Bloomberg spews venom and vapidity on CBS News
0Oops. I was so furious over this that when I heard Katie Couric, I thought Today show. And I fired off a missive to Bloomberg’s office with that error in it. A quick-tempered man…
Oh, well. Below is the letter with corrections. I suppose Bloomberg’s office will write me off as an idiot. Another testament to the necessity of proofing.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg
City of New York
253 Broadway
New York, NY 10007Mayor Bloomberg:
Your recent comments on the CBS Evening News implicating foes of Obamacare in the attempted bombing on Times Square were contemptible in the extreme. It is most regrettable that you have chosen to equate those who ascribe to the values of our Founders with Islamic militants. It seems to me that one of those two groups has a clear track record of terrorist acts. Who, I ask, is more likely to detonate a car bomb in New York?
Your gratuitous and unwarranted slander of patriotic Americans was as fatuous as it was specious. Congratulations.
Sincerely,
Robert R. Monti
Virginia Beach, VA
Big changes
0Well, I found out a short time ago that Blogger no longer supports FTP published blogs as of, well, today. This precipitated a hasty migration to WordPress. I have plans to redesign my blog, but I have no idea when this will occur. So you get to look at the stock WordPress template for a little while.
Stay tuned…
Web design excursus
0I have given a name to my pain, and it is Internet Explorer (IE).
More specifically, it’s versions predating IE 8, which (IMHO) is Microsoft’s first really solid Web browser and gives me little to no trouble. IE 7 and IE 6, on the other hand, are what Napoleon Dynamite would refer to as decroted pieces of crap.
Here’s my most recent study in IE pain. I’m making a Web page that uses a variation on an accordion menu. Said accordion menu needs to allow users to open more than one pane at a time, so I can’t use the handy little .accordion() method in the jQuery UI plug-in to create it. After a little digging around on teh interwebs (Did you see that subtle, humorous allusion to internet culture there? Did I mention that it was subtle?), I opted to write a little click handler that would apply slideToggle to create the modified accordion effect, like so:
var currentAccPane = $(this).next();
$(this).toggleClass(‘ui-state-default’);
$(currentAccPane).slideToggle(‘fast’);
});
BTW, for all you self-appointed code police (SACP) out there, I’m fully aware that the guts of this function can be chained. For me, this looks cleaner and is clearer. There. Are we okay now?
Anyway, this accomplishes the following:
- When each accordion item is clicked, it sets the variable currentAccPane to the next sibling element, which happens to be the div containing the content associated with the clicked heading.
- It changes the on/off state of the clicked heading by toggling the class ui-state-default.
- Then, it slides the pane of associated content down (on) or up (off).
Everything was just ducky in Firefox, IE 8, and Safari, but IE 7 choked on it. Hours of arduous Googling revealed that IE 7 and slideToggle don’t like each other when you’re slideToggling positioned elements (which I was). In this instance, IE 7 simply ignored the height of the parent element and stretched absolutely positioned child elements vertically to the height of the viewport.
Holy MonT-SteR Consternation™, Batman!
After trying every CSS trick I could find, as a last resort I tried resolving my issue with jQuery in a separate JavaScript file targeting IE 7 and older. All I can say is, “I heart jQuery.”
Here’s what worked:
var currentAccPane = $(this).next();
var divH = $(currentAccPane).innerHeight();
$(currentAccPane).css(‘height’, divH – 24 + ‘px’);
});
The fix occurs in the last two lines:
- After getting the content block associated with the heading, it calculates its pixel height based on the content it contains (which is the same whether open or closed — when the latter, it’s simply hidden) and stores it in the variable divH
- Then it uses divH to assign a hard pixel height to the content’s parent element via inline CSS on the fly (minus the top and bottom padding in the element, which in this case added up to 24px)
Voila! jQuery to the rescue! IE 7 now happily constrains the absolutely positioned blocks that were being inordinately stretched to the size of the containing block in the accordion.
Now, let me preempt the SACP by acknowledging that there may be a more savvy, efficient way to do this. And I admit that this may break the rule of keeping style and behavior separate in Web design. I suppose one could argue that my use of the .css() method here in my script is actually addressing a behavior — albeit a bad one — and so everything’s kosher.
In any case, I’m just getting my feet wet with jQuery, so I’m open to suggestions. But this works without any deleterious effects on other browsers (except IE 6, but that’s a animal beast monster form of torture horse of a different color). And, it solved my IE pain. For a jQuery noob, I think that’s a pretty good day’s work.
