Sunday, February 28, 2016

Thoughts about online dating now that I'm in a stable relationship

Historically, online dating was thought of as a tool for the desperate. Even though it's more popular, it still gets bashed a lot. But it opens up a single person to more potential dates. You get to meet people that you likely would never have met offline. And to think that our parents met through random chance in meatspace.
For me, online dating was like college: enjoyable but stressful, and I'm glad I don't have to do it anymore. Here are my thoughts for anyone who is still looking:
1. Never post your thoughts about online dating on your blog if you still are active in online dating. You will sound like a complainer. You probably are a complainer if you do this. So stop it. I get to rant about online dating because I'm in a stable relationship now.
2, Your parents probably give better dating advice than your single friends.
3. I saw a lot of single mothers on OKCupid. I know that kids come first. But just check off the box that says you have a kid or kids. Don't gush about how amazing your kids are in your dating profile bio. "Amazing" was a pretty common adjective to describe toddlers. I would have liked to meet the mother of a mediocre three-year old. That would have been a woman with realistic expectations.
4. Platonic friends and coworkers can sometimes stumble across your dating profile. It's probably best to keep things PG.
5. I think people who put up ads that say they are looking for a platonic relationship with a member of the opposite sex are either lying to themselves or don't know what "platonic" means.
6. You don't save yourself up for marriage. You save yourself up for a house full of cats.
7. People say there is no such thing as the friendzone. But I think it's real. It's like getting a bronze medal in the Olympics. My best advice is not argue with the judge, and just move on to the next event and try again. (Silver medal is when you are friends with benefits.)

Monday, February 22, 2016

Filling Scalia's vacancy

People have been going on Twitter rages complaining that Republican senators are refusing to do their job. The word "treason" has been thrown about like f-bombs on Xbox Live. And most of the adults using the "t-word" have no idea what it really means. It's just something they say when they are angry. If people are going to be upset about the nomination process, then let's be honest about our real reasons for being upset. Conservatives are upset about the possibility that Scalia might not be replaced by another conservative, and liberals are mad that Obama's nominee might get borked.

Article 2, Section 2 Clause 2 gives the President the power to nominate Supreme Court justices with the advise and consent of the Senate. The President can nominate whoever he wants, and the Senate is under no obligation to consent to anything. Obama can systematically nominate everyone who has ever graduated from law school and the Senate can vote them all down if they so choose. And the Supreme Court can function fine with a vacancy. Nine isn't a sacred number or anything, especially back when FDR was President.

There are a couple things that I think might happen. Mitch McConnell can hold the line until after the election, but he would run the risk of Hillary Clinton winning and then nominating Barack Obama for SCOTUS. But he isn't going to confirm the first person Obama nominates either. So what might happen is Obama will nominate a very liberal sacrificial lamb for the Senate to vote down. And then he'll nominate what passes for a moderate these days, and the Senate will confirm that judge to keep this from being an issue during the election.