Friday, February 13, 2009
McDonalds Food Challenge
The challenge is to eat $25 worth of McDonald's food in one sitting - presumbaly without throwing up or exploding. This meal ends up being:
  • 5 chicken strips
  • 10 chicken McNuggets
  • 1 Big Mac
  • 1 double Quarter Pounder with cheese
  • 1 double cheeseburger
  • 4 medium fries
  • 4 medium Cokes
The prize is $100. Does he succeed?

Feb 13, 2009 12:01 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
Cheeseburger...
... in a can!



Says the poster on YouTube: "This is me eating one of the famous cheesburgers in a can. It is kinda ok although the noise the meat makes when you bite into it is very disgusting. It has that crunchy, gristly kind of feeling to it. Would I eat it again? Yeah, probably but only if I was close to starvation. Was it worth the €3,95? Hell no."
 | 
Feb 13, 2009 11:08 AM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  |  Trackback
 Thursday, February 12, 2009
Another promise broken
Similar to President Obama's broken promise to publicly post non-emergency legislation for comment for five days before signing, Congressional Democrats have broken their promise to allow 48 hours of public review of the Stimulus Bill before putting it to a vote.
In a press conference Thursday, the House Republican leadership spoke candidly about being kept out of the House-Senate conference on the Obama-Pelosi-Reid so-called “economic stimulus” bill. They confirmed they had not yet seen the text of the bill as of 4 p.m.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he was unsure how many Democrats would vote with Republicans again on this bill but that he thought Republicans “may get a few” Democrats to side with them. The fact that the Demos have now broken their promise to have the public able to see the bill for 48 hours may drive more Dems into the Republican camp.

“[I] don’t know, ‘cause they haven’t seen the bill either,” Boehner said.

“The American people have a right to know what’s in this bill,” Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind) told HUMAN EVENTS after the press conference. “Every member of Congress -- Republicans and Democrats -- voted to post this bill on the internet for 48 hours, 48 hours ago. We’ll see if the Democrats keep their word.”

Actually -- as of 5:15 pm, the Democrats had broken their word. The stimulus bill -- which we still haven’t seen -- will be released late tonight and will be brought up on the House floor at 9 am tomorrow.
There's also this exchange which amused me greatly, mainly because it took place over Twitter.
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) twittered, "Don't know when we're going to vote. Will the no votes delay vote just because they can? Speed is important. They know that."

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) twittered back, “Those in favor of speed over commonsense may just be afraid of letting the People know what they are ramming through.”
Feb 12, 2009 7:40 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
Bringing you only the best II
You'll be pleased to know I am now #5 on Google for "kevin's a chipmunk".

Feb 12, 2009 12:42 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Duoseptuagenuple Stuf!

What is this Duoseptuagenuple Stuf magic I speak of? Let me demonstrate using dimensional analysis:

1 package Double-Stuf
36 Double-Stuf cookies
2 Oreo goo
1 Duoseptuagenuple Stuf
 ∴ 1 package Double-Stuf = 1 Duoseptuagenuple Stuf cookie

1 package Double-Stuf1 Double-Stuf cookie
72 Oreo goo

Oh, yes. There are pictures.

 | 
Feb 10, 2009 9:15 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Friday, February 06, 2009
Cleaning out my phone's memory card
Ok, so enough with the politics for tonight, just the same old crap there anyway.  I finally remembered to grab a USB cable before sitting down to dump the pictures that I've been meaning to share off of my phone.  So, with no further ado...

I forget where we were driving when we saw this truck but I had to ask Leesa to grab a picture of it.  It's kind of hard to tell but the back of the truck says, inexplicably, "WE BUY YONK CARS".  I figured it was supposed to be junk, and I guess I could see misspelling it as "YUNK" or "JONK", but "YONK"?


Yeah, it's on the side too - same spelling.


This is Kate chilling in the Target cart as we did some Christmas shopping.  If memory serves it was one of the first times (if not the first) that they got to ride in the cart without being in a carseat.


Natalie desperately trying to get to a bag of Krystal's burgers.  This is from November, long before she got any teeth.

Now we enter the time when I was at the mall, unattended, and decided to just take pictures of whatever absurd thing I happened to come across.  The above I have little to add to.  It basically speaks for itself.  It was just in the window of an "As Seen on TV" store.  More from that store shortly.


This is from a kiosk in the mall that sells "electric cigarettes".  I think the idea is that you can look just as cool as if you had a regular cigarette but it's a lot healthier.  I don't know, somehow it just looks really stupid to me.  It looks like she's falling while holding a cheap pen in her mouth.


