The federal government hit their credit limit recently (not that they haven’t been pushing it all year). Instead of re-evaluating their spending habits, tightening their belts and learning to live within their means, they just raised the limit. Aiming for a high of $1.9 trillion, they tried to make this increase seem a little more palatable by “only” raising it $298 billion – to get us to February. When they will raise it again.

A recent on-line poll of over 163,000 people showed a mind-boggling 99% of Americans are against raising the ceiling – but they did it anyway. Among them was Utah’s Jim Matheson, who voted for the bill. 39 Blue-Dog Democrats voted against the bill, coincidentally the very same number that voted against the health care bill and presumably the precise number Pelosi allows to vote no.

Over in the White House, President Obama has led the way on calling for a debt ceiling increase. In an ironic twist, he also led the way speaking out against Bush raising the debt ceiling to “only” $9 trillion in 2006. Back then, he said: ““Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.” Obama later joined his Democratic colleagues in voting en bloc against raising the debt increase.

Tired of the drunken-sailor spending going on? I know I am. It’s time for some TRUE fiscal conservatives back there.

Jet-setters arriving in Las Vegas will immediately be assaulted by Vegas Culture in the airport, both the obvious (fruit machines) and the unexpected (home-grown art exhibitions). This month, Vegas native KD Matheson displays some of his most profound and inspiring work – a primal gathering of dream-inspired totems, masks, prayer figures, vases and other magical creatures neatly representative of an ephemeral desert culture. Composed of a variety of clay, cement and other earthly materials, Matheson’s works may be the first to truly define a Las Vegas art style that escapes the hackneyed ’southwestern’ schlock.

Senator Bob Bennett is not the only Utah politician in trouble.  Congressman Matheson, the lone Democrat in Utah’s federal delegation, is under fire from the left and the right.

Called a DINO by Utah liberals, he is no conservative, either. His ranking with the American Conservatives Union is a rock-bottom 38. (Ok, you can go lower – dozens of Dems get a score of zero.) He votes with the Pelosi agenda most of the time and let’s be honest – he only votes against her when she knows she has the votes to win. Sitting in the House Gallery Saturday night, I listed to Dem staffers talk about “releasing” Blue Dogs to vote no once they knew they had the votes – and not until then.  That’s the way the game is played.

He voted against the healthcare bill (angering his Democrat base), but he also voted twice to bring it to the floor, knowing it had the votes to pass and refusing to vote for an alternative plan angering his conservative constituents and national GOP leaders. He voted for the Stupak amendment preventing federal funds from being used for abortion (angering the left) and yet the first business day after the vote, Democrats were already assuring their constituents the amendment would be stripped out of the final version (angering the right).

Senator Scott McCoy was fed up and posted on his Facebook page that maybe he should run against him. Even though Senator McCoy says he was not serious, there is a lot of discontent with Representative Matheson from within the ranks of his own party. A couple dozen protested outside his office yesterday, angry that he voted against the healthcare reform bill. Liberal Utah blogs are filled with a call for someone to run against him.

Combine that with anti-incumbent sentiment, a rising percentage of voters identifying themselves as conservatives and last week’s elections seeing independent voters break 2 to 1 for Republicans and this may very well be the year Matheson “retires”. A letter to the editor of the Salt Lake Tribune sums up the feelings of what seems to be a growing number constituents. Daniel Larkin says:

I haven’t voted for a Republican since Richard Milhous Nixon — twice — but fence-straddler Rep. Jim Matheson, with his jellyfish backbone, gives me pause. If the Republicans field an opponent in the mold of Rep. Jason Chaffetz (but more sagacious), she or he will get my vote. I have had it with this politician who is so ashamed of his party that he skipped its national convention. Bye bye, Jimmy.

2010 is sure to be one of the most wild-and-woolly election years to watch in recent history.

Hey, we finally are getting somewhere.  I am not a fan of my Congressman Matheson, but he finally takes a stand that I can get behind.  I will be calling his office tomorrow, and thanking him.

More importantly, we are making an impact.  The calls, visits, and emails are getting the point across, we don’t want this, and we will vote you out if you support it.

Casa Editrice: Fanucci Editore

Anno Di Pubblicazione: 1954 (America), 1957 (Italia)

Trama: America, 1976. Robert Neville è l’ultimo essere umano rimasto sulla Terra, dopo che un batterio ha infettato tutta la popolazione, tranne lui; tutti gli infettati sono diventati le creature mitologiche per antonomasia, i vampiri. Robert trascorre la sua vita girovagando per la cttà in cerca di provviste, munizioni e protezioni per la sua casa, perchè ogni notte si deve barricare per gli assalti dei vampiri. Solo dopo diversi mesi decide di studiare il virus, e scopre che ci sono due tipi diversi di vampiri: quelli vivi, ancora intelligenti e in grado di ragionare, e quelli morti, che si comportano come degli zombi, vagando ed assalendo ogni cosa vivente. Finalmente, dopo tanto tempo Robert trova un’altra creatura non infettata: un cane. Si dedica molto a proteggerlo, ma poche settimane dopo scopre che anche l’animale è infetto, e lo uccide per evitare che lo contagi. E così la vita di Robert va avanti. Ma, perchè egli non è infetto? E chi è la donna che vede camminare una mattina poco lontano da casa sua?

Commento Al Testo: Il libro, scritto in terza persona, coinvolge fin dalle prime pagine, forse per la scrittura semplice e scorrevole, che allo stesso tempo rende perfettamente tutte le sensazioni ed i pensieri del protagonista, forse per il senso di quotidianità “alternativa” che il libro racconta. Le vicende narrate nel libro sono suddivise in 4 capitoli: Gennaio 1976, Marzo 1976, Giugno 1978 e Gennaio 1979. L’ambientazione è una cittadina americana, non specificata.

