Friday, November 21, 2008

Celebrity baby names: WTF?

Do you think that there are out there in the world tons of ridiculous names, and that it is just because they are in the public eye that it seems as though celebrities come up with the craziest ones? I mean, maybe there's lots of other kids out there with names like Zuma and Apple and Pilot Inspektor and we just don't know about it because their parents aren't famous. Whatever the case, here's the newest crazy effing name, granted to a child who will, no doubt, get eyeliner and black nailpolish for Christmas and who will be beaten up because his dad is Pete Wentz, notwithstanding the fact that his name is Bronx Mowgli Wentz. Honestly, given the parents, we should have expected something insane, but wow. Just, wow.

Welcome to the world. Sorry, kid.

Thursday, November 20, 2008

WOD: lucubrations

Don't ask me. Shows up in Special Collections a fair amount, though. Fancy word from the 18th-19th centuries, having something to do with miscellaneous sort of writings.

Hit me, Merriam Webster: "laborious or intensive study ; also : the product of such study —usually used in plural."

You're on your own with pronunciation ... I'm still practicing.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Edification, courtesy of NPR

This morning, there were a few things I decided to look up after hearing them discussed on NPR. I will say that again, I had sort of the gist of them, but wanted some clarification. Here we go!

pragmatic:According to Merriam Webster Online, if something is pragmatic, it is "relating to matters of fact or practical affairs often to the exclusion of intellectual or artistic matters : practical as opposed to idealistic." While I don't really like the bit about excluding intellectual matters, seeing as this was in reference to Obama's team of economic advisers, I'm mostly glad to hear it. Wasn't he supposedly going to be the idealism king? I don't really think that exclusion is valid in this particular instance, Obama being fairly intellectual. Anyway.

I've also decided that, since I'm attempting to pay closer attention to the workings of our governement, it's a really good time to learn some things since Obama is choosing his cabinet and filling all these positions, etc. To that end, the first nomination, apparently, is for the position of Attorney General, that going to one Eric Holder. "Attorney General" seems to be more or less a simple concept; my guess would be that what we're talking about here is kind of the head lawyer for a presidential administration. According to the website of the Department of Justice, "the Judiciary Act of 1789 created the Office of the Attorney General which evolved over the years into the head of the Department of Justice and chief law enforcement officer of the Federal Government. The Attorney General represents the United States in legal matters generally and gives advice and opinions to the President and to the heads of the executive departments of the Government when so requested. In matters of exceptional gravity or importance the Attorney General appears in person before the Supreme Court. Since the 1870 Act that established the Department of Justice as an executive department of the government of the United States, the Attorney General has guided the world's largest law office and the central agency for enforcement of federal laws." So that's what he does. For extra edification, the mission statement of the Department of Justice is "to enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans." I guess the only thing that confuses me a little here is the bit about being the "chief law enforcement officer", which just makes the AG sound like a policeman. I suppose, though, that since law enforcement does fall to the Judicial branch of government (as opposed to the other two) that it's all the same, really. It's just the use of the term "officer" that throws me, I think.

Kindly do not make fun of me - I was never a good student, and the last time I studied government would have been 10 years ago, so there. I'm doing well to remember what little I do. At any rate, it's never too late to learn things, right? [Right.]

Friday, November 14, 2008

Personal Word of the Day

Upon encountering a word for which I do not know the definition, I shall look it up and post my findings here. To wit, a short story, by Walter de la Mare, entitled "The Froward Child". Froward is a word that I've often read, and I more or less understand in the context that it means "difficult", but my curiosity was piqued, regardless. Merriam-Webster Online says: habitually disposed to disobedience and opposition.

That sounds much grander than "difficult", doesn't it?