Wow, it's clearly a Wii!  And for only $25.  See?  It has the Wiimotes and nunchucks and such!  It has bowling, tennis, baseball, boxing, and golf!  The kids are going to be thrilled come Christmas morning!


Back to the "As Seen on TV" store.  Never seen this on TV, but as you'll soon see, it's just possible that this Notebook Holder comes to us from another country.  Maybe.


"Can be convoluted"!


"Be easy to catch the screen.  Be hard to tired for the hands.  Good posture."
"7 angle points can be adjusted among 10' and 16'"


Here's the back of the box with all of the technical information.


"The loss and damage of the data saved in the computer exceeds our guaranty."
"No using beyond the purpose."
"Please set on the balanced table to use."
"Adjusting to the stable and fixed angle, placing the notebook after assurance."
"Don't jam the finger if the angle is altered and adjusted."
"Don't adjust the angle when placing the notebook."
"Please shopping using when the notebook isn't fixed stably."
"Please pay attention to the unassured situations because of the underside shape of the notebook."
"Don'open the screen excessively to avoid possible falling."
"Please rotate the holder slowly to avoid dropping the notebook."
"Don't drop and strike intensively, for it is possible to cause damage."
"Don't set beside the fire."
"Long-time placing is prohibited."
"Don't use in the airflow and dusty circumstance."
"Please wipe gently with dry or soft cloth.  Don't use the gasoline, thinner or alcohol."


"Heat dispersion effect: Make sure the air isflowing to create the comfortable life rhythm of the notebook!  Perfec heat dispersion when enjoying DVD"
"Skidding prevemted: Be unaware of cutting of the electricity at any time for good heat dispersion."  [What?]


Here's a "Figure Trimmer" that's a triple-threat of nonsense.  It promises to help you lose weight by pivoting (so you can exercise with it, I guess) plus it has magnets that are all positioned to provide benefits via the magic of reflexology.


Here's a closeup of the foot diagram that shows which points on the foot correspond to which internal organs.  I like how they are all roughly similar to the shape of the organs themselves.  Must be a real bitch to try to stab the small intestine spots what with them weaving all around like that.


The back had more information on the benefits of the "Magnetic Wave Disc".  If you can't make it out, here's what it says:
MAGNETIC WAVE

According to a Japanese medical doctor, there exists a magnetic field inside the human body.  The electromagnetic force in the human body reduces accelerated activity of "sodium, postassium and phosphor", which in turn stimulates the activeness of the sympathetic nerve.

BARE FEET AND HEALTH

Since modern people are not used to walking bare feet, there are various diseases that affect the internal organs.  In view of this fact, the Magnetic Wave Disc was designed and produced.  The Magnetic Wave Disc will massage and stimulate the meridian points on the bottom of the feet and help promote good health.

MAGNETIC WAVE DISC
  • Stimulates more than 200 meridian points
  • Alleviate pain
  • Massages and relaxes
  • Stimulates blood circulation
The Magnetic Wave Disc will not cause any side effects with prolonged use.
First I'd just like to point out how great it is that the claim is attributed to "a Japanese medical doctor."  Not even "Eastern medicine teaches us that...".  No.  "Some Japanese doctor once told us this."

The merits of reflexology and magnets I'll leave to the reader to investigate; it's too late in the day for me to start a pseudoscience rant.  I would like to point out, though, that not walking around in bare feet all the time has probably done wonders for lowering tetanus infections at the very least.


My nephew from our recent trip to Savannah.  He tried to wear ever piece of pirate regalia offered to kids at The Pirates' House.  He succeeded, briefly.


Kate, looking very pitiful while wearing her nebulizer mask during her recent breathing troubles.


Ingles has started carrying some really weird flavors of potato chips.  Target had some interesting ones under its generic brand a while back like "buffalo wings and blue cheese" that were pretty innovative for their time.  These are kind of gross, though.






Thought this said "Ragin' Rash" at first. "Ranch" is better.


And lastly, minced fish, deep fried with a layer of cheese. Mmmmm!
 |  |  |  | 
Feb 6, 2009 11:37 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
He's super serious!
From the AP:
President Barack Obama decried as "inexcusable and irresponsible" the delay of his economic recovery legislation in Congress with an estimated 3.6 million Americans losing their jobs since the recession began.
Well now he's just throwing a Presidential temper tantrum.
Obama's remarks were some of his most direct and pointed in support of the massive economic package that the Senate considered Friday and tried to pare down below its $900-billion-plus price tag. Obama acknowledged it was not perfect and pledged to work with lawmakers to refine the measure, which he called "absolutely necessary."