Citazione dal libro:

La sveglia trillò alle cinque e mezza e Robert Neville allungò il braccio addormentato nella tetraggine del mattino per spegnerla. Prese le sigarette e ne accese una, poi si sollevò a sedere. Dopo poco si alzò e si diresse nel soggiorno in penombra per aprire lo spioncino. Fuori, sul prato, le figure scure vigilavano come sentinelle silenziose. Mentre stava a guardare fuori, alcuni di loro cominciarono ad allontanarsi e li sentì brontolare insoddisfatti. Era passata un’altra notte. Tornò in camera da letto, accese la luce e si vestì. Mentre si infilava la camicia sentì Ben Cortman gridare: “Vieni fuori, Neville!”. E poi basta. Dopo, tutti se ne andarono più deboli, lo sapeva, di quando erano arrivati. A meno che non avessero aggredito uno dei loro. Capitava spesso. Non erano uniti. A motivarli era unicamente il bisogno. (…) “Il vampiro trae forza dal fatto che nessuno intende credere alla sua esistenza”.

I had the privilege of seeing this Perth-based (that’s in Western Australia, kids) 5-piece for free at the “The Espy” Hotel in St. Kilda, Melbourne. I also convinced myself that the 23 bucks/pitcher we were preparing ourselves with didn’t cover the set… each subsequent pitcher=greater denial. 

 Everyone has seen a band they love for free—in the U.S. I have more bands on my ipod formed in Washington State than all of Australia.  What does this say about our industry? Pearl Jam, Death Cab for Cutie, Modest Mouse, Band of Horses, Fleet Foxes, etc. (all from Washington) do come out to play on occasion, but I love music and food. I have to choose. If I had more limbs, I guess I could see more foreign bands. Hence, when I find an Aussie band I love, I just hope to hell they remain anonymous…

Thankfully, the Panics survived long enough for me to take some American friends to the gig and give something back to the country.  My pitch: ‘C’mon mate, free…’  I have realised that my American audience will do anything if you stick the word mate after it. They were keen as mustard at the point*. I’m not even sure they knew what exactly was free.

The support acts, Matheson, of Ballarat, Victoria and The Bloodpoets, of Brisbane, Australia made this a true Aussie affair and were solid, but nothing spectacular, so we drifted in and out of the band room, whilst I raised expectations dangerously high for the boys. The Panics’ set then flew by, a perfect mix of old and new and luckily, all three of my mates begged me for the entire back catalogue. This came moments after they’d blasted out their anthem, ‘Don’t Fight It’, to finish up probably the best free set I’ll ever see. In Australia, anyway.

*Editor’s note: I have no idea wtf this means.

Take a gander at king of thieves Bernard Madoff’s political contributions.  Then explain to me how the Republican Party is the party of greed.

The top three donations to the Democrats all dated 03/18/09, by the way, are in fact three separate donations (totaling over $75,00).

