OBJECTIVE: To Obtain a Full-Time Position Utilizing my Technology, Interpersonal, Project and Team Management Skills.
EDUCATION
1990-1994 BFA, New York University
EMPLOYMENT
2008-Present, Consultant – Rosai Group
Projects have included on-site system maintenance, backup strategy design and implementation on an individual and firm-wide basis, database management, hardware installation and troubleshooting, email configuration, broadband installation and configuration, web design, network design, managing large multi-user upgrade and cross-grade projects, and many others.
2007-2008, Project Manager – Google, Inc.
As a Project Manager in Google’s Engineering department I was responsible for managing projects involving the reconfiguration, turn-up, and turn-down of Google’s servers and services world-wide. Projects ranged from the reconfiguration of single machines up to massive data center turn-downs involving thousands of servers covering hundreds of Google’s services. Extensive reporting and metrics analysis were required as well as project coordination with Google employees at all levels.
2007, Consultant – Mann Consulting, LLC
Through Mann I consulted on and off-site for up to 20 individual and corporate clients per week. Clients included, Levis Strauss, Hoffman/Lewis, Giants’ COO Larry Baer, radio host Ronn Owens, RSCG Advertising, Dr. Steven Funk, Bioquest, LLC, and many others. Consulting has included the design, building and maintenance of backup, MS Exchange Servers, afp, smb, printer, DNS and anti-virus servers, routers, switches, and firewalls, as well as RAID, VPN, and remote database systems including FileMaker Pro and Open Directory servers. We were required to keep meticulous documentation and account for all time with high billability requirements. We were also required to maintain a calm and professional demeanor in the face of extremely high-stakes IT situations while balancing the needs of the client, the firm and the technologies.
2005-2006, Linux Engineer – DPITI (Formerly Kamaradata)
Through DPITI, I helped design, test, and build an ambitious and dynamic data management and server construction business. DPITI boasted a distinguished list of media professionals for whom we hosted custom Linux servers and custom service based web interfaces. Technologies included Linux Fedora Core, Perl, PHP, MySQL, Apache, Berkeley DB, Netatalk, https and SSL web interfaces as well as all aspects of Mac OS X and Windows XP integration into our workflow model.
2000-2006, Owner - Beathustler Productions
In 2000, I founded Beathustler Productions featuring the label’s on-line music shop, our online Internet forum, as well as our successful Internet Radio station, Beathustler Radio. We broadcasted music and spoken word and podcasted all of our archives as well. The site was served on a Pentium box running a Fedora Core 3 build and is where I obtained many of my server management skills.
So I'm hesitant to feed this flame and give "The New Yorker" more press than it deserves for this behavior but the self-righteous elitism of the "The New Yorker" absolutely must be put in its place once and for all. Regardless of whatever drivel is in the article accompanying the above image, the image itself, which will carry much more weight and power than any words behind it uses the unearned luxury of tongue in cheek humor to set back the civil rights and political work of countless activists who have worked so hard to bring the truth to the American people and once and for all get a progressive individual into the White House. Obama is showing some dangerous swings to the right lately and many on the left are attempting to hold him to his promises but that's totally besides the point as far as this horrible image goes.
"The New Yorker" like so many other media outlets seems to be a little bit behind the times so allow me to catch you up here along with so many of your "leftist" colleagues. We live in a viciously racist, sexist, and violent empire. The United States has earned its place in history now as one the worst in the history of violent empires in fact. Two of the greatest civil rights leaders in the history of our empire were murdered by gunfire in cold blood for trying to bring change to the plight of African Americans. Every day women like Amy Goodman and men like Noam Chomsky toil hour after hour also trying to change this empire while doing the work that SHOULD be getting done by the horrendously over paid and over celebrated journalists at "The New Yorker."
The phrase "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit" might seem appropriate but it really doesn't do this propaganda justice. The over educated elite crowd over at "The New Yorker" would claim to love the writings of William Shakespeare so let's use his work as an example. Shakespeare's characters never ever lie. There is no subtext in their words. No sarcasm. They say what they mean and they mean what they say. It's what makes his writing great. The folks not just at "The New Yorker" but at all of the elite media outlets out of NY, SF, LA and the like need to borrow a page from his book and learn what it means to be a brave and respectable journalist.
