This year, there are now concerns that the Bradley Effect may happen. If it happens, a lot of people will begin pointing fingers at who the racists are. I will just say this: Those that say they are voting for McCain probably will. Those that say they are voting for Obama may not vote for him. Those that say they are voting for Obama are predominantly Democrats. Therefore, if the Bradley Effect takes place, the racists are predominantly Democrats.
Now for the fun part: they can utilize the Kerry Effect and say 'well I voted for Obama (in the primary) before I voted against him'.
In a few years, when we all begin to realize that the only man-made warming going on is centered around Al Gore's mouth, what will humanity do to heat up the planet again? I mean it will be a calamity when the growing season is cut short due to global cooling, less food means higher prices, more demand on fur coats, overcrowded ski resorts etc.
Should we stop being green and become brown? should we trade in our Prius for Hummers? should we plug back in our old light bulbs and start using aerosol sprays?
Isn't this exactly what Obama is advocating, when he had this exchange over the weekend?
The fracas over Obama's tax plan broke out Sunday outside Toledo when Joe Wurzelbacher approached the candidate.
Wurzelbacher said he planned to become the owner of a small plumbing business that will take in more than the $250,000 amount at which Obama plans to begin raising tax rates.
"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the blue-collar worker asked.
After Obama responded that it would, Wurzelbacher continued: "I've worked hard . . . I work 10 to 12 hours a day and I'm buying this company and I'm going to continue working that way. I'm getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American Dream."
"It's not that I want to punish your success," Obama told him. "I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success, too.
Then, Obama explained his trickle-up theory of economics.
"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
Obama just let slip his true colors by living up to the following statement: "from those with means to those with need". This is the central tenant of socialism as stated by Karl Marx. It sounds great with lofty ideals, but the reality is that it punishes those that are succesful and rewards those that are not. This creates a disincentive for those who are the earners, and creates an incentive for those who are not. In the end, there will be fewer and fewer people who are motivated to do well.... to create and grow businesses that hire people only to be taxed more and more as the succeed... to create wealth that will be confiscated to give to people who don't earn it. Just look at European countries with their high unemployment and very expensive governments.
My view is that Robin Hood did NOT steal from the rich to give to the poor. What he did was take back from the tax collectors the punitive taxes leveled on the people, and gave back that money to those that really owned it... the people. Robin Hood was not a socialist, he was against an all powerful government trying to suppress it's people and he led a revolt against that government.
In modern day politics, Obama is not the Robin Hood, he represents the repressive government who will send out his tax collectors. Unfortunately, there is no modern day Robin Hood in American Politics. The GOP and DEM parties are both spending our money like drunken sailors and increasing the size and scope of FEDGOV to a point where they have to confiscate more and more of our earnings.
The Last Robin Hood we had in America was Newt Gingrich who led the GOP into power in 1994 and brought some sanity back to FEDGOV. He led the GOP to cut taxes, eliminate wasteful spending, reduced welfare and balanced the budget. Unfortunatly, that was short lived as the culture of Washington overcame these reformers. In 2006, Conservatives got tired of this and didn't come out to vote figuring that if the GOP was going to act like DEMS, then what's the difference?
The GOP will remain in the wilderness until they can get their 'Robin Hood' soul back.
btw, who is john Galt?
Not once did Jason Tuck's name get called. Not once did any defense player's name get called. Not once did the Cleveland QB get even touched... no sacks... no knock downs.... no pressure. THERE WAS NO DEFENSE AT ALL! You'd think they would have made some adjustments during halftime.
The Offense wasnt looking much better. Eli wasn't on his game and Burris wasn't on Eli's page.
It's like the Giants didn't prepare for this game. It's like they took the game for granted.
The Giants better get their act together this week or they won't survive Dallas... with or without Romo.
As John says "One of the common themes of modern American history is that liberals will create a problem by ill-advised government action, then benefit from it politically by proposing ever more intrusive government action to solve it. That appears to be happening again in connection with today's credit crisis."
Why can't the MSM do their job objectively?
Here is the premise (the bolding is mine):
The worst thing is that the left-wing Dems are poised to take control at a time of apparent economic crisis, or something approaching it. History suggests that under these circumstances, the party that gains control keeps it for longer than normal. FDR's victory in 1932 was the start of 20 years of Democratic control. After Reagan prevailed in 1980, the Republicans occupied the White House for 12 years. Clinton came to power towards the end of a mild recession. But for a quirk in the electoral process, the Dems would have held the White House for at least 12 years thereafter.
Here is the conclusion that I think is spot-on:
It's not mysterious that canddiates and parties elected in bad times do well in subsequent elections. First, it is natural to give them time to "fix" things. Second, the business cycle, and the underlying strength of our nation, are such that we tend not only to recover fairly quickly from downturns, but to emerge from them stronger than before. Both the law of averages and the laws of economic suggest that our economy will be in significantly better shape in October 2012 than it is today. In that scenario, a President Obama would have a huge advantage over any challenger.
Weighing slightly against this analysis is the fact that voters today are, I believe, much more impatient -- i.e., spoiled -- than in the past. We certainly are not likely to wait five to ten years for a full recovery, as voters did in FDR's day. On the other hand, the gang set to take over power this time seems far more prepared to rely on Chicago-style machine politics, voter fraud, and perhaps additional anti-democratic methods than were their counterparts in 1980 and 1992.
This is why Hillary doesn't want Obama to win. She'll need to wait 8 years before she can get elected. However, she doesn't want a Republican to win either for the same reason outlined above.
Will we remember who John Galt was?
We stand to lose a great deal of freedom and liberty if this bill is not done correctly. If we lose our ability to fail, we will soon loose our ability to succeed.
After all of the reading about this, and I'm no financial wizard, it seems the root cause is that FedGov, in a time of economic surpluses, wanted to force the 'trickle down' allow home ownership assistance to those who may be in positions to really afford it. Thus, lending institutions were forced to make loans that were that much more risky. It sounded like a good idea at the time.
Freddie and Fannie, being government enterprises, backed these loans. These institutions grew too large and didn't reserve enough cash to ensure these institutions would not fail in worse economic conditions. Now, We the People must make a choice, and it is not a good choice. We need to either spend at least 700 billion (and since when did any fedgov program not cost way more) to shore up the financial market by buying up the bad debt at a discounted price. If this is done right, all of the money will be eventually repaid by selling the assets at a higher price when the market goes up. If this is done wrong, we will not only eat the cost, but transfer so much power to FedGov that we may as well call ourselves the Peoples Republic of America because FedGov will have direct ownership of banks and lending institutions as well as Insurance companies (AIG).