Contributor	Candidate or PAC	Amount	Date	FEC Filing
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$-25,000 primary	03/18/09
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$-25,000 primary	03/18/09
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$-25,000 primary	03/18/09
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$-25,000 primary	03/18/09
Madoff, Bernard L. Mr. New York, NY 10021	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE	$-10,000 primary	02/27/09
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L. MADOFF INVEST.-SEC./CHAI	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$25,000 primary	09/12/08
Madoff, Bernard L. Mr. New York, NY 10021 Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securi	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE	$5,000 primary	08/20/08
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10022 SELF EMPLOYED/INVESTOR	MERKLEY, JEFFREY ALAN (D) Senate – OR JEFF MERKLEY FOR OREGON	$2,300 primary	04/24/08
Madoff, Bernard L. New York, NY 10021	SAUL, ANDREW MARSHALL (R) House (NY 19) SAUL FOR CONGRESS INC	$-2,300 primary	12/05/07
Madoff, Bernard L New York, NY 10021 Bernard Madoff Investment/Chairman	LAUTENBERG, FRANK R (D) Senate – NJ LAUTENBERG NJ VICTORY COMMITTEE	$300 primary	07/20/07
Madoff, Bernard L New York, NY 10021 Bernard Madoff Investment/Chairman	LAUTENBERG, FRANK R (D) Senate – NJ LAUTENBERG NJ VICTORY COMMITTEE	$5,000 primary	07/20/07
Madoff, Bernard L New York, NY 10021 Bernard Madoff Investment/Chairman	LAUTENBERG, FRANK R (D) Senate – NJ LAUTENBERG NJ VICTORY COMMITTEE	$2,300 primary	07/20/07
Madoff, Bernard L. New York, NY 10021 Bernard L. Madoff Investment/Chairm	SAUL, ANDREW MARSHALL (R) House (NY 19) SAUL FOR CONGRESS INC	$2,300 primary	07/10/07
Madoff, Bernard L Mr. New York, NY 10021 Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securi	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE	$5,000 primary	05/24/07
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L. MADOFF INVEST.-SEC./CHAI	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$25,000 primary	05/04/07
Madoff, Bernard L Mr. New York, NY 10021 Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securi	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A	$5,000 primary	10/17/06
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L. MADOFF INVEST. SEC./CHAI	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$25,000 primary	09/30/06
Madoff, Bernard L Mr. New York, NY 10021 Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securi	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A	$5,000 primary	09/22/05
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD L MADOFF INVEST SEC	DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE (D)	$25,000 primary	05/09/05
Madoff, Bernard New York, NY 10021 Madoff Investments/Chairman	MATHESON, JAMES (D) House (UT 02) MATHESON FOR CONGRESS	$250 general	10/18/04
Madoff, Bernard L New York, NY 10021	FROST, MARTIN (D) House (TX 32) MARTIN FROST CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE	$250 general	10/15/04
Madoff, Bernard New York, NY 10021 Self-employed/Banker	HOOLEY, DARLENE (D) House (OR 05) HOOLEY FOR CONGRESS	$250 general	10/15/04
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENTS	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY FRIENDS OF SCHUMER	$1,000 general	08/18/04
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENTS	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY FRIENDS OF SCHUMER	$1,000 primary	08/18/04
Madoff, Bernard L Mr. New York, NY 10021 Madoff (Bernard L.) Investment Secu	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A	$5,000 primary	07/08/04
Madoff, Bernard L New York, NY 10021 Madoff Investments/Chairman	MARKEY, EDWARD J MR. (D) House (MA 07) MARKEY COMMITTEE, THE	$2,000 primary	06/17/04
Madoff, Bernard L New York, NY 10021 Madoff Investments/Chairman	MARKEY, EDWARD J MR. (D) House (MA 07) MARKEY COMMITTEE, THE	$2,000 general	06/17/04
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENTS	LAUTENBERG, FRANK R (D) Senate – NJ LAUTENBERG FOR SENATE	$1,000	02/18/04
Madoff, Bernard L New York, NY 10021 Bernard L Madoff/Chairman	GEPHARDT, RICHARD A (D) President GEPHARDT FOR PRESIDENT INC.	$2,000 primary	09/23/03
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENTS	WYDEN, RONALD LEE (D) Senate – OR WYDEN FOR SENATE	$2,000 general	03/25/03
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENTS	WYDEN, RONALD LEE (D) Senate – OR WYDEN FOR SENATE	$2,000 primary	03/25/03
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENTS	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY FRIENDS OF SCHUMER	$1,000 general	04/08/02
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENTS	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY FRIENDS OF SCHUMER	$1,000 primary	04/08/02
Madoff, Bernard L. New York, NY 10022 Bernard L. Madoff P.C./Chairman	RANGEL, CHARLES B (D) House (NY 15) RANGEL FOR CONGRESS	$1,000 primary	08/30/01
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURIT	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A	$2,000 primary	11/03/00
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD MADOFF INVESTMENT SEC	FOSSELLA, VITO (R) House (NY 13) COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT VITO FOSSELLA	$1,000 primary	04/20/00
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD MADOFF INC	OBEY, DAVID R. (D) House (WI 07) A LOT OF PEOPLE FOR DAVE OBEY	$1,000 primary	03/10/00
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10022 CHAIRMAN	CLINTON, HILLARY RODHAM (D) Senate – NY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON FOR US SENATE COMMITTEE INC	$1,000 primary	01/13/00
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURIT	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A	$2,000 primary	12/20/99
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURIT	SECURITIES INDUSTRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION FUND A	$2,000 primary	12/20/99
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10021 MADOFF SECURITIES	CORZINE, JON S (D) Senate – NJ CORZINE 2000 INC	$1,000 primary	08/24/99
Madoff, Bernard Mr. New York, NY 10021 Bernard Madoff Investment Securitie	BRADLEY, BILL (D) President BILL BRADLEY FOR PRESIDENT INC	$1,000 primary	04/26/99
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURIT	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY VICTORY IN NEW YORK	$1,000 primary	10/30/98
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L MADOFF PC	RANGEL, CHARLES B (D) House (NY 15) RANGEL FOR CONGRESS	$1,000 general	10/23/98
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10021 SELF-EMPLOYED	D’AMATO, ALFONSE M (R) Senate – NY FRIENDS OF SENATOR D’AMATO (1998 COMMITTEE)	$1,000 general	09/21/98
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10022	CROWLEY, JOSEPH (D) House (NY 07) CROWLEY FOR CONGRESS	$-500 primary	08/26/98
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10022 BOND BROKER	CROWLEY, JOSEPH (D) House (NY 07) CROWLEY FOR CONGRESS	$500 primary	08/04/98
MADOFF, BERNARD NEW YORK, NY 10021	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY SCHUMER ‘98	$-300 primary	06/29/98
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURIT	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY SCHUMER ‘98	$1,000 general	05/22/98
MADOFF, BERNARD L NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERNARD L MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURIT	SCHUMER, CHARLES E (D) Senate – NY SCHUMER ‘98	$1,000 primary	05/22/98

When you take a look at who the nation’s biggest scumbags and crooks actually support, it should set to rest the lie that the Republican Party is the party that advanced these people’s greedy self-interests.

Take a look at Norman Hsu, who was a major Democrat fundraiser – and a major Democrat scumbag.  Take a look at Hassan Nemazee.  The Democrats have all sorts of slimeballs who make Jack Abramoff – as bad as he was – look like a chump change operator.

And you maintain that the REPUBLICANS are the party of greed and fraud?  And you want to give DEMOCRATS total power to control everything?  We’re about to see that actions have consequences.

Take a look at your corrupt new Chicago president.  Senator Barack Obama was the largest single recipient of corrupt and collapsed Fannie Mae campaign contributions over the last 20 years – even though he had only been in the Senate for four of those 20 years.  There is no question that Fannie Mae was at the epicenter of the subprime mortgage disaster (see here for a concise summary of the AEI article) that created the financial meltdown in 2008.  Even the liberal Newsweek acknowledges that “Fannie Mae defanged laws that could have prevented the subprime mess.”  And how did they do that?  By supporting lawmakers like Barack Obama who took their side.

Conservatives repeatedly tried – to no avail in the face of united Democrat opposition – to stop the monster (that Democrats supported, and received support from) from growing and then collapsing and taking the economy along with it.

Now Democrats are on their way to rebuilding the monster so that we can have another collapse down the road.

Obama was also right at the head of the line in campaign handouts from corrupt and collapsed Wall Street player Lehman Brothers.  Lehman Bros. was one of the worst players in the subprime game that made them so much money before exploding – and imploding the economy.

Obama had all sorts of “subprime buddies.” Obama was getting huge money from all of the very worst of the worst Wall Street players who brought us down.  You should seriously take a look at all the greedy and Wall Street entities and executives who piled money into Obama’s hands and ask yourself why they funded him.

Democrats are yelling for regulations as the “solution” to the problems caused by the free market.  But before you fall for that load of malarkey, just realize that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) – and fell under the direct oversight of the government.  The reason Democrats want to have so much authority over the economy is so they can benefit from all the cozy and profitable relationships that accrue from the finance world coming to politicians for special treatment favors.