"But broadly speaking, the package is the right size, it is the right scope, and it has the right priorities to create 3 to 4 million jobs, and to do it in a way that lays the groundwork for long-term growth," Obama said at a ceremony in the White House East Room.
"work with lawmakers to refine the measure" how? Once it's passed, it's passed. THIS is the time to refine the measure, which is exactly what's going on. You can't order people to pass it and then say you'll work on afterwards.
"These numbers demand action. It is inexcusable and irresponsible for any of us to get bogged down in distraction, delay or politics as usual while millions of Americans are being put out of work," Obama said bluntly. "Now is the time for Congress to act."
So pass it! What do you want from me? You have the votes, you have the majority! Pass it! Or are you having trouble from some people on your side of the aisle?
Borrowing themes from an address the night before to fellow Democrats on retreat in Williamsburg, Va., Obama reminded lawmakers that voters gave them the White House and control of Congress.

"They did not choose more of the same in November," Obama said Friday. "They did not send us to Washington to get stuck in partisan posturing, to try to score political points. They did not send us here to turn back to the same tried and failed approaches that were rejected because we saw the results. They sent us here to make change with the expectation that we would act."
Ah, there's the bipartisan spirit! "People didn't elect you Republicans to exercise your beliefs and do what you think is right! Every single member of Congress was elected in 2008 to do exactly what I say!"
Feb 6, 2009 1:08 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
The politics of fear (2009 edition)
From the Washington Post this morning. Yes, the Washington Post.
"A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe."

-- President Obama, Feb. 4.

Catastrophe, mind you. So much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared "we have chosen hope over fear." Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill.

And so much for the promise to banish the money changers and influence peddlers from the temple. An ostentatious executive order banning lobbyists was immediately followed by the nomination of at least a dozen current or former lobbyists to high position. Followed by a Treasury secretary who allegedly couldn't understand the payroll tax provisions in his 1040. Followed by Tom Daschle, who had to fall on his sword according to the new Washington rule that no Cabinet can have more than one tax delinquent.

And yet more damaging to Obama's image than all the hypocrisies in the appointment process is his signature bill: the stimulus package. He inexplicably delegated the writing to Nancy Pelosi and the barons of the House. The product, which inevitably carries Obama's name, was not just bad, not just flawed, but a legislative abomination.

It's not just pages and pages of special-interest tax breaks, giveaways and protections, one of which would set off a ruinous Smoot-Hawley trade war. It's not just the waste, such as the $88.6 million for new construction for Milwaukee Public Schools, which, reports the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, have shrinking enrollment, 15 vacant schools and, quite logically, no plans for new construction.

It's the essential fraud of rushing through a bill in which the normal rules (committee hearings, finding revenue to pay for the programs) are suspended on the grounds that a national emergency requires an immediate job-creating stimulus -- and then throwing into it hundreds of billions that have nothing to do with stimulus, that Congress's own budget office says won't be spent until 2011 and beyond, and that are little more than the back-scratching, special-interest, lobby-driven parochialism that Obama came to Washington to abolish. He said.
Considering how little will be spent this year, I really think we could keep the normal rules in place rather than just ramming it through Congress. Of course the big story is that there's any ramming at all.

It's a bad start, really. When the GOP took Congress in 1994, they at least had a period where they got a lot done - fulfilling the Contract with America. The Dems have the White House and Congress with almost a supermajority and they've already started fighting right out of the gate. This is crushing any momentum they may have had and will likely severely hamper any of President Obama's legislative aspirations.
Feb 6, 2009 10:36 AM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Thursday, February 05, 2009
Yes, I know
On the off chance anyone's expecting an account and commentary on the infanticide case in Florida that came out today, I'm going to have to disappoint you. Quite honestly I can't even bear to reread the story or provide a link. It sickens me more than I can say right now. Despite my usual ability to find another side or some excuse for something, I'm failing here. Every single fact is just more terrible than the last. The only thing I'd have to add is that I hope this is a very isolated incident.
Feb 5, 2009 5:57 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
I'm watching you, Elmo...
From Power Line yesterday:
The Obama administration has capped executive compensation at financial companies that get bailout money from the feds at $500,000. Most people probably think this is a good idea. I don't disagree with the concept that taxpayer money shouldn't be sucked up by bonuses for executives in failing companies. Of course, I don't think the government should be investing money in failing companies in the first place.