The other option is for Fedgov to do nothing to bail out these institutions. Rather, they should rescind the legislation that was created in the first place that caused this mess. This may cause another stock market crash, and a real recession in the short term. However, the market will correct itself and we will be stronger for it. This is probably the right thing to do, but highly unlikely in an election year. Nor will our congresscritters admit that fedgov is the problem rather than the solution.
We don't hear press reports about the root causes. there is a very good reason for this: the press has an agenda that is to do no harm.... to Democrats. I have linked to video showing the history of the problem, and you see that Bush, GOP leaders and McCain has all said we need to fix the problem before it gets out of hand. Here is another link. Well, it is out of hand now thanks to inaction by the Donkeys.
No matter what congress decides, we are in for tough times.
PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is asking Ben and Jerry's to stop it's use of cow milk and substitute human milk instead.
VERMONT -- People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sent a letter to Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, cofounders of Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc., urging them to replace cow's milk they use in their ice cream products with human breast milk, according to a statement recently released by a PETA spokeswoman."PETA's request comes in the wake of news reports that a Swiss restaurant owner will begin purchasing breast milk from nursing mothers and substituting breast milk for 75 percent of the cow's milk in the food he serves," the statement says.PETA officials say a move to human breast milk would lessen the suffering of dairy cows and their babies on factory farms and benefit human health.So PETA would rather we stop exploiting cows, which incidentally were put on this earth so us humans can consume them (If god didn't intend us to eat cows, she wouldn't have made them out of steak), and begin to exploit humans.
Just for sake of argument, (like I really need to make one to show what a really stupid idea this is) we begin to milk humans for our daily dairy needs. A cow can produce about 19,500 pounds of milk per year. One human can only produce a tiny fraction of this. For the amount of milk that the world's population needs, it will take almost every human capable of producing milk to be constantly hooked up to a milking machine. What will the National Organization of Women think about this? How can a women perform in the workplace while she is hooked up to a milker? How can title IX survive when a women's soccer team has to stop every so often to milk their players? I can just see it now.... world leaders demanding we produce more girls to raise the overall milk production.
Meanwhile, happy healthy cows are wandering around in perfect bliss because we are not molesting them for their milk nor are we eating them.
For this reason, I am creating a new advocacy group called PETH - People for the Unethical treatment of Humans. We can call this idea pethetic.
From all accounts, President Bush has been raising this issue from almost his first inaugural. We see Alan Greenspan signaling problems, and we see John McCain sponsoring legislation to place some over site board over Freddie and Fannie. It looks like the Democrats had blinders on to the future of the GSE's.
It is no wonder harry Reid et al has no clue how to resolve this... they are the ones who allowed this mess to happen.
McCain will go to Washington and meet with Bush, leaders of both parties and Barrack Obama to hammer out the details. The Conservatives do not want McCain lose the presidentsy, so they will eventually support (albeit reluctantly) whatever Bush and McCain hammer out. Democrats, who want to take action but don't know how, will also go along with the deal but they will try to add silly things to the bill so they can also claim victory. Obama is just window dressing as he has shown that he does not have a real voice of power at the table.
Only McCain can deliver the deal. Harry Reid and the Democrats knows this. If the Democrats then oppose this deal, they will look like obstructionists who will oppose anything the GOP does without offering any viable alternatives (once again...referring to an energy policy).
This is clearly a win-win for McCain, and a lose-lose for Obama. How many more times can Reid, Pelosi get snookered? I don't know, but it seems that it is very seasy to do.
Although this shows us that the country comes first in his mind, he still must realize he is running for president against someone who will destroy this country's economy by his Liberal policies. This should be his number one focus. Also, a President, facing a crisis somewhere in the world, simply cannot suspend his Presidency on all other matters he/she faces. this is not an option for a President.
If McCain feels it important enough to be apart of the Senate deliberations, that's fine. He should do his duty as a Senator. But, he needs to delegate to the rest of his staff, especially Sarah Palin, his campaign duties until he can focus once again on the campaign.
If I were McCain, I would tell Obama "I must focus on this crisis in the senate. If you feel the same way, please join me in postponing the debate. If you do not feel the same way, I will send Sarah Palin to debate you". That oughta scare the bejeebies out of Obama.
In Fact, all of the Senators should be in DC for the senate deliberations. Palin then would be the only one available to campaign.
This madman deserves to be ridiculed, ostracized and demeaned in any way possible. His stay here in the UN should be made as uncomfortable as possible.
Rightly so, the NJDC is organizing a protest, and in an act of common values as Americans, invited influential people of all political parties to the rally. This should have been a no-brainer to show our united front against terrorism and extremely bad behaviour.
So what happened? As soon as Hillary Clinton found out that Sarah Palin (A sitting Governor, a VP candidate and strong proponent of Israel) would be there, she bagged the event. What a childish thing to do. It should serve to show us that she has absolutely no moral compass when she cannot bring herself to share a stage to show a common American Purpose. For her, it's Party first, and then Country. Actually, Its HRC, Then Party and only then Country.
So, the NJDC reached out to other Democrats, and none of them would attend. Who exactly is making this a political thing? Where are the adults in the Democrat party? They are all acting like badly behaving kindergartners.
Then, to make matters worse, the NJDC rescinded their invitation from Palin saying well if we can't get any Democrats, then we can't have any Republicans. As a Jew, I am ashamed of this group's behaviour. They acted almost as childish as the Democrats.
This should have been an American event... non-political and non-partisan. Instead, the Democrats and this lame Jewish group turned this into a joke. This rally will not get the attention it deserves because they denied national voices to attend. 'It's my ball, and I'm taking it home'. WAAAAAA!
Isn't the goal of liberals to have a massive Federal government control our health care and to provide cradle to grave insurance? Wasn't this 'HillaryCare' and is this not what Obama is now pushing?
I would think the only way to accomplish this goal is to have a government run/owned Insurance Company and force everyone into it... or at least those that cannot afford their own health care... which is to say just about everyone.
Now we have the Federal Government owning 80% of one of our nations largest insurance companies, AIG. Is this Step #1 towards their goal? For Hillarycare, this was probably the hardest and most complex part to accomplish in building the infrastructure to provide the products needed. In one fell swoop, this has been dealt with.
Step #2 is perhaps convince the public that we should maximize FEDGOV'S investment by saying something like: 'Now that we have this insurance company, we should use it to insure everyone, especially the children (it's always about the children as if us parents can't raise them ourselves)?'
Step #3 is to pass legislation in the liberal controlled congress and have the liberal president sign it.
In other words, by this time next year, HillaryCare could be a reality, while we all scratch our heads and wonder how this could have happened so fast.