Did Barney Frank’s regulatory oversight over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stop their collapse?  Hardly.  In 2003, when George Bush first tried to create regulations that may well have prevented the 2008 collapse, Barney Frank represented the overwhelming Democrat opposition when he said:

”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

And just before Fannie and Freddie – which controlled half of the nation’s total mortgages – collapsed, Barney Frank (who had direct authority over the GSEs as Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee) said:

REP. BARNEY FRANK, D-MASS.: “I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound, that they are not in danger of going under. They’re not the best investments these days from the long-term standpoint going back. I think they are in good shape going forward.”

You can watch Democrats fiddling while Rome burned on Youtube:

The Democrats’ “regulations” amounted to the foxes being put in charge of keeping the chickens safe.

And we’re currently seeing an explosion of frankly quasi-fascist interrelated influence between the White House and giant Wall Street entities under the president who has been bought and sold by the same people who destroyed the economy.

If you want the truth today, you have to go out and seek it.  Because the media today is as dishonest and as much of a propaganda tool for Democrats as TASS and Pravda used to be for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Judging from the flurry of venture-capital deals, big oil company investments, and attention from politicians on startups creating biofuels from algae, it might seem like the world has fallen in love with the technology to power vehicles with pond scum. But after all of the algae euphoria this summer, we’ve started seeing a few signs of an algae fuel backlash, with several prominent investors publicly questioning the economics of algae fuel.

At the AlwaysOn’s GoingGreen conference, outspoken cleantech investor Vinod Khosla said his firm has aggressively been looking at algae technologies, but hasn’t found one viable plan after looking at “maybe two dozen.” “The economics of algae don’t seem to work,” he said.
(You can watch the video here by clicking on “Renewables at Scale.”)

In contrast, Khosla has been investing millions into biofuels made from cellulosic biomass. His sentiments also seem to be a change from the rhetoric just last year, when Khosla said at the Algae Biomass Summit that algae could “be a solution” and play a significant role in replacing oil.

Khosla isn’t the only one warning against too much optimism where algae fuel is concerned. At the EmTech conference this week, Jim Matheson, a general partner at Flagship Ventures, said he doesn’t think the costs calculate out either. “We just don’t believe in the economics,” he said, and added that he isn’t sure that “algae is going to come down the cost curve,” according to Technology Review.

At the same event, Technology Review also reported that David Eyton, head of research and technology at BP, which has invested in algae startups Synthetic Genomics and Martek Biosciences, questioned the viability of different types of algae technology, and more specifically the kind that Exxon Mobil recently invested $600 million in. “We don’t think that [technology] will ever reach the kind of cost or supply that we think people are prepared to pay,” he said.

Is the algae-fuel backlash snowballing into a full-on trend? Well, algae has always had its skeptics. As far back as three years ago, companies like Imperium Renewables were stating that producing significant amounts of algae for biodiesel was further away than cellulosic ethanol. “It’s not about whether algae can produce oil, but about whether it can meet a standard quantity needed for fuel,” then-CEO Martin Tobias said at ThinkEquity’s Greentech Summit in San Francisco back then. “It’s going to take longer than anyone wants to say at an investor’s conference.”

Nobody so far has been able to produce algae cost competitively in large quantities, and – in spite of all the promising ideas — it’s still unclear whether that will happen. Matt Horton, CEO of Propel and a principal at @Ventures, said his view of algae hasn’t changed in the last few years. “It’s one of the most promising opportunities in the liquid fuels arena, but the timelines for true commercialization are still years down the road,” he said. It’s tough for a company like Propel to work with algae companies at this point because it’s difficult to predict – with any certainty – when algae-based fuels might realistically be delivered.

When a technology like algae fuel gets as much attention as it has this summer — with politicians visiting algae fuel startups on a weekly basis — it becomes an easy target for the skeptics. What the industry needs right now is less hype and more proof that the pond scum can really come down in cost to reach mass commercialization.

Image courtesy of NREL.

Montreal and Nashville’s rookie camp rosters have finally hit the web, and quite a few familiar faces will be making their way to their respective clubs.

MONTREAL: Among the 29 players to hit the ice in Brossard, Quebec with the Habs on September 7th are former league MVP David Desharnais, 2008 American Conference-clinching goal scorer Ryan Russell, 2008 Kelly Cup MVP Cedrick Desjardins, and forward/defenseman JT Wyman. [Full roster here.] Other names of note: Dany Masse & Robert Mayer. Masse, 21, is a QMJHL graduate who had 110 points in 68 games with Drummondville last year, before an injury knocked him out of the postseason. He isn’t expected to spend much time in Cincinnati, but could see some action early on while making up for lost time after missing this summer’s Canadiens prospect camp. Mayer, 19, went 26-25-4 (.900, 3.25) with the Saint John Sea Dogs of the QMJHL. The way the Canadiens’ depth chart looks, if Halak is not moved before the season, he could factor to be the fifth goaltender in the system and could see action in Cincinnati.

NASHVILLE: The Predators open their rookie camp up on September 8th with quite a few familiar names – ’08 Cup winner Ryan Maki, ‘09 playoff point-per-game man Ian McKenzie, 26-goal-scorer Mark Van Guilder, as well Mark Santorelli and defenseman Mark Matheson who saw limited action in Cincinnati. They travel to Duluth, GA to battle the Atlanta rookies on September 14 & 15. [Full roster here.] Notable names: Jeremy Smith and Chet Pickard. Mark Dekanich split time in net with Drew MacIntyre in Milwaukee, but with the departure of MacIntyre to Atlanta, it appears to be between Pickard and Smith to fight for the second spot, with the other seeing time in Cincinnati. Smith, 20, went 15-18-5 with Niagara and Plymouth of the OHL, while Pickard went 35-12-3 with the Tri-City Americans of the WHL. Chances are, Smith will make an appearance in Cincinnati if Pickard’s success translates to the professional ranks.

