I&apos;ll read will be this one. </title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003827.php</link>
<description>Gene Sharp: Author of the nonviolent revolution rulebook His writing has helped millions of people around the world achieve their freedom without violence. I&apos;m skeptical, but fascinated....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3827@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject></dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-02-21T15:39:37-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Republican Boondoggle!</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003804.php</link>
<description>Get this: Homeland Security chief cancels costly virtual border fence Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Friday canceled the controversial virtual fence along the U.S. border with Mexico, citing technical problems, cost overruns and schedule delays since its inception in 2005. The Secure Border Initiative-network, a high-tech surveillance system to reduce border smuggling, so far has cost taxpayers almost $1 billion for two regions in Arizona, covering 53 miles overall on the 2,000-mile border, according to a Homeland Security report. That&apos;s five years, and ONE BILLION DOLLARS for fifty-three of the 2,000 miles. Bigotry is expensive. I guess I should be grateful someone finally pulled the plug on that monstrosity but all I can think of is how much good ONE BILLION DOLLARS could have done the economy, if spent wisely over the past five years. Well, no, that&apos;s not all I can think of. I also want to know...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3804@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject></dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-01-14T16:12:11-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Moderation In All Things</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003802.php</link>
<description>Just when I&apos;m about to write Brooks off, he goes and says a lot of sensible things. &quot;Moderation&quot;, as he makes clear, is not the same as centrism, weakness, or ineffectualness. What our politics needs is more moderation. To be moderate--measured and thoughtful--in one&apos;s approach to ideas and events does not preclude being passionate about one&apos;s beliefs. Also, shut up already with blaming the Rightwingnuts for Arizona. Stories, even those that came out less than 24 hours after the shootings, make it clear that this young man was mentally ill, and has been for a very long time. As distasteful as I find the Rightwingnut rhetoric*, I have to say that rhetoric didn&apos;t make that kid sick. Those of you who jumped into the driver&apos;s seat of the Blame Wagon over the weekend should be ashamed. Sometimes I find myself wondering--if he hadn&apos;t fixed on a political target, would he...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3802@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Politics and Liberalism</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-01-12T12:49:10-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Support Bernie</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003792.php</link>
<description>He&apos;s over here, filibustering for what you want - an extension of tax cuts for everyone except the super-rich....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3792@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject></dc:subject>
<dc:date>2010-12-10T12:13:21-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Yeah, that&apos;s what I meant</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003780.php</link>
<description> Succinctly, there&apos;s a lack of truthiness in the wingnut population of the Republican Party and now that the Party has succeeded in wining a few elections, it has to figure out how to ride the whirlwind it created....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3780@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject></dc:subject>
<dc:date>2010-11-11T12:41:41-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>killmenow</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003779.php</link>
<description>Paging Jeb Bush -- for 2012...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3779@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Campaigns and Voting</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2010-11-11T10:59:11-07:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Not News. Olds. And Truths.</title>
<link>http://annezook.com/archives/003778.php</link>
<description>Did you read this column? Unsurprising revelations of a giant gap between what Republican voters say they want and what the public leadership of the Party says they&apos;re in favor of. The column just reiterates three truths we already knew: 1. The majority of Republican voters have no idea what their Party&apos;s policies actually are. 2. The majority of Republican voters have no idea that every vote they cast is a vote against their own best interests. 3. The majority of Republican voters have no idea where their Party came from - what their roots are. Just as the actual Democrats in this country are considerably more liberal* than the centrists holding the reins of power, the actual Republicans in this country are much more traditionally conservative than the wingnuts getting all the press coverage. (Actually, the majority of people in this country are far more liberal than conservative in...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">3778@http://annezook.com/</guid>
<dc:subject>Campaigns and Voting</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2010-11-10T16:40:28-07:00</dc:date>
</item>


</channel>
</rss>