Blessings,
Rob
aka The MonT-SteR
DOOM
0Moe Lane over at Redstate.com called it. Coakley is toast, which may very well be the stake through Obamacare’s heart. To quote Mr. Lane, “DOOM.”
Senator Elect Brown and tea partygoers everywhere, congratulations.
Senator Webb, you aren’t fooling anyone. You and Warner both sold out on Obamacare, and we shan’t forget it. With the denouement of today’s Boston Tea party, the writing on the wall is just too stark for you to ignore.
But it’s too late. You and Senator Warner chose to brush aside the sensible majority you’re supposed to represent when we were angrily, desperately assailing switchboards and inboxes, begging you not to let Obamacare advance in the Senate.
You betrayed your public trust. You both turned a deaf ear to us. And there’s NOTHING you can say or do at this point that will EVER erase that fact.
DOOM.
On Calamity and Divine Judgment
0I made the comments below in the wake of hurricane Katrina. Given the nightmarish suffering that’s occurring in Haiti at the moment (and some notorious commentary that’s floating about on the subject), it seemed like a good idea to repost them.
Did God judge New Orleans by sending Katrina? It’s not beyond the realm of possibility, nor is it without biblical precedent. God is love, but He is also judge, and he does bring the nations to account for their deeds. But Luke 13 indicates that Christians ought to refrain from being so glib in their pronouncements of gloom and doom. The locus of the Church’s ministry in such times ought to be in reaching out with the love, care, and compassion of Christ — not in smug proclamations of judgment from the comfort of an easy chair.
Ever heard of Jonah, folks? You know, the guy who wanted God to fry those brutal, savage, imperialistic Assyrians? Did God allow him to just sit back and wait for Him to destroy Nineveh? Or did He send Jonah in mission to them in hopes that they would repent so they could be spared? And what did Jonah learn in the end — that God enjoys laying waste to entire cities, or that He’d rather spare them? Is God pleased when his people are happy about or hopeful for the destruction of non-Christians? Or would he prefer us to be motivated by His heart for compassion and rescue and reach out to unbelievers?
Blessings,
Rob
aka The MonT-SteR
Bible tweets?
0David Schuster of MSNBC made a number of tweets today (if you don’t know what that is, go here) decrying Miss California’s stance on gay marriage. In essence, he cited several verses from Leviticus in an attempt to demonstrate that Christians are guilty of cherry picking Biblical prohibitions in order to justify their “bigotry” vis-à-vis homosexuality. The argument goes like this: Christians are happy to ignore all sorts of strange and arcane prohibitions in Leviticus, but they capriciously fixate on the prohibition against homosexuality in Lev. 18:22; if the other prohibitions can be licitly ignored with advantage, there’s no good reason to regard Lev. 18:22 as binding either.
This is actually a common argument, and on its face it has the appearance of merit. Unfortunately, it doesn’t take into account the various categories of law contained in the Mosaic books. Some directly enumerate universal principles that transcend culture (e.g., the Decalogue in Exodus 20). Others apply these universal principles to Israel’s cultural setting; as such, the application cited in the Law is necessarily occasional. In other words, even though the transcendent principle behind certain cultural prohibitions is itself inviolate, we wouldn’t expect it to be applied the exact same way in every cultural context. The task for the modern biblical interpreter is to do the legwork necessary to tell the difference and live accordingly.
For example, Schuster cites Lev. 19:27, which “expressly forbids men from getting their hair trimmed.” In our culture, this seems patently absurd. Most men shave daily before they go to work as a simple matter of personal hygiene and professionalism; to suggest that we are offending God by doing so smacks of lunacy. But the men of the cultures surrounding Israel commonly shaved their hair and beards for occultic purposes (this could be inferred from the context, especially given vv. 26 and 28). Thus, Lev. 19:27 isn’t an arbitrary and silly prohibition; it is, rather, a culturally-attuned application of the universal, Decalogic proscriptions against idolatry and worshiping other gods.
A couple more statements by Schuster, intermingled with my comments:
- If a narrow read of the bible is the last word on “marriage,” what about bible based condemnations of cosmetic surgery?
It’s certainly valid to consider whether or not cosmetic surgery is biblically sanctioned, but does he really mean to suggest that breast implants and homosexuality are morally equivalent? I hope not… - Lev. 19:19 forbids planting two different crops in the same field or wearing two different kinds of thread Penalty? Lev. 24:10-16 death.