–Dannielle

My August 5th post on single-payer health care outlined why I thought single-payer health care ought to pass and become America’s new health system.  Its now appearing obvious that American legislators are in bed enough with insurance companies to make any important reform let alone the revolutionary change to single-payer health care difficult.  A Business Week cover article from August 6th, called “The Health Insurers Have Already Won” begins with an assertion in their first page that insurance companies will emerge more profitable regardless of any likely outcome.  It is the combination of Blue Dog and moderate democrats with republicans that is so quick to sell out American citizens for their corporate taskmasters. 

Representative Jim Matheson from Utah and Representative Mike Ross from Arizona, opposing progress and affordable health for millions on behalf of the Blue Dogs and corporations, are working to thwart any proposal which would set up a public option to compete with the private sector, a major component of the Obama Administration’s plan to reduce costs among the private sector.  The perspective of the leaders of the Blue Dogs can be easily seen.  Ross had been bought completely by UnitedHealth, stating that “”If United has something to offer on cutting costs, we should consider it.  We need more examples that work, and everything should be on the table.”"  Ross wants everything on the table, and he’s worried about cutting costs in the health insurance industry.  What compassion!  Yet he also says that “We have concerns about a public option if it’s not done on a level playing field [with the insurance companies]“. 

Ross seems sincere, right?  I mean, he’s so concerned about everyone that he wants to help us all and help insurance companies, because they sure have been hurting in these hard, hard times. 

The National Coalition on Health Care states:

National Health Care Spending

• In 2008, health care spending in the United States reached $2.4 trillion, and was projected to reach $3.1 trillion in 2012.1 Health care spending is projected to reach $4.3 trillion by 2016.
• Health care spending is 4.3 times the amount spent on national defense.
• In 2008, the United States will spend 17 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health care. It is projected that the percentage will reach 20 percent by 2017.
• Although nearly 46 million Americans are uninsured, the United States spends more on health care than other industrialized nations, and those countries provide health insurance to all their citizens.
• Health care spending accounted for 10.9 percent of the GDP in Switzerland, 10.7 percent in Germany, 9.7 percent in Canada and 9.5 percent in France, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

In other words, Americans spend more than anywhere else despitethe fact that 46 million are uninsured.  Meanwhile, the AFL-CIO reports that “profits at 10 of the country’s largest publicly traded health insurance companies rose 428 percent from 2000 to 2007, while consumers paid more for less coverage.”  You know, now that I think about it, maybe Ross and the blue dogs are more concerned with sacrificingAmericans for insurance companies than he is about being fair to everyone.  He actually bragged about how the Blue Dogs “held the [health care] bill hostage in committee for 10 days” and prevented consideration of a single-payer health care option, as reported by the Huffington Post. 

It appears that the major argument given by the opposition (Blue Dogs and republicans) to every sane and reasonable healthcare plan (those with public options) is that the creation of a public option, competing with private insurers, would underprice them and drive them out of business.  Then again, if they are so concerned with cutting costs and putting everything on the table, what difference does it make?  In other words, a public option can reduce prices for Americans in a way that private insurance either can’t or won’t.  Tens of millions of Americans have no health insurance because they cannot afford it (I assume there can be no other reason).  Despite that, the Blue Dogs oppose any public option because of its increased ability to make healthcare. . . affordable?  Seriously, their primary objection is that public options will be able to lower their price to such affordable levels that, it is estimated (although controversially) that “88 million people, or 56% of those withemployer-provided coverage, would desert private insurance for a government-run program.”  If private insurers could not compete with a public option, isn’t that a sign that the public option is vastly superior to the private insurers?  I mean, I thought that sound logic went something like this:  “Millions of Americans can’t afford Option A.   Option B costs waaaayyyyless than Option A ever could, with the same coverage.  Because they could afford B waaayyyyy more than A, they’d probably switch from A to B because they like it more.  Consequentially, we should endorse B.”  The ‘argument’ given for supporting private insurers which, even according to the terms of the argument, are wholly unable to meet American needs, is that a public option, undercutting private ones in price, “would destabilize the marketplace and potentially kill the private insurance industry”. 

I suppose the correct response is “Who cares?”  Even those arguing for private insurers and againstpublic options do so from the premise that public options have greater potentiality to be affordable, so there is no reasonable objection to public options.  The healthinsurance industry is already in an oligopoly state in the market, and so arguments that a public option would destroy the competition are meaningless.  It’s not a competitive industry.  It’s massive profit margins and insufficient coverage are results of its lack of a need to be competitive.  Someone concerned withcompetition should welcome a public competitor, and realize that the true result of competition, that private insurers unable to compete might go out of business, is fine.  As for me, I’d rather have Americans have an affordable public option than a number of high priced private options.  We deserve to be able to afford the surgeries and medical care we need.  We deserve to not have to watch our sick children wither and die from our inability to pay for treatments.  We deserve to not have to choose between our children dying now because we can’t afford treatments, and our children dying later because the treatments put us permanently in debt.  We finally deserve democratic say over these issues, and if we have representatives we deserve those who will consider their citizens, rather than lie to their faces about the options before them, and stab them in the back with UnitedHealth’s knife. Stop protecting private insurers from competition!  Stop sacrificing American health for the profits of your capitalist friends! 

My post: http://practicalutopian.wordpress.com/2009/08/05/on-single-payer-health-care/

Business Week: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_33/b4143034820260.htm 

NCHC: http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

AFL-CIO: http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/05/27/health-insurance-profits-soar-as-industry-mergers-create-near-monopoly/

Book Review:

I am Legend!

by Richard Matheson

So I figured it was the perfect time to bring up a book review on the Gray Pen. I struggled a bit picking which one it should be; I settled on I Am Legend.

I am Legend is a science fiction novel written by Richard Matheson in 1954. It has been adapted into three films over the past fifty years: The Last Man on Earth(1964), The Omega Man(1971), and finally I am Legend(2007).