I used to listen or watch the news for the weather reports. All I really needed to know is what I need to wear for the day... do I need to bring an umbrella... do I need a jacket... can I wear shorts? there was a time the weather man will give you a percent chance of rain. Nowadays, he/she will pinpoint exactly when it will start raining, how heavy the rainfall might be etc. They are usually wrong in that they always try to sensationalize the weather. they will tell you it will potentially dump 5 inches of rain, and flood out major roads when in fact it just drizzled. The reality is that it does not matter how much rain is expected, only that I have to bring my umbrella. They sensationalize the temperature by adding a 'wind chill factor' in the winter and a 'heat index' in the summer. Does it really matter that it is 20 degrees Fahrenheit, but the wind chill (defined as what it feels like being naked, as if I'll be running around naked outside) says 10 below... I'll still need my winter coat, gloves and hat. Does it really matter that it is 90 degrees but the heat index is 110?
I don't listen to the weather man anymore because what they tell us is nonsense.... I get a better weather report by looking out of my window. They don't tell me just the facts anymore.
The news that is presented to us is just like the weather report... they try to sensationalize it as well as try to tell a story. The story is what the editors want us to think about the facts they are presenting. Because the facts are going through this kind of editing, we do not get the overall picture anymore. Since there are now so many avenues of information gathering and presentation due to the Internet and blogs, we can now get a better picture of what is actually happening. There are tons of news sources at our fingertips, and many people sifting through these to find different perspectives on the same set of facts. In a lot of cases, finding facts that were either overlooked, not reported or not found by the Media. This is a problem when editing to tell a story in that you will usually be proven inaccurate and unreliable. If the media just stuck to the facts without editorial comment, they would be a lot better off. If the media was consistent in the treatment facts, they would be a lot better off.
Case in point: The media has dug into Governor Palin's accomplishments, life and family to a much higher degree that they did with Biden or Obama. Granted they have not had as much time to do this digging so it was compressed into a few short weeks. They had about 16 months to dig into Obama's history with William Ayres ( a known terrorist), but they have not. They had enough time to dig into Obama's pastor for 20 years, who weekly lectured to his congregation about racist and Anti-American ideals while Obama and his family sat and listened. It was only until conservative talk radio did the job of the Media that Obama left that pastor. For all the hammering that Palin is getting about being qualified, has the same hammering happened to Obama or Biden?
On Odd Couple quote applies here: 'Do you want speed or accuracy'? The Media has sacrificed accuracy for speed. Remember the 2000 election when they called the election in Florida for Gore an hour before the poles closed in a part of the state? If they hadn't sacrifsed accuracy, there would have been more Bush votes from the more conservative pan-handle, thus there wouldn't have been cause for Gore to try to steal the election.
The bottom line is that the Media, in trying to tell a story, rather than telling us the facts, has lost their direction as to why they are important to us, and they need to get their compass re-aligned. It is no wonder their viewership and readership is declining. It is no wonder alternative media readership is expanding.
I would watch a news program or read a newspaper, even if their articles were a day behind, as long as the facts are accurate and well researched.
1) Why don't we drill where there is oil? It seems to me that setting artificial and arbitrary boundaries limits the effectiveness for obtaining the oil thus increasing the cost of extraction and delivery. For instance, if there is a large oil source that is out of bounds, but smaller ones that are in bounds, it would take more oil rigs to do the extraction, as well as having to lay down that much more piping to get it to shore. The more oil rigs there are, the more potential risk to the environment (this makes no sense in the world of loony liberal logic).
This arbitrary restriction is like saying that we can't build a wind farm in the windiest places in America because it would wreck someone's view, so build wind farms where the wind isn't as good or consistent.
2) Why is this even a Federal issue at all? Each state should govern what happens within their property. Granted, it can get dicey when dealing with state boundaries off-shore, but I think an easy solution can be reached: just draw a line from the state boundary due east (or due west for left coast states). Easy.
Once the boundaries have been drawn, each state can decide what to do with their oil reserves, with the Federal Government acting as a customer. Each state can decide how to lease the land to the oil companies, and each state can decide how to divvy up any royalties paid to the residents of that state. This is basically the Alaskan model set up by Governor Palin. If a state doesn't want to have any drilling, that is their prerogative. When that states residents sees their neighboring states' residents getting tax breaks or reduced prices at the pumps, I'm sure they will put pressure on their state's government to change their minds.
We know the answers to these questions. It is because the Federal Government has grabbed too much power over the states and will not let go, even though what they are doing is constitutionally questionable. We also know that Liberals are more interested in control over our daily lives. I know this is a bold statement, but it is born out by the fact that they do not want us to have money in our pockets by keeping tax rates and energy costs high... and money = freedom, thus less money = less freedom. To a liberal, competition is verboten unless they can control it, thus they do not want states to compete for energy solutions.
Remember, the energy platform of Liberals is BANANAs -- Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.
So ABC releases the entire transcript of the interview (via Marklevinshow.com via hotair.com). It is fascinating to see what was not aired. If you have time, read the whole thing, especially the things that were left on the cutting room floor. Here is an example. The bold letters is what is on the floor:
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?
PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.
GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.
GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.
PALIN: Right, right.
GIBSON: I’m talking about somebody who’s a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?
PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we’ve got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state … these last couple of weeks … it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.
As you can see from this example, it shows that Palin has experience in negotiating with foreign countries, including Russia. It shows she has a whole lot more practical contact with foreign affairs than Obama ever had. It shows she is way more prepared than both Obama and Biden combined in meeting with and negotiating with foreign dignitaries. She has sat at the table, made the deals and had the authorization to sign the treaties on behalf of her state. Because this does not fit into ABC's portrayal of Palin as a Foreign affairs dolt, it was edited out.
I can understand editing the interview to eliminate non-editorial issues like external noises, Gibson farting or Palin's shirt opening up (thankfully neither happened). But editing the interview to change the meaning and context is unforgivable.
This is the first interview and first real chance for us Americans to hear Sarah Palin speak in an unscripted setting. For ABC to edit her answers (and Charlie's questions) is beyond the pale. It is no wonder the media has very little credibility any more.
It has been 7 years since Islamic terrorist assholes attacked us, and life has long since gone back to normal for most people. The event, although never forgotten, was not at the forefront of my mind at the time. I was focusing on the interview, and very little else.
The last time I was downtown, I took the Path to the WTC station. As I remember the trip, once entering the tunnel from the Jersey side, you don't see daylight again until after you exit the train, go up the escalators and walk outside.
My concentration on the interview was completely shattered when the Path train broke out into daylight about 1/4 mile from the station. You can look up into the sky and see buildings, cranes, workers and construction. The Path station itself was partly outdoors. Needless to say, I was deeply moved by this, and as I made my way up to street level, I realized I was feeling the same emotions I felt 7 years ago to almost the same intensity.... sadness for the victims and their families, anger at those assholes who now are cowering in caves like the worms they are... amazed that in this information age that those on flight 93 we instantly alerted ... and finally pride in Americans that those on flight 93 took action like the true heroes they are.