Here, Schuster makes a common error by reading these verses sheerly through the lens of modern experience and sensibilities. In order to make sense of the Bible—particularly the OT—we have to make an effort to understand the milieu of the ancient Near East (ANE). In a nutshell, Israel was an agrarian culture utterly dependent on a good harvest for its very survival. If Schuster’s going to invoke modernity with respect to Lev 19:19, he might do well to observe that modern farmers judiciously avoid planting corn, wheat, and soybeans together in the same field. Perhaps science and experience have taught us that mingling crops ruins both harvest and subsequent generations of seed. If so, God’s prohibition takes into account the fact that such activity in ancient Israel would not only threaten livelihood, but life itself. I don’t know about you, but I can understand why a God who cares for His people would tell them in no uncertain terms, “Do NOT do this.”
Schuster had more to say, which I will address in another post (it’s getting late). But the overarching point here is that the cherry picking Schuster is declaiming against actually isn’t cherry picking at all. It’s a very reasonable bow to the difference between 21st century America and ancient Israel. Even so, a little detective work reveals that these prohibitions Schuster et al find so silly and superfluous actually have both warrant and wisdom behind them. In any case, the occasional nature of these Levitical proscriptions does not give us license to dismiss or ignore the God-given, trans-cultural absolutes they depend on.
I daresay, Mr. Schuster, that Lev. 18:22 is no exception.
Blessings,
Rob
aka The MonT-SteR
Tilapia Po’Boy recipe
0So, my wife buys these breaded tilapia filets from Sam’s Club. Usually, she bakes them in the oven until they’re crispy on the outside, and I enjoy them with thorough doses of vinegar (I’m not really a seafood person).
Well, she had somewhere to go this evening, and graciously cooked up some of these tilapia filets for me to eat while she’s out. This time around, however, the ol’ take-it-with-vinegar routine just didn’t seem appetizing. So, in the fine Monti tradition of improvisational gastronomy, I experimented with what we had on hand in the kitchen.
The result was (IMHO) delicious, and a welcome change of pace. If you’re trying to get more fish in your diet and in a rut, try this for a quick and tasty meal.
Tilapia Po’Boy
Ingredients
- 1 breaded tilapia filet, baked until exterior is golden brown and crispy
- 3 slices of onion, coarsely chopped
- 1/2 long hot chili pepper, coarsely chopped
- 1 roma tomato, chopped
- 1-2 t. soy sauce
- 1 T lemon juice
- 1/2 t. Tabasco sauce
- 1 T olive oil
- 1 small pat of butter
- Shredded Monterrey Jack or sharp white cheddar cheese
- Salt
- Pepper
- Crushed red pepper
- 1 Small Italian sandwich or hoagie roll, or (better yet) some ciabatta bread or about 4″-6″ of a Louisiana baguette (whatever you use, be sure to toast it)
Directions
- Heat the olive oil and butter in a non-stick skillet.
- Over medium heat, add the onion and long hot chili pepper. Stir to make sure the oil/butter covers everything.
- Sautee until the onion becomes translucent.
- Add soy sauce, Tabasco, and lemon juice. Add salt, pepper, and crushed red pepper to taste. Stir.
- When this mixture has sauteed for just a moment more, fold in the tomato. Stir thoroughly. Continue to sautee until the tomato wilts a bit, then remove from heat.
- Take your toasted roll/bread, and spread a little mayonnaise on the inside. Place the baked tilapia filet on the bread, and spoon the sauteed vegetable mixture on top. Sprinkle just enough shredded cheese to give it a bit of a tang, and enjoy.
YUM! I never enjoyed a fish sandwich this much. Some suggested variations:
- Put a little Cajun seasoning (like Tony Chachere’s or Slap Ya’ Mama!) in the mayo, or substitute it for the salt and pepper in the sauteed veggie mix.
- Flatbread or a tortilla could make this a tasty wrap.
- If you want a healthier cheese option, feta might be a good choice.
Give it a try and let me know what you think!
Blessings,
Rob
aka The MonT-SteR
Voiceover recording FAIL!
0While recording voiceovers for a training video at work this week, I got real frustrated. I use something akin to a Porta-Booth to do recording. While it does a good job approximating the quality of a full-blown soundbooth, it makes reading copy and controlling the computer a tad difficult sometimes. I just couldn’t get situated, and so goof-ups were frequent and hard to recover from.