The novel tells of vampirism spreading and infecting the entire world; leaving one man Robert Neville alive in New York city. The brunt of the novel revolves around the scientist Neville, who seeks a cure to save humanity. Constantly, he seeks to find other people, or life itself, suffering from depression and loneliness. At one point in the novel he finds a companion; a dog, however the dog dies several days after him finding it.

The novel ends with the world being owned by these vampires, and Neville being executed in front of the masses as a test of their power. He is the last man on Earth, he is legend.

Matheson beautifully narrates the novel, swinging between the dark and optimistic tensions. The vampires are displayed more brutally and soon you can tell that they become more human-like, and knowledgeable. People viewed the movie, will be in for quite a surprise once they read the book, the plot is the same; however everything else is much different. It will be like you’re checking out something entirely new, and dark.

Anyone who is into dark fiction, or science fiction at all should definitely pick up this classic. Though it is old, time has not withered away at its impact and feel.I am Legend is one hell of a read!

Thank you,

Damian

The stats are here!  Nameniks rejoiced as the US Social Security Administration unveiled the 2008 name data.  Here’s a quick round-up of discussion posts:

• Elisabeth’s Names on the Upswing at You Can’t Call It “It”
• Nameberry’s post, as well as Pam’s Daily Beast article. Her big take-away?  Celeb influence is serious;
• The Baby Name Wizard has a series of articles, starting with one on the fastest rising names; 
• Even Wired chimed in on the announcement.  Greg at Daddy Types mentioned their coverage before I spotted them in my Google Alerts – he was my go-to stroller guru back in the day, and I always enjoy his name-spotting articles.

A few celeb births to report, too:

• Tampa Bay Ray baseball player Gabe Gross welcomed a daughter named Allie Lee.  I’m can see the appeal of Allie, but I’m puzzled by that middle pick – isn’t it like naming your kiddo Anna Na?  Or David Vid?
• Backstreet Boy Howie Dorough chose a nicely classic appellation for his firstborn – James Hoke Dorough.  (Hoke is a family name.)  Sounds more poet laureate than boy band, doncha think?
• Broadway actor Jonathan Cake and Law & Order: Criminal Intent’s Julianne Nicholson welcomed a daughter called Phoebe Margaret.  Big brother is Ignatius.
• Television’s Julie Bowen had twin sons – Gus and John.  I suspect they have more formal names, yet to be revealed, as big brother is Oliver McLanahan.

A few more newsy bits:

• The most recent Toronto Star What’s Your Name article was among the most thought-provoking yet.  The parents chose Matheson for their daughter, noting that the name “just didn’t sound like a boy.”  To them, anyhow.  We’ll have to agree to disagree, and I must say that their daughter’s full name – Matheson Mary Isabel - is lovely, and the nickname Mattie is being worn by little girls called Matilda everywhere.  And that’s what really surprised me – the parents landed on Matheson as “something that when she went to kindergarten, the teacher would say her name and five hands wouldn’t pop up.”  Hmmm … Matheson, Madison, Madeline, Matilda … if the parents wanted something distinctive, they’d have been better off calling her Mary.
• Over at Nancy’s Baby Names, poll results suggest that the vast majority of parents would stick with a name that is “very significant to you, but could be a burden to your child” versus something more mainstream, but without meaning.  She doesn’t break it out by gender, but I wonder if that would a make a difference?
• It’s not exactly name news, but McDonald’s McCafé ad campaign threatens to unleash extraneous diacritical marks on the American public with their claims that one iced mocha from the Golden Arches can transform your daily drive into a commuté and your workspace into a cubiclé.  I will be hiding under my dešk, rockiñg baçk and forth untíl someone mâkes it stöp.

Wow – quite a week in baby naming, and that’s without the Jolie-Pitts adding to their brood!

Ni modo, se que estoy haciendo publicidad gratuita a dos empresas que bla bla bla… Lo importante, amable público lector,  es que pueden conseguir libros de ciencia ficción y fantasía al módico precio de 18 soles, y sin necesidad de buscar en Quilca o Amazonas,  sino en el supermercado de su barrio, es decir, en casi todos los establecimientos de Wong y Metro de Lima.

Y no es poco lo que se puede conseguir: La casa infernal de Richard Matheson, El globo de oro de John Varley, El mar de madera de Jonathan Carroll, Silencio de Ramsey Campbell, El ciclo de Dunwich de VV.AA., Luz de otros días de Stephen Baxter & Arthur C. Clarke,  Los hechos  de la vida de Graham Joyce, Darwinia de Robert C. Wilson… que se pueden complementar con El alma del vampiro de Poppy Z. Brite, Mundo anillo de Larry Niven y El ansia de Withley Strieber, entro otros títulos, estos en las librerías Crisol.

¿Qué puedo decir? Miracles still happens…

A novelláskötetben egyedül a címadó novelláról írnék most, mert a kötetben megjelent többi írás inkább a horror világából való.
Mint mindenki tudja, a Will Smiths főszereplésével készült film ebből a novellából (vagy inkább nevezhetjük kisregénynek is) készült. Valójában a kettőnek nem sok köze van egymáshoz a főszereplő nevén kívül.
A mi történetünkben Robert Neville teljesen egyedül van, rengeteg whiskey-t iszik és vámpírok veszik körül. A családját horrorba illő módon veszti el. Először magányát egy kutya érkezése töri meg, majd pedig úgy néz ki, hogy egy túlélőre talált…
Matheson írás szikár, pesszimista, közel sem olyan “happy endes”, mint a film. És egyszerűen remekmű. Neville érzéseit, állandó vívódását, önostorozását remekül mutatja be. Emellett még egy kis ismeretet is szerezhetünk a bacilusokról, de elsősorban az emberi természetről tanulhatunk rengeteget.
Valójában a műben keverednek a sci-fi, a horror és a fantasy elemei, de ezek mellett is nagyon realista a mű. Már csak ezért is érdemes megvenni a könyvet.
A többi novelláról azért annyit írnék, hogy túlteng bennük a horror, a fantasy, és még egy kis morbid humort is találunk bennük. Azért elmondható, hogy ezek a kis írásai is nagyon élvezhetőek az írónak.
Szóval olvassunk Mathesont! És pont.
by Nita

We’re getting ready to head to the printer’s very soon, so we’re opening up pre-orders now for just the Deluxe Signed Edition. There will be only 75 copies of this for sale and with advance interest, we anticipate it will sell out very quickly. The Deluxe Edition features a special handmade binding with textured faux leather, foil stamping, a reading ribbon, individual signed colophon author sheets, 7 art inserts, and a color dust jacket.