Once I got to street level, I began walking downtown. There were tourists with cameras gawking at the site all over the place. There were a few streets blocked off and stands being erected for 9/11 ceremonies. I don't know if any of them had the same emotions I was feeling. It didn't matter. I hope they take a lot of pictures and show them to a lot of people. I feel that we should be showing pictures of the towers before during and after the attack to make sure we do not forget...ever. Our complacency is our enemy's advantage.
When I was growing up, I watched those towers being built from the treetop in backyard. I would come home from school and climb my tree and count the number of floors. I watched the towers crumble to the ground. If I get this job, I will watch the new buildings built. I hope I get this opportunity.
Update: Unfortunately, I will not have this opportunity.
Now, Barrack Obama, who is struggling to find something he is better at than Sarah Palin, wants to challenge her to a basketball game. (ht to John Hawkins)
I would love to see this. It would be great theater, and it will do wonders for Palin's (and McCain's) election.
ABC News' George Stephanopoulos Reports: The rivalry between the Democratic and Republican tickets for president could shift from the ballot box to the hardwood if Barack Obama has his way.
In an exclusive interview airing this morning on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," the Democratic nominee for president said he would be open to going one-on-one in basketball with Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.
"You know, I would play her a game of horse," said Obama. "She looks like she’s got some game."
Palin was a standout high school basketball player whose skills on the court earned her the nickname Sarah Barracuda. But Obama said he doesn’t fear her.
"On the basketball court, I think I’d stand up pretty well," he said.
In my humble opinion, she is the ONLY qualified candidate this year. Unfortunately she is the VP pick, not the top spot.
and in other news, liberals are now realizing the predicament they are in: If Obama wins, then we are against women, and if Obama loses, we are all racists. This is the dangers of identity politics that liberals have created for themselves.
the good news is that no matter who wins, there will be a first, so we'll never have to go through this again.
The only reason women's beach volleyball is so popular is because they wear those skimpy bikinis while performing extraordinary feats of athleticism bringing out the best voyeurism in all us guys. When May/Walsh won the gold, they were very exited (in more ways than one). It was good tv.
So, I watched the Australian women trounce the Chinese in basketball for the simple reason of what they were wearing. If the WNBA wants more butts in the seats and more viewers, they should look up the uniform designers from Australia. Near the end f the game, the Aussies were up by almost 30 points. they kept on pouring it on by not letting up nor were they trying to run the clock out. In any other circumstance I would have thought this in poor sportsmanship and I would have lost a great deal of respect for them... but for the fact they were playing the Chinese who deserved this treatment due to their overall hubris during these games.
So (back to sports and to my next point) the Aussies won sending them to the gold medal round with America, and China will face Russia for the bronze. The question is (and not that I really care) who should I root against more fervently to lose the bronze?
Last night, the women's 100 meter qualifier races were on (as an example). NBC only introduced those athletes who would eventually qualify. If you were blind, you wouldn't know there were 6 other athletes in the race. What was worse, there was one heat that they introduced the Jamaican and the American, but the Russian won. You never once heard the Russian's name mentioned. Not once. Again, if you were blind, you would not know who actually qualified to move to the next round. At the end of each race, I had to say 'Gee, what a surprise' because the winners were the only ones NBC mentioned (except if there was an American in the race).
I realize these races took place at least 12 hours prior to it being aired, so NBC has plenty of time to produce and edit what they will show us. I just wish they'd play it straight and show us the races.
ESPN has all of the highlights so why do I even need to put up with NBC
No big deal, I think Ice Road Truckers is on tonight.
I dislike judged events. It is too subjective to be useful as a sport. There are amazing athletes involved in gymnastics, diving and other judged competitions, and they deserve a lot of credit and a fair competition. But the bottom line is which team has paid off enough judges. The Russian judge always scores the Americans lower, and visa versa.
One would think there are only 2 teams competing based upon the coverage: America and China. I know there are other teams, but we will never see them.
Beach Volleyball (especially the women) is an awesome sport. How these athletes can cover so much area on very soft ground is amazing.
Let's roll with this for a minute.
I can only assume that because the car was registered in America, more specifically, in NJ, that the driver is not saying 'G-d Save the Queen'. Thus I guess they approved of the American Revolution.
I didn't see any slaves driving the car, nor was there anyone in chains in the backseat. I guess they approve of the Civil War.
Because the bumper sticker was in English, not German, I guess that they approve of World War I and II.
Because they are alive because we have not had a terrorist attack, nor where they wearing Muslim garb means they approve of the current GWOT.
The utter hypocrisy of the owner of the car with this bumper sticker is staggering.
- The Union representing the Framingham MA police department is angry because they were denied a 1.2% pay increase by the city council. The reason for the increase? To settle a grievance filed by the union because police officers are now required to file all police reports on the computer. The raise was to compensate the union members for being "forced" to use the computer. http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/07/10/saying_police_stipend_doesnt_compute_voters_scuttle_framingham_settlement/
- A Boston Firefighter suffered a back injury in March and was requesting disability retirement (a tax free benefit for firefighters in MA). A few months later, he finished 8th in a national bodybuilding competition. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/07/14/on_injury_leave_firefighter_stood_out_as_bodybuilder/
It takes some really big balls to to rip off the tax payers like this, especially with the current economy.
Here is why I find this silly (oh... where to begin)
1st off, there is no reason to build these things because the global warming myth is just that... a myth. The world has already begun cooling down as it has cycled from hot to cool for millions and millions of years.
Secondly, Who would want to live on these huge ships with virtually no way of getting on/off? Keep in mind that these things are supposed to just float around in the ocean's currents. There are no engines to propel these things and if there was, imagine the power it would need just to keep it stationary. This power requirement alone would defeat the entire purpose of reducing the carbon footprint that these things are supposed to reduce. If these things are not powered in some way, won't they eventually crash land against land? what then? Perhaps it will be anchored to the sea bottom... but won't this destroy the ecology underneath this huge thing?
Thirdly, Has anyone actually rode out a hurricane in the the ocean? I thought those global warming scare mongers keep saying there will be more hurricanes and other natural extreme weather. If this is the case, they are in for a real rough ride, no matter how big these things are, they will be affected by rough seas. I hope they will pack enough barf bags.
Fourthly, How many people can survive in one of these things? Will there be mandatory birth control to maintain a certain population level? Who gets to decide who can have kids and who cannot? Not only that, it seems that everyone will be given a job to perform, much like a kibutz. While there is nothing wrong with this form of socialism when practiced by a willing but small community, it becomes overbearing and too controlling over people's lives when there are more than just a small community. For instance, on one of these ships, someone has an aptitude to be a dentist, yet there are already too many dentists, thus that person becomes the garbage collector.
