Inventing Flight: Three Days
I haven’t abandoned the blog, and I have several posts in the works. However, as a resident of Dayton, I thought that I should at least post a few quick snippets on Inventing Flight while I’m working on more involved posts.
Opening
UFOs: I know that Inventing Flight is trying to be as inclusive as possible, hence the use of breakdancing in the opening ceremony. But I really wouldn’t have picked the Raelians as consultants for depicting the future of flight.
Somber: I’m not a doctor, but it sure looked like Neil Armstrong was suffering from Parkinson’s disease during the opening ceremony. It is entirely possible that in not too long a time, we will no longer have the lunar astronauts among us. Does it disturb anyone else that human interplanetary exploration may soon be an experience only remembered in books and films? If and when we go back, what will we have to relearn along the way?
Bush’s Speech
Numbers: I was lucky to be one of the twenty-five thousand people who got tickets to see Bush speak at Wright-Patterson AFB. I saw exactly five protestors outside the gates. And I’m counting the two-year olds in strollers.
Introductions: One of the worst possible introductions was invented for a congressman this morning: “This man has brought a lot to us here at Wright-Patterson. In other states, we call this ‘pork’, but in Ohio, we call this ‘economic stimulus.’ Please welcome …” And so ends the career of a promising master of ceremonies.
Security: Without going into detail, let me just say that when the Secret Service decides to secure a facility from outside threats, they do not joke around. Thus, I very much suspect that the low-and-slow Air Force One flyover of the crowd was done over the objections of more than one security agent.
Image: If you decide to drive across the grass to get ahead in line, partially block off paths that are being used by ambulances, and then expect other drivers to let you back into traffic, you really shouldn’t do it in a black Chevy Blazer with a WHIO-1290 logo on the side door. That’s just asking for trouble.
Miscellaneous
France: The Dayton Airshow this year is set to be the largest in the world. This must really peeve the French: Paris has been beaten out by a city which isn’t even large enough to have a major league baseball, basketball, football, or soccer franchise.
CityFolk: Rosie Ledet and the Zydeco Playboys rock. ‘Nuff said.
You saw “exactly five protestors outside the gates” because they wouldn’t allow the rest of us anywhere near the event…and there were a lot of us, from Dayton, Cincinnati, Northern KY, and surrounding areas. They set up “free speech zones” as parodied on “Arrested Development” on Fox - we were allowed to hold our signs and walk around in front of a Wendy’s, a gas station, and a few other areas that obvously worked, since you didn’t see us. A number of people driving away did, however.
This administration hides more things than Wite-Out. I think it’s funny how you talk about Google misleading people and yet must think that because you don’t see anyone around, they must not be there. To be fair, I’ve only dipped into your blog a handful of times and don’t really know your politics, but take it from someone who has protested Bush for 4 years starting with Inauguration Day - we are numerous (obviously, at least about half of the country can’t stand him) and out there, being squelched by the powers that be so as not to taint the image of the Fearless Leader. Kind of like your link to the anti-Scientology article - the philosophy being if you don’t see it, there’s nothing bad here. Move on.
Comment by Serti — 29 December 2004 @ 14:19
To answer your question about my politics, they’re fairly convoluted, but tend to be more right than left: I’m typically libertarian on fiscal policy, hawkish on foreign affairs, and my views on social issues are an odd blend of libertarianism and Catholicism.
As for the existance of free speech zones at this particular speech, I will defer to your comments - I don’t know if they existed, and I have no evidence that they did not. In fairness, though, this tactic seems to be used by both parties. Neither the Right nor the Left has a monopoly on the desire for image control. (And, in all honesty, how squelched are you if nearly half of the country agrees with you?)
If you’re reading this, a response to your comments on “Courage in the Face of Evil” will be forthcoming later this evening - you’ve clearly put a lot of thought into your criticism there, and I don’t want to simply give it an off-the-cuff response.
Thanks for dropping by - although we appear to disagree on the issues, I hope we can agree to enjoy the discussion.
Comment by Zach Heaton (Port 80) — 29 December 2004 @ 17:22