This anthology features all-new/previously unpublished work from an amazing group of writers. Here’s the lineup:

Cover and interior art by Kris Kuksi
Foreword – S.T. Joshi
Introduction – William F. Nolan and Jason V Brock
“Some Of My Best Friends Are Martians” – Ray Bradbury 
“De Mortuis” – John Tomerlin
“Love & Magick” – James Robert Smith
“Madri-Gall” – Richard Matheson & R.C. Matheson
“Hope and the Maiden” – Nancy Kilpatrick
“The Death and Life of Caesar LaRue” – Earl Hamner
“A Certain Disquieting Darkness” – Gary A Braunbeck
“The Boy Who Became Invisible” – Joe R. Lansdale
“Getting Along Just Fine” – William F. Nolan
“The Grandfather Clock” – George Clayton Johnson
“Triptych: Three Bon Bons” – Christopher Conlon
“The Hand That Feeds” – Kurt Newton
“The Central Coast” – Jason V Brock
“Omnivore” – Dan O’Bannon
“Just A Suggestion” – John Shirley
“I, My Father, and Weird Tales” – Frank M. Robinson
“Silk City” – Lisa Morton
“Red Light” – Steve Rasnic Tem
“How It Feels To Murder” – Norman Corwin
“At The Riding School” – Cody Goodfellow

To order, follow the link to our special page we’ve set up for the book. The Deluxe Edition is on sale for $175.00 (We’re offering $20 off for pre-orders). Shipping will be a flat $15 in the US for Priority Airmail with Insurance and Delivery confirmation. More for overseas.

Here’s the link: http://jasunni.com/shop/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=1

There will also be a trade hardcover retailing for $65 ($55 with newsletter coupon or pre-reserve). These will be unnumbered and 400 copies will be done. These will be signed by the editors William F. Nolan and Jason V Brock. We’re not asking for payments now for these as the number being produced is much larger, but you can drop us a note via email or post to reserve a copy for you (and then you can get the discount for it).

- James R. Beach and Jason V Brock
(Dark Discoveries Pub.)(Cycatrix Press)
www.darkdiscoveries.com
www.jasunni.com

“Fearless Leader”

June 25th, 2009

While a strong second season and great episodes like “End Run” last week have created raised expectations for Burn Notice, the show remains a formulaic procedural at some level. The show is not formulaic in a negative way, necessarily, but it has its patterns and uses them to varying degrees of effectiveness. As it happens, the past season or so has been particularly strong, but the show is by no means blowing our collective mind week in and week out. So, when I say that “Fearless Leader” was a pretty typical episode of Burn Notice, this is to say both that it was enjoyable but also that it did nothing to really make me stand up and take notice.

The problem, however, is that to some degree it should have been one of those episodes, at least the way it was situated within the season-opening storyline with Moon Bloodgood’s Detective Paxson. Presented as a new obstacle for Michael now that law enforcement is no longer being kept off his back by the people who burned him, the police interest in him has seemed a legitimate threat even if there have been times where Bloodgood popping up at the beginning and end of each episode has felt shallow. It left me waiting for the episode where Michael’s mission would intersect directly with our newly arrived detective, thinking that would justify her presence as more than just a symbolic sign of Michael’s newly precarious position.

It’s ultimately this expectation, not some notion of every episode being like “End Run,” that makes me disappointed in this one, as Paxson remained a pretty uninteresting character and, more importantly, the story that ends up closing this chapter in the show’s run was not particularly connected to her or elevated in any way by her presence. The result is that it makes the show seem lazier and simpler than it really is, and it makes an otherwise solid episode into a bit of a letdown: as Michael says, you always need to have a plan, and it seems like the show’s plan was a little shortsighted.

What made Season Two work, as I’m sure I’ve written countless times, was that Carla was a compelling threat to Michael that felt permanent and more importantly out of his grasp. There was something about Carla that Michael couldn’t crack, and we got the satisfaction of seeing Michael infiltrate her security, complete her jobs while keeping something for himself, and basically having to handle two cases at once at all times. Tricia Helfer was good, don’t get me wrong, but the impact of Carla was less in her performance and more in the character’s position vis a vis Michael, as someone who could control him and wasn’t just a pawn to be moved aside.

That’s ultimately what Paxson becomes in this episode, someone who the first three episodes pretended was this immovable object incapable of being bribed or blackmailed but here is broken in 43 minutes flat. We learn that she, like any good police, has a long-running case that she can’t quite solve, and that her forceful behaviour with Michael is a pattern that actually got her slapped for harrasment of a particular local drug lord (Erik Palladino). So, she becomes Michael’s unknowing client (or so the chyron tells us), as he infiltrates the gang through a frustrated middle manager in order to take control of his police situation.

The actual storyline wasn’t in and of itself bad, and I quite liked the episode’s moral of sorts that people will surprise you a bit. The problem is that within the storyline itself that worked: Tommy proving to be too good a guy to let our heroes get killed in order to him to move up the ladder was a nice turn, and allowing the likeable and hapless criminal to come out a good guy was a good way to end the storyline on a lighter note for a change. Add in the charmingly quaint Dry Cleaners robbery, with Michael having to both appear like a follower and keep himself from getting arrested, and you have a number of scenarios that were entertaining, plus a nice bit of humanity.