And lastly (and there are so many other points) these things will never, ever get built even if everyone agrees it is the only thing that will save mankind. Why? Because there are environmental whackos who will argue that it will irreparably damage the echo system , cause extinction of (fill in the lifeform here) and pollute the air by having so many humans concentrated in a confined space. Jeez, we cannot even drill a small hole in a barren wasteland in Alaska to make us more energy independent. where will this thing get built? Keep in mind that these whacko's philosophy is 'BANANA': Build absolutely Nothing Any Where Near Anything.
Thus, it will be Whacko Vs. Whacko debating how and where these things should be built. the rest of us will be watching and laughing our asses off as if we are reading Spy Vs. Spy comic strips where the black spy is always at odd with the white spy found in Mad Magazine.
Since you haven’t seen the HBO Special “The Amazing Jimbo”, it’s safe to say I never made it as a comedian. But that doesn’t keep me from trying. I figure if I tell enough jokes, sooner or later, one of them has to be funny based on the Laws of Probability (sorry Eldridge).
Here’s to you, George.
(for you liberals, was this lesson slow enough for you to understand?)
Let me see if I can get through to you with this example of basic economic supply vs demand principle.
You run a lemonade stand. It is outside and operates 365 days per year.
- On a hot summer day, there is a line to purchase your product. You can increase your price and people will still pay for a cup (High demand, unlimited supply).
- On a cold winter day, there is no one lined up, even though you have reduced your price to almost cost and you fear that your ingredients will spoil (low demand, unlimited supply).
- On a hot summer day, you find your supplies running out. Your customers begin bidding up the price to get a cup. (High Demand, limited supply)
THE president of the United States has the power to attack, and perhaps destroy, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, the illegal cartel that has driven the price of oil over $130 per barrel. This can be accomplished without invasion or bombing. No special legislation is needed. The president need simply allow the states to seek relief in the Supreme Court under our antitrust laws.ooookaaay... Lets go with this. Let's sue them. After all, it must be a good idea to bite the hand that supplies us with the majority of our oil. And win or lose this lawsuit, we will succeed.... succeed in pissing off the oil producers so much so that the global oil prices will be reduced. How? Because when America's share of the oil is redistributed to the other countries that have NOT pissed them off, there then will be ample supply for everyone else, just not Americans.
Let me give Mr. Evans an analogy, I will sue Tavern on the Green because their prices are too much for me to afford. During my lawsuit, I get a bonus and now want to take my significant other to the best restaurant in the city, so we go to Tavern on the Green who recognizes me as the jerk who is suing them. Should I expect good service? Should I expect any service at all?
Bottom line, suing OPEC will not create one more drop of oil. It will not reduce the price of gas. It will not solve our energy problem. In fact, it will do just the opposite. It will decrease our supply of oil because OPEC doesn't have to sell oil to us. Thus, it will drastically increase the price of gas and further exacerbate the problem.
On so many levels, suing OPEC would be extremely stupid. But for loony liberal logic, I guess it makes sense.
My fellow “Reality Distillates” should have known that would only be a matter of time before I threw in some engineering geek stuff. Here is a wonderful book that I recommend. There is a lot more to ceramics than making birdbaths and bathroom sinks.
The Magic of Ceramics
David W. Richerson, Bonnie J. Dunbar (Foreword by)
What do the following things have in common: the space shuttle, cosmetics, color TVs, concrete, and kayaks? Ceramics! All these items are made of or include ceramics, the most common and diverse of all materials - yet most of us would be surprised at its variety of uses. You will be amazed by how ceramics make possible such diverse products as cellular phones, many of your favorite sporting goods, radio, television, and lasers. You will be surprised by how ceramics are used in medicine for cancer treatments and restoring hearing, in our cars, and even in some cosmetics. This book introduces readers to the many exciting applications of ceramics. By using simplified technical explanations, it answers the question: How do ceramics improve your everyday life? It describes how the ceramic material functions, and why it is superior to other materials, while teaching key scientific concepts like atomic structure, color, and the electromagnetic spectrum.
Table of Contents
Our Constant Companions.
From Pottery to the Space Shuttle.
The Beauty of Ceramics.
Ceramics and Light.
Amazing Strength and Stability.
Ceramics and the Electronics Age.
Ceramics and the Modern Automobile.
The Hardest Materials in the Universe.
Energy and Pollution Control.
On sale at Amazon for only $38.65. It is currently #1,711,433 on the Amazon Best Seller list
Well, Monty Python did show an occasional quick shot of a topless model, but they were few and far between. While endlessly waiting for them to show some naughty bits, I started to enjoy the humor. The next summer, our cable system started offering HBO and had a free preview for about a month. One of the movies playing that month was Monty Python and The Holy Grail. My friends and I must have watched about 10 times. The killer rabbit and "bring out your dead" had me hooked.
No need to repeat the lines. It's getting late and I have to work tomorrow. But here are some links that may be of interest
This link has the Script to The Holy Grail. Now you can impress your friends by quoting the exact phrases from your favorite scene.
Some more movie scrpt links to Life of Brian and The Meaning of Life. Not all of the links work but there is lots of interesting stuff if you fish around
Now it's time for an extended rest after writing this prolonged squawk.
There are 2 similar shows on the History Channel that I also enjoy, Ice Road Truckers and Axe Men. They have the same script; follow people around as they do difficult jobs.
Ax Men is finishing up its season and Ice Road Truckers starts a new run of shows next week.
So after a day of crunching data and writing experimental reports as a process development engineer, these shows offer a nice change of pace (and they sure are a lot better than American Idol).
As soon as she said that, my 8 year old son chimed in from the back seat, “Can I see?”
We live in the greatest country civilization has ever seen. Generations of Americans have used the capitalistic ideals of good ideas and a strong work ethic to improve their lives and the lives of others. Today, however, new technology is expensive so a little capital to jump start the process can’t hurt, right?
In theory, it’s hard to argue with this approach. But as with any good idea, the devil is in the details. And we have one great, big devil (so to speak) in the details of this plan. It’s called Government.
Can anyone name a program run by the Government that is efficient and cost effective? Yeah, I thought so. Let’s look at the track record. Welfare? I guess it helps a few who really need, but how many people fall into the “lifestyle”. Whether it is the inner city or rural America, there are numerous 3rd generation welfare trash sitting on their @$$, pumping out kids, and feeling entitled to your taxes. Social Security? Pork Barrel entitlements from Congress? You get the point.
