You can't be pragmatic without dissecting the arguments.

Alright, I lied. I wasn't the first in line for the new film "Birthday Girl" starring the ultra-hot, hotter than hot, hotter than any other woman, so very very hot, Nicole Kidman. In fact, I haven't even seen it yet. I will get to check it out this weekend if all goes well.

In other local happenings:

The latest issue of the Heuristic Squelch came out this week, it includes my feature article debut entitled "Confessions of the Colorblind."

The Daily Cal has once again come up with an incredibly brilliant editorial position. Today, they decided to take on the new University regulation that pushes the smoking line around buildings from 5 feet away to 15 feet, so that University policy matches up with State Law (a radical concept). In classic Daily Cal overanalyzing the editorial board in their infinite wisdom tried to find in this regulation change some sort of agenda which it cannot by definition fulfill.

It would seem to me that moving this smoking barrier out from 5 to 15 feet is, in fact, significant. It's not like they're moving smokers away from an arbitrary point, but rather moving away from the entrances to buildings. Come on Daily Cal, isn't it much less obtrusive for smoking to take place at that distance from a door as opposed to where it used to be? I'm more or less a supporter of smokers' rights, but I don't see anything wrong with not being bombarded with tobacco smoke immediately upon exiting a building. It's a good decision. It will make smokers think twice about where they're smoking and it will empower people who are umcomfortable with tobacco smoke to approach someone violating the regulation.

Are police going to enforce it? Probably not. Did the University ever expect them to? I doubt it, though the Daily Cal seems to think otherwise.

Please Daily Cal, take more than five minutes to reason out your editorial opinions.

Nicole Kidman is so very very hot. I'm going to be the first in line for "Birthday Girl." Nothing else to really comment on in the news today.

I was able to check out the simulcast of Clinton's lecture on campus today. It was a phenomenal speech. After brief introductions by Chancellor Berdahl and California Governor Davis, Clinton spoke for about an hour primarily on the subject of globalization. His comments were well received by the audience. He supported the military action against Osama bin-Laden and Al-Qaida, but he did little to support the prospects of an extended war that the current administration seems to advocate. Clinton discussed the importance of invest in the economies of developing countries, forgiving debt in exchange for promised investment in Health Care and Education. He supported environmental checks on the World Trade Organization's authority without dismissing global politics out of hand.

His best point was that by implementing some simple projects now, primarily curtailing climate change, investing in health care in sub-Saharan Africa, and forgiving debt relief in exchange for investment in human services, we can prevent billions of dollars in expenses in later consequences of disillusionment in the developing world. He spoke of the importance of the United States and the rest of the developed world to continue and expand programs investing overseas to improve quality of life in those developing nations.

His speech has been or will be archived on the UC Berkeley website. Check it out here.

Check it out.

I swear, what do West Coast college basketball teams have to do to get respect from the East Coast media? Compare the RPI, the primary gauge to find tournament quality teams, with the ESPN/ USA TODAY poll. It's frustrating, and not just because Cal is ranked 29th in the RPI (second best in Pac-10) but didn't even receive a single vote in the poll.

I'm a strong supporter for Disabled Rights. I believe that all public places should be wheelchair accessible and that the state and/or local governments should provide assistants and interpreters as necessary for a disabled student to be able to participate in class at their ability level at all levels of education. Special Education and Adaptive Education are both very important programs in the public schools and should remain so.

However, I do not agree with the UC Berkeley Disabled Students' Union in their lawsuit against the University of California. While I will admit that their points regarding being caught up in University bureaucracy can be frustrating, it is not a problem unique to disabeld students. My bone of contention is that I do not understand how they can justify attacking the requirement that hearing-impaired students report on their class absences if they have a state-provided interpreter for them. It is a matter of policy that if the student is more than ten minutes late to a class, the interpreter leaves to handle other business. If the state is spending tax money to provide for these disabled students' services it is only natural that the student be accountable so that this money is not wasted when it could just as easily be spent on something else vital.

According to the Daily Cal, "Disabled students are required to explain why they are late to or absent from a class. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit say that rule is 'burdensome' and 'intrusive.' Emily Alexander, a student at UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law, said the policies make her feel like a 'child.'" Alexander continues by saying that "None of my hearing classmates are required to inform university officials on a continuing basis of whether they will attend class."

This may very well be true, but what Ms. Alexander doesn't seem to understand is that most students do not have an interpreter provided by state taxpayer funds for their daily activities. If those interpreters are present in a class when the student is not, then that is a waste of both the interpreter's time and the state's money. Requiring these students to be modestly accountable to the University for their whereabouts so as to ensure a minimal waste of funds is both justifiable and necessary.

If I were receiving services from the state as a disabled student I would be angry at these students who were filing this lawsuit. It is this frivolousness and sense of entitlement that is cited by opponents of state-funded services for the disabled as reasons for curtailing those services. Think strongly about what this lawsuit hopes to accomplish and take a minute to objectively see how selfish you are in fact being.

It's Sunday, the end of a delightful weekend. I went to the gallery reception at 66 Balmy in SF to see the work of Aidan Hughes, as well as Winston Smith and Shepard Fairey. It was a very interesting exhibit of neo-propaganda art. All the artists in one way or another subvert propaganda paradigms from the 30's, 40's, and 50's and use them to create a new propaganda style that exists in opposition to the original intent. The exhibits there until February 4th and I strongly encourage anyone in the Greater Bay Area to check it out. 66 Balmy is in and of itself a pretty damn cool place, sitting on the muraled Balmy Lane it is actually the converted garage of a house that abuts the alleyway.

That evening I ended up at my friend's fraternity for a basement party that was pretty grooving.

There wasn't much in the news to comment on this weekend, but I'm sure I'll have lots of ranting to do this coming week. Keep on reading and I'll be back tomorrow.

Later.