Witness the EPIC MonT-SteR Consternation&trade!
Blessings,
Rob
aka The MonT-SteR
A free Macbook Pro?
0I received credit for completing my offer — my ShamWow! towels arrived yesterday (happy happy, joy joy), and my offer was marked as complete by Notebooks4Free last evening. Now I just have to figure out how to get referrals.
Call me crazy, but Macinlust can drive one to do crazy things from time to time.
You’ve probably seen these sites where they offer goodies that appeal to anyone with a bit of a gadget bug. Complete an array of offers, and you’ll get the techno-carrot they dangle in front of your face to entice you—anything from iPods to PSPs to, well, Macbook Pros.
The problem with many of these sites is that they want you to complete the most ridiculous offers to get the goodie. No, I’m NOT going to apply for a mortgage and buy a European vacation package just to get a LAPTOP, for Pete’s sake. My gadget greed isn’t THAT out of control, thank you very much.
I recently encountered a site that asks one to complete a modest offer (like a trial at Netflix or a sample pack of gourmet coffee) and refer 24 people who also complete offers to get the goodie. That seems doable to me. So, I took the plunge.
In my case, I had to order some ShamWoW! towels, which is fine; I’ve been wanting to try them anyway. But now comes the work of referring 24 people who are willing to complete offers like I did.
So, if you’re interested in getting a Macbook Pro on the über-cheap, pay Notebooks4Free.com a visit. From what I’ve seen, this is actually a reputable company that’s not out to scam you (go here for a positive and seemingly credible review).
I’ll keep you posted on how my application for the Macbook progresses.
Blessings,
Rob
aka The MonT-SteR
P.S. The MonT-SteR Reduction has been going badly. I really fell off the horse after my business trip. A day off for Good Friday tomorrow will give me the chance to go to the gym for an extended period of time, thus breaking the pattern of not getting to the gym for an extended period of time. Pray for me! This whole weight-loss, fitness thing HAS to happen.
Photoshop World and The Biggest Loser, Blog Edition
0Greetings from Beantown. I’m here in Boston for the Photoshop (PS) World conference, learning all sorts of yummy new things about every designer’s favorite killer workhorse application.
I consider myself an intermediate to almost-advanced PS user, and it was gratifying to find that a good number of things presented today were review for me. But I got to see lots of nooks and crannies in PS CS4 that I was unaware of. The neat thing about PS nooks and crannies is that they can have a very meaningful impact on your workflow. For example:
- If you have PS CS4, check out the Content Aware Scaling. In essence, if you have an image that you need to scale in a non-proportional way, you can protect the important content of the photo so it doesn’t squish or stretch. Very powerful when you have a photo that is perfect for your project but it doesn’t fit the dimensions of the end product.
- PS CS4′s mask and adjustment panels are awesome time savers, and they give you the ability to apply masks, feathers, and adjustments to an image in non-destructive fashion. Very cool.
I could go on, but I don’t want to bore my few readers. In any case, I’m learning lots, and having a very good time here at the conference. I’m eager to get back and put these little tidbits into practice.
In other news, your One and Only Favorite Friendly Neighborhood MonT-SteR™ is, well, fat. Portly. Obese. Rotund. Corpulent. Some of you who actually see me on a regular basis will doubtless be completely UNsurprised at this revelation. But it’s true. Call me Moby Dick (Ishmael was thin, I’ll wager).
And so, The MonT-SteR must reduce. Lots. Like, the “over 100 lbs.” kind of “lots.” To be specific, I need to lose at least 140 lbs.
This seems kind of daunting, but I done this before. I lost nearly 100 lbs. years ago, and over time (especially after the birth of my first son) I gained the weight back, and then some (and how!). And corresponding medical complications are forcing my hand. I’ll not be done in by hypertension and declining cholesterol.
So, as a therapeutic measure, and to help with motivation, I’ve decided to use my blog to chronicle my progress. Think of it as The Biggest Loser for the blogosphere.
Not sure what shape this will take, or how I’ll publish my results. But I think it will be helpful to know that readers and other netizens can come along for the journey. I’m sure there will be days when I’ll need encouraging words from folks out there!
In an effort to continue my recent trend of getting to the gym, I’ll be heading to the fitness center here in the hotel before breakfast and class.
So, off to bed with me!
Blessings,
Rob
aka The MonT-SteR