Can you really expect the Government to efficiently manage a program flush with cash? And can we trust them? Back in the 1980’s, when Mario Cuomo controlled NY, he raised the gas tax to cover the cost of road repairs. The increase was supposed to go into a special fund specifically for roads repair and improvement. Being a naïve conservative, I actually thought this was a good idea. After all, I drove on the roads, and they could use some repairs, so I didn’t have a problem with paying to help keep them up. Two years later, the NY state legislature voted to put the special fund road repair money in with the general fund. Their reasoning was that road repairs came from the general fund so why not put all of it there. But the general fund also paid the rest of the bills so there was no way be certain that the extra gas tax revenues were actually going to road repair or some other mismanaged program. So the tax went up, the roads didn’t get fixed , and NY state drivers are still paying extra.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe that we absolutely have to find a way to develop alternative energy. As a country, how can we protect ourselves when we have to rely on an energy source controlled by despots and barbarians, all the while competing with China and India for the resources? Here is a better idea. Let’s use tax breaks to encourage businesses and entrepreneurs to invest in alternative energy. Allow the capitalist system to work. Americans have always been good at innovation, government has not. Let’s streamline the process for building wind farms by not subjecting companies to frivolous lawsuits because it may hurt a subspecies of bat that is nearly identical to other bat populations or it may be ruin the view of the Kennedy’s and other rich socialites when it id placed 20 miles off the coast of Nantucket. Let’s build some more nuclear plants. If the French can manage a national system of nuclear power without screwing it up we should be able to. But whatever we do, don’t give the government more money.
Hillary Clinton did exactly that the other day by recalling assassinations and other maladies during this primary. She essentially said: 'Thats a nice candidate you got there, it would be a shame if something happened to him'. The question is, what is her price?
West Virginia Senator, Robert Byrd, a former member of the KKK, is supporting Barack Obama for President. Just goes to show you how bad Hillary is.
Jesse Helms must be rolling over in his grave.
It is the 'You can't' attitude of governments that is the hallmark of Socialism, Marxism and every 2-bit tinpot dictator that suppresses their people from achieving greatness.
The last time an American Politician told us 'we can't' was Jimmy Carter. he was soundly defeated by a man who said ' We can'.
Now candidate Obama is telling us 'we can't'. From AFP via Drudge comes Obama's quote:
"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.
"That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added.
Obama expects us to freeze ourselves in the winter, and pack our large families into tiny unsafe vehicles. He will dictate to us Americans what we cannot do. This is not leadership... this is dictatorship. this is not the American way, it is the Russian or Chinese way. It is the path towards socialism that us Americans WILL NOT TOLERATE.
If Obama (or any other politician) wants a truly 'I can' society, then allow us Americans to solve our own energy crisis. We can, if only the fedgov will get the F%^) out of our way. We have solutions already, but fedgov will not allow them to be implemented. For instance, when was the last time a refinery was built? (Answer: over 30 years ago.) Why can we not drill safely and environmentally friendly in Alaska? Why can we not drill offshore to tap huge amounts of oil? Why can we not build wind farms 100 miles offshore? Why can we not build nuclear plants? The answer is that the fedgov's energy policy is 'BANANA's: Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.
And another thing, who gives a rat's ass what other people think of us? We are the greatest country in the world because we made it. Us American's should not feel guilty about the possessions we have. We work hard for them and if the rest of the world don't like it, it is because they are jealous of us. I am not willing to succumb to this attitude of guilt. If they want what we have, then they need to dump their socialistic governments and become more like us by working hard for it by adopting the'I can' attitude that is being suppressed in most other countries.
On so many levels, Obama should not be elected. In fact, no liberal should be elected. It is the fastest way down the path of self distruction for this country and the world. He is the next Jimmy Carter, only worse. At least Jimmy Carter had executive experience as governor prior to being elected.
- The Boston Globe had 3 main articles on the front page today. The most print went to the hospitalization of Teddy Kennedy. The second largest was an article on how the how the Gay community in California was rejoicing over their State Court's reversal of their gay marriage ban and how they are looking to Massuchusetts for help. No Front page on the Chinese Earthquake that has killed tens of thousands, nothing on huge humanitarian tradgedy in Myanmar. Not even any Obama kissing or Hillary bashing.
- The Globe did have a nice article the Clinton past is catching up with Hillary.
- I've taken an interest in Hockey now that the Penguins are close to making it to the Stanley Cup. Yes, I guess I'm a bandwagon fan, but it's the Hockey Bandwagon, not just the Penguins. I would be hard pressed to name more than 1 winners of the last 10 Stanley Cups (Didn't the Buffalo Sabers lose to Dallas a few years ago?)
- It is the middle of May and the Pirates aren't mired in last place. In fact, they are 1 game under .500 and have a better record than the Yankees.
- Speaking of the Pirates, I'm taking my kids (10 year old twins and and 8 year old) to their 1st major league game over memorial day weekend. We will be in Pittsburgh and go see the Pirates with my brother and his family (no child abuse jokes, please).
- I've come to the conclusion that I don't hate the Patriots as much as I hate Bill Belicheck. The guy comes off as an arrogant @$$hole and I hope spygate continues to black cloud over his head. In a few years, the Patriots will fall back into mediocrity and we'll see how many true New England fans there really are.
- I always liked the Boston Celtics (no NBA in Pittsburgh). It's great to see them doing well I guess you can have a good sports teams without a bunch of trash talking, look at me, thugs. A lot of NBA and NFL players should take a look at how well Garnett, Pierce and Allen play together.
Do you prefer a good Lager to a fancy Pinot or Chardonnay? Like discussing the finer points of a Belgium White or Hefeweizen? When you pour a glass and smell the fruity bouquet, it is more likely the Hops from a pale ale than some grape? Prefer Brew pubs to wineries? Then here is a great site.
These guys know what there talikng about (even if they did give the Boston Beer Works wild blueberry lager a decent rating. Blueberries and beer?? Don't think so)
q: How stupid do liberals think we are?
the reason for this pop quiz is the article I just read concerning how Obama wants to have a 'windfall profit tax' on 'big oil found here. The following is the jist of the article:
The plan would target profit from the biggest oil companies by taxing each barrel of oil costing more than $80, according to a fact sheet on the proposal. The tax would help pay for a $1,000 tax cut for working families, an expansion of the earned- income tax credit and assistance for people who can't afford their energy bills.
``The profits right now are so remarkable that one could trim them 10 percent or so, which would turn out to be somewhere in the $15 billion range,'' said Jason Grumet, an adviser to the Obama campaign.
Every company is entitled to make money. This is why they are in business. Each company has an earnings target. This is why they have investors. If you raise taxes on a company, they raise prices accordingly. The company will make the same amount of money while the rest of us who consume the product will pay a higher price. All liberals will succeed in doing is create a bigger problem. This concept is fundamental economics that liberals do not understand.