The truth is that there is a horrifyingly large number of people in The U.S. who DO view Obama in precisely the way depicted in the above image. What is "The New Yorker" doing to address the thinking employed by those individuals? Those are the folks who are in danger of shooting Obama before he even GETS to the White House. Oh but "The New Yorker" isn't talking to them are they? No they're just initiating a big circle jerk amongst the elite echelons of American knowledge and power so we can laugh at the stupid little racists. SNORE! What an easy job the writers at that magazine have! Time for "The New York Times", "The New Yorker", "MSNBC" and all of the other "leftist" pro corporate media to roll up their sleeves and join Amy Goodman in changing the United States. No more sidelined tongue in cheek humor that aims to let you off the hook for what you've done to contribute to this mess we have to clean up now! Time for real work.
In this picture, U.S. soldiers survey the Cambodian town of Snuŏl after it has been almost completely flattened by U.S. bombers.
This is part I of a documentary by John Pilger called "Year Zero" which I finally found on Youtube. The second installment of this documentary is just as astounding and horrifying as the first and is featured below this one. I would urge all documentary fans, all activists, and all Americans to view both of these in their entirety.
Here is an excellent documentary about Henry Kissinger called "The Trial of Henry Kissinger." Some of Henry Kissinger's worst war crimes took place in Cambodia in the late 60's and early 70's.
So lately I've heard the subject of Cambodia come up in discussion so many times that I decided that I was being instructed by some larger force to share what I have learned about Cambodia - specifically about the U.S. role in bringing about the conditions that the Cambodian people suffered and died under for so many years. Usually modern day discussions about Cambodia revolve around the travel stories of Americans who have enjoyed Cambodia as a modern backpacking destination. Now I don't want this entry to express judgment on Americans who travel to Cambodia. Shoot if I could afford it right now, the truth is I would love to see that beautiful country myself. However, I find myself wondering, how horrendous would my Government's crimes have to be in a nation before it became an unacceptable backpacking destination morally and ethically?
I thought this Blog post would be a good chance to review a few facts about what took place in Cambodia before the Kumer Ruge "surprisingly" emerged from the countryside to launch one of the worst campaigns of violence civilization has ever seen - or not seen.
Depending on whom you believe anywhere between thousands to several hundred thousand Cambodians were killed by U.S. Military action during our illegal invasion of that country. B-52 bombers, a totally indiscriminate weapon of mass death if ever there was one, totally leveled entire towns and cities.
Then, when the Kumer Ruge was at it's worst point of destructive power and behavior, coverage of these crimes in the West went to almost ZERO. Those demanding evidence of this please read the extensive writings by Noam Chomsky and others on Cambodia where the silence of the New York Times and other media outlets is exhaustively laid out for us to see.
Do we really think about that enough? What did we think was going to happen there after we bombed that country anyway? What did we do to rebuild that Cambodia? Did we pay ANY war reparations? What would happen here if several million people were bombed to death buy an invading force here in the U.S.?
These are really important questions because the truth is if we switched places with the Cambodians, given who we are, we wouldn't let them set one foot on our soil. You really think that if they had done that to us that we would be OK with them backpacking around Yosemite? Of course not!
Further, and much more importantly, John Pilger's follow up documentary above makes some very serious and convincing allegations surrounding covert arms of the U.S. Government and their behavior in Cambodia. And he's not the only one to have done so. He takes footage which seems to suggest that the U.S. not only knew about the Kumer Ruge but actually may have helped feed, fund, and arm that vicious army. Now before everyone gets worked up demanding evidence from me, I must urge all to consider that this is the CIA we're talking about. It's their JOB not leave evidence. We have to look for little tiny clues that they sloppily leave around. And we also have to consider the actions of the CIA in the rare cases where we the truth actually does come out.
How about Chile? Please I urge everyone to look at the ethics of the CIA's (and ITT's) behavior in Chile in the 70's. How about Iraq in the 50's when we helped Saddam come to power? How about Iran in the 70's when the CIA propped up the Shaw and helped arm their vicious police force? There are simply too many cases to list here however once you do consider these cases and the CIA's priorities and ethics as reflected in them, it's really very little of a stretch to imagine that the CIA did indeed fund and arm the Kumer Ruge.
If this is true then many Americans are complicit in the crime of genocide. And many still alive namely Henry Kissinger MUST be brought before a war crimes tribunal and severely punished for their actions. Not for the bombing of Cambodia although that would certainly warrant an extremely lengthy trial but much more importantly for supporting and arming the Kumer Ruge even after we knew what they were doing. That is a crime right up there with the Nazis and one that will not just go away because it's inconvenient for us to think about.