Beyond that, I have a couple of specific objections. First, a number of banks were forced by the federal government to accept TARP funds that they didn't want. I don't think the government, having bullied those banks into taking unwanted money, should now be in a position to dictate compensation decisions. Second, while $500,000 may sound like a lot of money, the idea that you can find an executive who will competently run a multi-billion dollar enterprise for that salary is a joke. A car dealership in a mid-sized city, yes; Citigroup, no. So Obama's decree is basically grandstanding: it will work only if attractive stock option packages supplement the cash salary.
Yes, exactly. $500k sounds like a lot of money, and it is, but "sounds like a lot of money" is a lousy guideline. A reader of the blog contributed this, which I thought was a very good point as well:
A $500,000 cap on salaries? By all means...and let's extend this...to PBS for starters...no employee of any contractor to PBS or NPR...which are "substantially" subsidized by the taxpayers....is allowed compensation of more than $500,000....

And let's audit them all...they have a cozy arrangement where Bill Moyers, say, as big a left-wing hypocrite as you'll ever find, charges his production company scads of money, literally millions, and the production company simply has a contract with PBS....so, sure, no salaries....just "production costs" for PBS....Jim Lehrer does the same....the practice is widespread...

So by all means....ANY government subsidized enterprise should have the SAME restrictions as the banks....and let's include vendors who are so dependent on government contracts ("substantial") that it amounts to a de facto subsidy....THAT will get some attention...
Sounds fair to me.
Feb 5, 2009 2:39 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
The AARP's going to be mad
From a blog post on The Hill by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA):
Sift through their self-righteous attacks on the Senate floor and the bluster of their talking heads on FOX News, and there’s an important aspect of the debate over the recovery package that the Republicans in Congress seem to forget — they’re the ones that got us into this mess. After all, over the past eight years they have driven our economy off a cliff faster than Thelma and Louise.
Wow. Timely.
Think about it — it was President Bush who transformed a $5.6 trillion projected budget surplus into a record budget deficit. He did so by cutting taxes for the wealthiest among us while spending $10 billion a month in Iraq. It was the Republicans in Congress who opposed common sense oversight and regulation of the financial industry, and who passed pork by the barrel, most memorably Alaska’s $250 million bridge to nowhere. And it was under their collective watch that our economy lost 5 million manufacturing jobs and millions of families lost their homes to foreclosure.
Ok, even granting that that's true (and I don't) what the hell does that have to do with anything? What does that have to do with the merits of the arguments against the stimulus bill? Because a person is a member of a party that you credit with causing a problem are all of their opinions about a bill to try to resolve the problem automatically invalid? Does this mean that since the Democrats have spent all of the Social Security fund that the GOP gets to unilaterally fix the boomer retirement problem looming over our heads?
While I appreciate President Obama’s goal of working across the aisle to fix this crisis, we cannot allow partisan temper tantrums to stand in the way of fixing our economy. The American people elected President Obama in record numbers to lead our country in a new direction, if the Republicans aren’t willing to join him, the least they can do is get out of his way.
Yes, I know this is all just drum-beating partisan nonsense that no one actually is supposed to read or analyze, but come on. She's actually suggesting that if you don't support the President's bill that you should just "get out of his way"? Even putting aside the President's non-Constitutional role in the legislation, whatever happened to the nobleness of dissent? All through Bush's Presidency we heard about how noble it was to dissent - that it was the highest form of patriotism in a democracy. But now any opposition to the President's policies is nothing but a "partisan temper tantrum"? Feh.
Cross-post from Huffingtonpost.com.
Yeah, that's great. Enough said. Now here's the part where she talks about the merits of the stimulus package with specific retorts to the GOP's objections:
[not found]
Oh, sorry, never mind.
Feb 5, 2009 2:25 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to itch!
Bill Gates Unleashes Swarm of Mosquitoes on Crowd
Microsoft founder turned philanthropist Bill Gates released a glass full of mosquitoes at an elite technology conference to make a point about the deadly disease malaria.

"Malaria is spread by mosquitoes," Gates said while opening a jar onstage at the Technology, Entertainment, Design Conference — a gathering known to attract technology kings, politicians, and Hollywood stars.

"I brought some. Here I'll let them roam around. There is no reason only poor people should be infected."
Admit it. When you read the headline your first thought was, "Well, we knew it was only a matter of time before Bill Gates got a monocle, a white cat, and started trying to take over the world with genetically-engineered super mosquitos."
Feb 5, 2009 11:53 AM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
Bringing you only the best
Apparently my site is now the #1 search result on Google for "smiling chipmunk".  Go figure.

Feb 5, 2009 11:43 AM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  |  Trackback
 Wednesday, February 04, 2009
There's always an exception
Tax cuts for huge corporations and the wealthy are bad for the economy, we're told. They don't stimulate the economy and just help the rich get richer. Except...
Senate Republicans yesterday stripped a special $246 million tax break for Hollywood producers from President Obama's stimulus package.