Here is a dirty secret liberals don't want you to know: the oil companies make about 10 cents on each gallon, yet fedgov takes about 18 cents per gallon. Who is ripping off the consumers?
Also, the oil companies are earning roughly 7% in profits. this is in line (and in some cases lower) with other industries. The computer industry makes about 12%. will liberals also tax these profits? Fedgov makes about 25%, shouldn't this be reduce this as well?
One more economic lesson for stupid liberals: there are only 2 ways to reduce the price of oil:
- Increase supply
- reduce demand
In conclusion, liberals are actually creating this problem and they do not even realize it. They are stupid.
Here is a clip from Nikki Fink's Deadline Hollywood (via Drudge)
If Paramount wasn't expecting too much, why did they make the movie in the first place? Because they live in Hollywood and they believe everyone is entitled to their opinion regardless of the cost. this and other movies coming out of Hollywood about the war are just examples of how completely out of touch with reality they are. During WWII, there was plenty of movies from Hollywood that were big hits simply because it showed America fighting the good fight and winning. Iraq is the good fight and we are winning, but Hollywood doesn't see this, thus they are producing garbage.
Although the drama from MTV Films was the best-reviewed movie opening this weekend, Paramount wasn't expecting much because no Iraq war-themed movie has yet to perform at the box office. "It's not looking good," a studio source told me before the weekend. "No one wants to see Iraq war movies. No matter what we put out there in terms of great cast or trailers, people were completely turned off. It's a function of the marketplace not being ready to address this conflict in a dramatic way because the war itself is something that's unresolved yet. It's a shame because it's a good movie that's just ahead of its time."
If Paramount was serious about making money (which any good business should do) then they would make movies that people would actually want to see. I have an idea: Why don't they make a movie about American Soldiers as hero's? there are plenty of examples they could use, just ask Micheal Yon.
Those who think a few million grains of sand can hold back the tides can also believe that man has caused our world to 'heat up'. There is no question that the average temperature has risen in the last few decades, but this has happened in the past as well... about every 1,500 years. The fact that the Sun goes through relative warm and cold periods (like summer and winter) has the ultimate impact on Earth's weather. There may also be a correlation between sunspots to our temperature. There was a period of time in the 1600's when there was virtually no sunspots. at the same time, there was a 'little ice age' happening on earth. At the moment, we are nearing the end of the 'summer' period. In fact, the Earth's average temperature has DECREASED over the last few years according to NASA's Aqua satellite data. Why don't we hear any of this? It doesn't fit with the media's doom and gloom nor does it fit with the socialistic views of environmentalists who want to confiscate wealth to save the planet (that doesn't need saving).
As for the oil crisis, I'm going to speculate a bit, with no factual backup. In other words, I'm going to use Al Gore's methods for defining a problem. Why is the price of oil high? There is the laws of supply and demand, and at the moment, the demand is very high due to the emerging markets of China and India consuming more oil than ever before. There is also a constant threat to the supply because of where in the world the oil riches are. Our world's oil supply is controlled by those with 15th century thoughts and societies. They reap the rewards of the oil riches and don't share it among their populations. The richest countries in the world have the poorest people. I'm talking about the Middle East Arab and Persian countries. To get their populations from revolt and bringing their countries into the 21st century, they foster a deep seeded hatred of the Western Culture.
Anyway, I don't believe this is why the price of oil is so high. Let's back up for a moment. In 2003/2004, there was a very rich person trying to influence the Presidential election. George Soros believed that given enough money, he can influence the population into electing Democrats through direct funding and funding groups like moveon.org. He failed for one major reason: the economy was doing fine despite all of the hardships against it (War, Natural disasters, and other events).
What if there was someone that had enough money to influence the American economy? How would someone go about doing this? The answer is actually quite simple. The oil prices are set not so much based upon supply/demand in the present but on speculation in the futures market. If I had enough money to burn, I could buy barrels of oil for $120 if I wanted to, and that would be the price. I would do this by raising prices gradually over a period of time so as not to raise too much suspicion.
As a result, the prices of everything associated to oil prices would rise, and in America, that is just about everything from fuel to plastics etc. If gas prices goes up, so do delivery charges which ultimately get passed on to the consumer. This alone will cause inflation because now prices on everything including bread, milk and eggs are going to rise. this will cause everyone to notice that their pocketbook is getting emptier, and when this happens, they'll look for someone to blame. The media has been beating this drum now for a very long time with the help of democrats to ensure the blame is squarely on the republicans.
Once a democrat is elected President, the prices of oil will miraculously drop to normal levels and prices will fall somewhat, but not all the way back to levels from 2006. This is the conspiracy that is much easier to pull off that the Global Warming scam.
I'm in the process of re-doing my resume for the 4rth time now. this time, Ive hired a professional. depending on the results, I'll hold off on giving myself the 'v-8' head slap.
the night shift started about 8pm, and I still had no desire to pee. they were getting worried. the night nurse was about the cutest Indian chick I have ever seen. So, just for her, I gave peeing the ole college try. I had to stand next to the bed and piss into a jug because I was plugged into the machines. It was hard enough with all of the wires, but she kept on interrupting every 30 seconds. I finally bullied her to go away. I squirted out a few thimble fulls, just enough to ease the pressure. It was all I could do with her interrupting.
About an hour later, they gave me another shot of morphine and soon after, I had to pee. I knew the drill, so I again bullied her to go away. I then overheard a conversation between her and another nurse that went something like this:
Other Nurse: 'What is he doing?'Needless to say, both nurses came running in and interrupted a very weak start. (So much for attempt #2). But this time, I noticed that the room had a head tucked away under the sink. I told the nurse to just let me sit on the head; this will resolve several issues as well as their concern about hosing down the room. So they unplugged me from the contraptions and left me alone for 10 minutes. What a relief! This became the drill every other hour for the rest of the night.
My cute nurse: 'He is trying to pee?'
Other nurse; 'didn't he just get morphine?'
My cute Nurse: 'Yes'
Other nurse: ' He is going to piss all over the room!'
There was an older guy in the room next to mine. He was moaning and carrying on and from where I sat (being on morphine, remember) he was either in a great deal of pain, or was having some fun with a nurse. Between him carrying on, and my peeing, I got very little sleep.
I got home today about noon after stopping at the pharmacy to pick up my prescriptions. Percoset in a liquid form that I need to take every four hours.
It hurts to swallow, otherwise I'm fine. I just won't operate any heavy machinery for the next few days.
I've never been knocked out before and I really didn't think much of it until the hospital put a living will document in front of me. then I got to thinking about 'what if', as in 'what if I don't wake up' or 'what if I'm somehow allergic to the anesthesia?'
