Congratulations, AT&T iPhone users. Your long national nightmare is nearly over. But a few quick notes for people who are considering being in the first wave of switchers to AT&T:

1. Sure, the early reviews are out from many reputable sources, and Verizon phone service is knocking AT&T into a cocked hat. But the proof won’t be in the pudding until the droves switch; if enough people zoom off of AT&T and onto Verizon all at once, then you may see the network problems migrate along with you.

Especially worth noting: nationwide sales numbers won’t mean diddly. You’ll want to know how many people are switching on the same towers you’re using, which means municipal sales numbers. Which you’re not likely to get for a while.

So you might not want to be in the first wave of switchers—or you might want to take Verizon up on the 14-day switching window that’s mandated by law. It’ll take a few months to see how this shakes out, and whether Verizon service is better than AT&T’s after everyone moves over.

2. Both carriers are getting personal hotspot services. Verizon will offer an unlimited data plan, but only for internal data to the phone; hotspot data is capped at 2 gigs. Meanwhile, AT&T is now offering an additional 2 gigs for hotspot subscribers, which is intertwingled with the data you’re getting in the 2 gigs you’re paying for the data package.

Which is better? Depends. Me, I hate any kind of data caps, which is why I’m on Clear 4G. The only way to know which works better for you is to have some idea of how much data you’re using in-phone, and how much you’re using over the phone tether. Good luck finding that out if you’re not an übergeek.

3. Major downside of Verizon: phone calls kill data connections. Workaround: port your number to Google Voice, and you’ll be able to control when calls go to your phone, so you can’t be knocked offline by a phone call.

Yes, I said knocked offline by a phone call. Man, it’s 1987 all over again. Mom, can I have a dedicated phone line for my modem?

Catching up on the latest nontroversy on the web, to which I can summarize Planned Parenthood’s apparent response as follows:

We work aggressively with law enforcement and we’ve done nothing wrong. But y’all were crying for blood, so a head rolled anyway.

You’ll pardon me for asking this, but what the fuck? First ACORN, then Shirley Sherrod, now Planned Parenthood. All three the victims of fraudulent “investigations” by idiots with a camera and an axe to grind. All three paying the price for it.

Tell me: exactly what is the disincentive for lying motherfuckers to go after their opponents? Seems to me like it’s a win-win scenario all around. Either you get them on tape saying bad things, or you can edit the tape making it look like they did. The attacked organizations put their tails between their legs and act like they shat on the rug. The attackers get tons of free media.

Hell, you don’t even need Final Cut Pro. iMovie will do.

Let me make a modest proposal for what PPFA should have said in their press release:

Yes, while none of us like to admit it, there are plenty of unholy bastards out there willing to pay for underage tail, which is the real cause of child sex-trafficking. We are in the business of protecting people’s health. So when we hear that a minor is being trafficked, we immediately work with the authorities, AND we give out information which will protect them.

Perhaps you people out there believe that a child already being trafficked for sex is somehow corrupted and it doesn’t make a damn bit of difference if she dies of AIDS or complications of a pregnancy at age twelve. Or you think that we should do what you do: put our heads in the sand and pretend that this isn’t happening. Or that she’ll be magically protected by fairy Jesus. But we know that hopes and wishes do not a public health strategy make.

That’s what you should have said. And that means not firing the woman who tried to protect the child. If she did say something which genuinely was a firing offense, and you have evidence above and beyond an edited video by the people who are trying to shut you down, then release that information. Let us know what you do, what you won’t do, and the principles you stand by. Even if that means giving out sex protection information to children who need it. Even if that means that Fox News will start baying at the moon.

Fuck them. You have principles. Defend them, goddammit. Make the other side explain why they’re in favor of children having their lives permanently ruined or ended by sex trafficking. By acting like you’ve done something shameful, you’re just playing into their hands, and that’s exactly the message you send when you fire your employee without sufficient explanation.

Just finished watching Obama’s speech in Tucson, which mostly sucked.

Too soon to say that?

Of course, the stories of those who acted heroically were moving, but that was because heroes themselves are moving. Obama, perhaps deliberately, went with historical precedent in the tone of his speech: They have consecrated this ground, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who died here have thus far so nobly advanced. And as a result, he gave a speech which, unlike Lincoln’s, was mostly not notable and which will be easily forgotten.

I was also mostly left unmoved by the Eulogist-in-Chief. Yes, I know, it is kind to say that those who died represented the best of America, and it would be nice to believe that. But they were united only in the violence of their passing; it seems odd that all you need to do to become the best of America is to die in a tragic and telegenic disaster.

More moving, and more true, to say: these were everyday Americans who died, and everyday Americans who became heroes, so let us celebrate the living and the dead for who they were, not for what we wish to believe of them.

Obama did move me with his words, briefly and unintentionally, with a catch in his throat when he analogized Christina Green to “our own daughters,” and I was suddenly reminded that his children are the same age. It humanized him and touched me, more so because it did not seem planned.

But too much of the speech fell into the trap of the Kumbayah Democrat. “Please, can’t we all get along?” I’m sure his enemies have already forgotten the speech except when their interviewers remind them to make nice, and their interviewers will forget to do so shortly. If Obama wanted to make a difference, to really mark a line in the sand pre-1/8 and post-1/8, he blew it.

What would have been better? I thought I’d have to turn elsewhere for an example of rhetoric, but Obama briefly spoke from a place of powerful oratory, in the last few minutes of his speech:

I want to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it. I want America to be as good as Christina imagined it. All of us, we should do everything we can do to make sure this country lives up to our childrens’ expectations.

That’s the man who has repeatedly moved me to tears with his words. That’s the man with a strong moral compass and an argument to make in its favor. That, essentially, is who I thought I was voting for, and the man who has too often been missing from office. Obama could have given a respectful, mournful, and powerful speech with this level of oratory, but if that speech was ever written, it was set aside for Kumbayah.

Too bad. If these deaths are to make a real difference in the American character, it is up to us, and Obama could have been the beginning of that. 9/11 just made us angry and fearful. Oklahoma City did nothing for our character. And we absorb mass shootings weekly without a tremor. It appears that this will be going on for a while longer.