The problem is that, for Paxson, that humanity was deadly – immediately, she becomes just another civilian, a threat that was never a threat at all. All it takes is one of Michael’s strongly conceived plans, and a bit of spy business here and there, and Michael manages to both remove his police tail and clear seven potential cases from the “Michael Westen was probably responsible for this” file with one cleverly placed piece of C-4. It’s the kind of simple resolution that we never got with Carla, which allowed the character to keep their mystique. Instead, whatever mystique Paxson got over the last few weeks was gone by the time we learned that she was really just another victim of the bad guy, waiting to be saved by our hero.

The show isn’t making Michael’s life uncomplicated, of course, and I think there’s some value to the episode’s final moment as Michael and Fiona realize they’ve both reached the moment they’ve been waiting for, and yet for one it means time to settle down for the future and for the other it means to head into even more danger trying to reconnect with their past. My problem is that we had this set up in the premiere, and realistically Paxson was nothing but a delay rather than a legitimate storyline. I don’t doubt that they have more up their sleeve all around, but Paxson ended up being such a weakling that I’m wondering if it was even necessary to put a face to the police threat against him. Some early on were blaming Bloodgood’s performance for some of the awkwardness of Paxson, but I think it ultimately falls on Matt Nix and Co. for not giving her enough of a reason to exist, and for writing her off (if not literally, then certainly in terms of her ability to challenge Michael in the least) in such a limp fashion.

The episode ultimately wasn’t helped by the extraneous “Sam gets both his finances and his philandering past audited” storyline, even if I do enjoy seeing Bruce Campbell work. I think he had some fun moments, as well as some strong dramatic ones, throughout the storyline, but I was way too confused trying to figure out just what Sam calls his job these days, and how precisely he could so non-chalantly talk about the gun he pulled off a dead body or anything of that nature. It just seemed like a really strange storyline to be distracting from what seemed like a slightly underdeveloped A story (could have used a bit more on Palladino’s character, whose name I didn’t even end up remembering – Matheson, I believe), and from a chance to really develop Paxson’s character.

It’s a testament to the show that even though it may not have been doing as much as I wanted to, it was certainly still entertaining – Michael got to tell us plenty of smart tips, Sam got to display his mad ink skills, Fiona got to blow things up, and we got some dramatic tension between Fiona and Michael that I really do think will be compelling in the weeks ahead. The problem is that it seemed like the episode was taking shortcuts all over the place (Paxson at the neighbour’s funeral being a particularly blatant example) to try to make things really connect, and it just wasn’t doing it for me. It is great in those small little moments that define the show, but for once it definitely seemed like it was the broader strokes that failed to live up to the show’s precedent, and my own expectations.

Cultural Observations

• I love Bruce Campbell to death, but I have a hard time believing Sam as a father figure in any capacity. Sure, he can take a protective stance every now and then, but it just seemed like an odd relationship for him to have with the young Stacey. Still, storyline was worth it for the Stacey’s Mom reference alone (she’s got it goin’ on, after all).
• Erik Palladino really did the midseason/summer guest star rounds (ABC’s Cupid, ABC Family’s Make it Or Break It as well), and I’m curious to see if he grabs a series job. This didn’t really give him anything to work with, but he’s not a bad actor, and he’s pretty recognizable from his ER days. He also did guest spots on Reaper, Fringe as well as Private Practice. He also, shockingly to me, is 41 – man doesn’t age.
• The opening scene kind of fell apart once Paxson showed up (I’d rather have seen Michael burst in), but Michael’s “make that two drinks” and their synchronization of their watches was a fun little opening.
• How much money would a dry cleaner seriously have in the till?
• We get it, Madeline can’t cook or bake – let’s find something else for Sharon Gless to do.

John Steinbeck

In the last two weeks I’ve delved into The Grapes of Wrath (Steinbeck) and I Am Legend (Matheson). I am currently reading The Sun Also Rises (Hemingway). I can’t get enough. Back in high school, somewhere in the late 80’s, I was loathe to read the assigned books. I read a lot of Stephen King and Robert Ludlum. Those guys wove (and still weave in King’s case) great stories that resonated with me. I still read both authors today.

Looking back, I think I avoided the classics was because I couldn’t relate, because I had such a narrow view of the world. Also, the writing style was just different enough as to sit crookedly in my brain, making it difficult to concentrate on reading and comprehending.

What a joy to read these books for the first time and fall in love with the characters, the prose, the whole deal. I should probably thank my wife, a devout devourer of all manner of books, classic and otherwise. My good friends in Indiana deserve credit for my rediscovering Steinbeck. The gushed about The Grapes of Wrath and went so far as to push a worn copy into my hands. I love having a great reading network.

If you stumble across this post, let me know your thoughts on some classics. I’d love to hear them.

One of my favorite sci-fi authors (Sharon Lee) has declared June 23rd Fantasy and Science Fiction Writers Day.

As she puts it:

So! In my Official Capacity as a writer of science fiction and fantasy, I hereby proclaim June 23 Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Day! A day of celebration and wonder! A day for all of us readers of science fiction and fantasy to reach out and say thank you to our favorite writers. A day, perhaps, to blog about our favorite sf/f writers. A day to reflect upon how written science fiction and fantasy has changed your life.

So … what might you do on the 23rd to celebrate? Do you even read fantasy/sci-fi? Why? Why not?

Well, actually, June 24th is my middle daughter’s birthday, so I’d imagine I’ll be busy shopping around for the cake and dinner and presents.  That is also a Tueday… not that that means anything, just that the 23rd’s a Tuesday.

As to whether I read sci-fi and fantasy, heck yeah I read it!  It’s really cool to see what bends, twists and detours the human imagination can take.  I’m forced to deal with reality on a daily basis, so it’s nice to escape from it in a good book.  Some of my favorite authors of this genre are Neil Gaiman, Ray Bradbury, and others for whom I’m drawing a blank… but they’re great!  lol…

I have H. P. Lovecraft on Mt. TBR, as well as several Richard Matheson books.