Fine, go backpacking there. Let's keep in mind though that it's only the infinite compassion of the Cambodian people and their lack of knowledge about who was responsible for what happened there that stops them from shooting us as we get off the plane.
The Cambodians, insofar as they do understand our role in their history, and having a largely Buddhist population, probably understand that gestures of revenge are pointless because Karma while being a tad slow is absoutely relentless and knows no borders and no patriotism.
I hope that this blog post and the videos in it give us all something to think about when pondering travel plans to Southeast Asia in the future. Any entrance onto Cambodian soil on my part that did not involve weeping and puking would feel wholly inadequate.
As our election approaches, the left has seen some great divisions expose themselves. I'm confident that these divisions can and will be mended behind what is becoming an increasingly likely Obama/Clinton ticket. However, I think it's important to have a frank talk about these divisions in order to move forward as a unified front. The number of women who supported and continue to support Hilary Clinton has been predictably quite large. Also, the African American vote for Obama has been predictably very strong as well. I myself have found the focus on Candidates' sex, race, and religion to be rather discouraging. I have witnessed several heated debates in which folks have argued and argued, in pondering Clinton and Obama's chances, over whether our country is more sexist or more racist. There's almost always a woman arguing the sexist side and some dude arguing the racist side. Snore! I couldn't find that chicken and egg argument more useless if I tried. Our country is sexist AND racist and instead of engaging in these constant half-cocked demographic analyses of candidates' chances the way "educated" Americans seem to love to we should be debating THE ISSUES and how each candidate stands on those issues. By focusing so much on a candidate's racial, religious, or sexual profile we allow the television's corruption of American politics to win the day and keep us dumb and uninformed little demographic robots. Like little mini Karl Roves. Mini Roves. Don't be a mini Rove! Be an ethical and free-thinking citizen!
So what does any of this have to do with Cindy Sheehan? Well as long as there is good reason to expend and demand female representation in our government - and there is - then why don't we take a look at a couple of important facts first. There already IS female representation in our Government. No it's not what it should be but it's there. Every single woman in congress of about 70 except for one, for example, voted to respond to 9-11 with bombs. That one exception was Barbara Lee and her vote will become much more significant as history is written but that's the topic of another post. There are many other women in congress like Diane Feinstein, Hilary Clinton, and Nansy Pelosi. These women are NOT STOPPING THIS WAR and they are NOT STANDING UP TO CORPORATE AMERICA. They are failing and worse yet they don't even appear to be very committed to these ideas.
Well if we progressives are committed to stopping the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and we really do care about keeping the troops alive then let's get behind a candidate who is really serious about making that happen. You want your anti-war package in the form of a woman? Fine! Her name is Cindy Sheehan. Show that we don't just want ANY woman in Government we want women who actually act on the causes that women care about. She can be San Francisco's representative in the House of Representatives and do just that! What an wonderful development that would be.
Cindy Sheehan has been branded by the mainstream press as an emotional hothead particularly around the brave protest she staged outside of Bush's Texas ranch. It's critical we see through this haze and realize that someone like Cindy will ALWAYS face that kind of treatment by the the corporate press. We must ignore this and listen to what she says and read what she writes. If we find ourselves agreeing with her words and yes with her passion then we are compelled to support her. For those of us who listen to KPFA and people like Amy Goodman on democracynow.org every day, we've heard plenty from Cindy. She's been an outspoken opponent of not only the current U.S. wars but also of the corporate corruption of the Democratic party. Label her an extremist all you want but we're in an extreme situation demanding extreme action. The fact that her words and ethics have come to seem so extreme compared to other candidates' says so much about what's happened to our country's politics over the past 10 years.
Well her headquarters is about 5 blocks from my house here in the Mission district of San Francisco so I for one will be poking my head in and seeing what help they need.
Check out her campaign at http://www.cindyforcongress.org
And remember what DJ Freak says. Don't be a mini Rove!
Alright enough politics. Let's get this place warmed up shall we?
There is an idea that we have when negotiating attractions to others that somehow there is that "special someone" that we're looking for out there somewhere. Whether we're looking for a wife or husband, a lover, a friend, or a friend with benefits, we are looking for those relationships that will be satisfying to us and feel right to us. Usually I think most of us tend to think that that "special someone" is someone who shares common interests, common life activities, common job goals, common sexual desires, common ethics and on and on. Animalistic attraction however, and yes we are most definitely animals, is far more complex. There are senses in our body including touch, taste, smell, and seeing which play a huge role in what revs our engines. These senses don't necessarily have anything to do with all those cerebral common interests I listed above. There may be a connection between the two but I don't think we will or even can understand it.