So with careful thought, I filled out the living will to basically say if a cucumber has a higher IQ than me, then pull the plug. I know this a bit blaze, but I can't worry about all of the 'what ifs'. that is how people can go insane.
The decision to pull the plug will be made by my significant other. She and I discussed it so she understands my intentions. Also, she understands horticulture and the nature of plants so she is the best person I know who can quantify the relative IQ of any vegetable. Plus, there is no financial impact one way or the other for her as my kids will inherit everything. (I really need to formalize a will, I'll do this soon as I still feel I'm immortal)
If all goes well (and there is no reason to believe otherwise), I'll be home tomorrow eating Italian Ices and drinking my meals for the next week.
Blogging is actually very scary. It really puts yourself out there for the entire computerized world to potentially see. It also has the potential for people who are close to me to get the wrong idea of why I'm writing certain things. For this reason, I don't write about personal relationships or business relationships.
As stated before I have a lot to scream about (I've lost my job, my house is for sale, and my divorce is winding it's way through the court system). Just looking at the previous sentence makes me scream as well as get a 'woe is me' attitude.
However, I am not feeling miserable about the way things are. I actually feel pretty good and here is why: the job was a crappy job working for a crappy company, the future ex-wife was a crappy wife, (who did 2 really great things in delivering my 2 wonderful kids). I'll miss the house if I have to move, but there will be other places to keep the rain off of my head. I believe I have good marketable skills and will not be out of work for long. I only hope I can find a job so I don't have to sell the house.
But most importantly, I have someone in my life to share everything with, and she is my source of strength (as well as some aggravation, but that goes with the territory) as well as some really good friends and of course my family.
I know all will be well, thus there is no need to scream, nor panic. I've been in worse places, such as drifting onto Rikers Island (NYC Prison in the middle of the East river) without engine nor sail to keep us away with prison guards aiming rifles at us. I didn't panic then either, but there was a certain amount of yelling.
Once I set it up, with my information, job history etc., I went in search of other people. I was extremely surprised at the results. I found colleagues from companies past that I am now linked with as well as my first recruiter! I also found my best friend from high school who we've lost contact with each other about 20 years ago! I'm now in touch with other recruiters, collage buddies and old friends.
I have an interview as a result of Linked In in about 40 minutes.
I called my sister a few minutes ago to apologize for the attitude as well as to thank her for the introduction to the site. Thanks again Sis!
Anyway, I'll be putting an icon on this blog shortly so you can all see my profile.
The results are in: I have a mild case of apnea, but not enough to use the CPAP masks effectively. The study shows that I spend about 52% of the time in stages I and II which is light sleep. The bottom line is that I'm not getting enough deep sleep which causes me to be tired, sluggish and forgetful. The Doc says that there is too much stuff in my throat and not enough space for air to pass due to the tonsils and pallet constricting my 'snore box'. When this happens the apnea index is about 7 times an hour which wakes me up.
So we are now down to 2 options: surgery or wearing a mouthpiece every night. The mouthpiece is designed to hold out the lower jaw (kind of like Bill Cower when he gets mad) so there is more room in the 'snore box'.
After some careful consideration keeping in mind that I don't have any pressing engagements at the moment, I decided to take my ex-employees up and actually use the medical benefits I still have until the end of March and do the surgery. (consider this my last act of passive aggression)
I'm getting my tonsils removed and my pallet scraped next Tuesday. I'll be staying one night in the hospital and then I'll be home for recovery, and then it's a liquid diet for the next 7 days.
I am really looking forward to sleeping better and I'm sure everyone else near me is as well.
I have been distracted by events at work (I know, I shouldn't let a thing like work get in the way of blogging...). Our workforce needs to downsize for various reasons. It is not a well kept secret at all and coupled with the visibility of the CEO, VP of HR and CFO being huddled behind various closed doors, has made the rest of us very worried for our futures. My company also has a problem in that we cannot execute a plan very well. things tend to drag out too long.
All of us are on pins and needles waiting for the ax to drop, and it will soon. Morale is extremely bad and has made everyone very tense. Ive noticed that people are taking different attitudes:
- 'Duck and Cover' -- these people keep there heads down, do what they are told even if they are told to do something they know is stupid.
- 'wtf' -- these people figure since they are sure to get a pink slip, they will make life even more difficult for everyone else by being uncooperative by saying something like '... do it yourself, I have my own job to do'.
- 'Who cares' -- these people think it wouldn't make that much difference if they worked here or not working at all. They feel very put upon already, so being laid off would be a relief. These people spend more time on Monster.com and Dice.com than actually getting their job done.
- 'I want to keep my job' -- these people are now, all of a sudden, the model employee, unlike what they were doing previous. They can be seen sucking up to everyone who may have some influence over the decision. (I don't want to speculate how a select few women are behaving)
- 'The Axe? What Axe?' -- These people are too naive or too stupid to know what is going on. fortunately, there aren't too many in this category.
Update 2/19/2008: Well, Thats a relief. The axe fell today. I wasn't around long enough to find out who else was 're-organized' out of the company. It is just as well. The company is dying a painful death. If it survives the year, I will be shocked. The brands will survive and probably be sold off to various major companies, but the current company will disintegrate.
More on this later. for now, I'm going to do what any self respecting person who is 're-organized' should do: get drunk, get laid and get some well deserved sleep. (perhaps I can get 're-organized' tomorrow as well..heehee)
I think this is a great sentiment. I share their desire to have world peace. It would be great if we all could 'just get along'.
Id like to meet the owner of the stickers and prove a point. I'll bring along a 'neutral' party (you'll see why in a moment) for this meeting.
here is how this will go:
- Slap peacenick in the face
- Referee says to peacenick 'Peace Please'
- Repeat steps 1-2 for as long as it takes for the peacenick to walk (or run) away
- Follow Peacenick and continue from step 1
- Repeat steps 1-4 until peacenick finally asks 'why are you doing this?'
- Answer: 'Because you are not Muslim, will you convert?'
- Repeat steps 1-6 until peacenick answers 'yes'
It is these radical-islamofascists who need to coexist with us. from all the evidence at hand, they are unwilling to do so. It is their stated goal to make the entire world Muslim. If you are not a Muslim, you are an enemy of theirs. Unless you are willing to convert, you will never have peace with them nor will you be able to coexist with them.
Their complete intolerance of everything not of their liking, such as those cartoons of Muhammad and the 'outrage' that ensued, makes it very difficult to 'co-exist' with them.
So for those with the bumper stickers, don't tell me about their desire to have peace, go tell it to our enemies. They are the ones responsible for this war and they are the ones who can end it by either surrendering (and coexisting with us) or dying. It is their choice.
As for us, we have a choice as well. We can either surrender (and convert), or fight on.