In fact, sometimes, we meet people who are TOTALLY different than we are who we can't keep our hands off of and with whom we share an incredibly hot and satisfying connection. People who work jobs for example that on any other day would make us gag! People who hang out with the STRANGEST crew is another example. Or perhaps we find ourselves attracted to members of a different race or perhaps someone who belongs to a religion with whom we strongly disagree. However, there's this smell she has that just makes me crazy and start gyrating. Or the way her incredibly hot stomach cascades down to the most luscious pair of petite yet curvaceous hips. Or there was this way he left his right finger to cascade over my forearm after we hugged. This raw and primal language we speak somehow makes all that other stuff fade away.
"Romeo and Juliet" for example. Look at that play. Romeo wasn't supposed to want Juliet. Everybody in that play would have been a lot happier (and dumber) if Romeo had kept his junk in his tights and had a homosexual fling with Mercutio or something. Now you could argue that Romeo and Juliet wanted to hook up because it was so forbidden. Forbidden acts can indeed be extremely hot but I think that Shakespeare was tapping into something deeper than that.
To be attracted to only people who are just like you or happen to be a member or your "club" is BORING. We look outside of our "circles" because we want to grow. We don't just yearn for physical contact, approval, pleasure, babies, connection, trust, love, and the like. Yes we want those things but what we're doing in the end is so much bigger. We're yearning to grow. We want to change and grow and become the best people we can and one of the biggest, perhaps THE biggest things we do to be those best people is to love and connect with our fellow humans. It's why we're here. To connect with other humans both sexually and otherwise and learn and grow with and through them is one of the most elemental desires that people have. Now there are bad desires that humans have like the one to go to war but the desire to connect in that way is a GOOD one. It's not just our instinct to create life that drives this either. It's often our desire to LIVE life too. That can come from what we might label a selfish place or it can come from a very giving one. Our decisions about who we feel deserves to experience this connection and growth with us can be fantastically complex.
So, in the end, we will of course continue applying whatever criteria serves us in choosing partners, friends, and lovers but we also need to realize that our bodies and our instincts are very, very smart. Our bodies speak a language that we must, to some extent, surrender ourselves to.
And that ladies and gentlemen is HOT.
So are there any hot smelling Bush supporting, corporate attorneys who feel like going on a date?
So I have this funny thing inside of me. Sometimes I like to watch stuff that makes me SO mad. Think of it like political S&M. I'll purposely watch Bill O'Reilly on Fox News just to make myself mad. Like hurting myself in my brain to make sure it's still working. Totally psychologically twisted but so is most S&M psychology when you get down to it.
The other day I decided to celebrate my new job by going on iTunes and buying some silly show or movie to chill out. But then when I get to the store I see this Aircraft Carrier documentary series from PBS. So out came the nipple clamps. I thought "ooooooh that's gonna totally get a rise out of me. Those naughty PBS SLUTS totally made an AD for the Navy under the guise of some brave objective documentary didn't they!"
So I watch this series and yup those clamps were TIGHT. It hurt sooo good. So I'll discuss my specific reactions below but upon watching several of these I immediately went over to see who I'd given my hard earned money to and it turns out to be none other than series Executive Producer MEL GIBSON. So I ran to the shower like that scene in "The Crying Game" and turned it on full blast all the way hot and started washing my mouth out with soap while yelling "nooooooooo! NOOOOOOO!!"
Ok fine I didn't really do that but that's how I felt.
Maybe the folks over at PBS are a little behind so I'm gonna help ya'll catch up here. We are at WAR and you guys just made a HUGE ad for the Navy and that is just so maddening because PBS stands for Public Broadcasting Station. PUBLIC. They're supposed to be broadcasting television that speaks in the PUBLIC's best interests. How does making an ad for the Navy serve the public's best interests? The folks at PBS need to be worrying about telling the truth about what's going on in our name not showing Navy Aviators picking up hot chicks in sunny Australia like some tourism promotion!
I think it is actually they who want their nipples clamped. They want me to pinch those clamps really hard and say "ooooh you've been bad Mel Gibson. You like it when I give it to you hard to punish you for being so bad don't you! You dirty little propagandist! Who's your daddy you little slut boy?"
Time to confess to Father Freak Mel. Tell me all those dirty thoughts so I can absolve you of your sins.