"This isn't stimulus. This is a gift," said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who wrote the amendment to strike out the giveaway for some of the Democrats' most generous political supporters.

"It's not going to stimulate the economy at all," he said. "What it's going to do is line the pockets of very wealthy individuals already not experiencing the downside of the economy."

The 52-45 vote was largely along party lines, with nearly every Republican voting to remove the Hollywood tax break, joined by 13 Democrats and independent Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman.

Under the measure, Hollywood moguls would have been allowed to write off half the production and filming costs of big-budget films and TV shows.

Backed by Walt Disney and the Motion Picture Association of America, the provision amounted to an estimated $246 million tax break over 11 years.

The entertainment industry gave nearly $20 million in campaign contributions to Democrats during the 2008 election cycle, according to OpenSecrets.org.
Shocking.
Feb 4, 2009 4:00 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Biomimicry
The 15 Coolest Cases of Biomimicry
Biomimicry - The practice of developing sustainable human technologies inspired by nature. Sometimes called Biomimetics or Bionics, it's basically biologically inspired engineering.
Some cool stuff here showing past and future efforts to solve problems using solutions already found in nature, including such things as artificial photosynthesis and self-healing plastics. Go look.
 | 
Feb 3, 2009 9:53 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
Last gasps of a dying medium
The NYT is talking of charging for online content again...
The editor of The New York Times has hinted that the newspaper might charge again for access to some of its online offerings, less than two years after abandoning fees to boost advertising revenue.

Executive Editor Bill Keller gave no specifics or timetable, and company officials characterized the internal discussions as general and ongoing.

In an online question-and-answer exchange with readers this week, Keller said that although advertising generates the bulk of online revenue, "a lively, deadly serious discussion continues within The Times about ways to get consumers to pay for what we make."

Possibility include charging for full-access subscriptions, developing a micro-payment model in which readers pay a few pennies each time they click on a page and selling news to be distributed on reading devices, as the Times already does with Amazon.com Inc.'s Kindle.
I'll confess I don't have a solution. I'm sure it's an expensive operation, the New York Times. And you can't just give it away for free. And you have a good thing with the Kindle there. But you have to know that getting people to pay for news when they're already online, browsing around, simply won't work. I don't know if you've noticed but there are more than a couple news sites online and if you think anyone outside of your loyal readership gives two craps about whether it comes from you or not then, well, we'll see how that goes for you.
Feb 3, 2009 9:27 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
Best laid plans
Seems like President Obama just can't catch a break. First his no-lobbyists promise:
On Jan. 21, the day after his inauguration, Obama issued an executive order barring any former lobbyists who join his administration from dealing with matters or agencies related to their lobbying work. Nor could they join agencies they had lobbied in the previous two years.

However, William J. Lynn III, his choice to become the No. 2 official at the Defense Department, recently lobbied for military contractor Raytheon. And William Corr, tapped as deputy secretary at Health and Human Services, lobbied through most of last year as an anti-tobacco advocate. Corr says he will take no part in tobacco matters in the new administration.

"Even the toughest rules require reasonable exceptions," said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

That was a big step back from Obama's unambiguous swipe at lobbyists in November 2007, while campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination. "I don't take a dime of their money," he said, "and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White House."

The waivers granted for Lynn and Corr caused some in Washington to wince. But others, including many longtime advocates of tougher ethical standards, suggest it all says as much about deeply ingrained practices — and even necessities — in Washington as about a new president.
And now the plan to restict stimulus spending to American goods and services only:
The European Union warned the US yesterday against plunging the world into depression by adopting a planned "Buy American" policy, intensifying fears of a trade war.

The EU threatened to retaliate if the US Congress went ahead with sweeping measures in its $800 billion (£554 billion) stimulus plan to restrict spending to American goods and services.

Gordon Brown was caught in the crossfire as John Bruton, the EU Ambassador to Washington, said that "history has shown us" where the closing of markets leads — a clear reference to the Depression of the 1930s, triggered by US protectionist laws.

Last night Mr Obama gave a strong signal that he would remove the most provocative passages from the Bill.
I can't decide if he was just promising things he knew he couldn't deliver (and didn't care) or was just being naive about some of his promises. But either way it's clear that despite his best intentions there are some things you just can't change overnight by executive fiat.
Feb 3, 2009 9:19 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
I don't understand
From AFP via Breitbart comes this vexing story:
Attacks on Pope Benedict XVI's decision to lift the excommunication of a Holocaust denier escalated Monday, with one theologian calling on him to step down as the head of the Roman Catholic Church.

"If the pope wants to do some good for the Church, he should leave his job," eminent liberal Catholic theologian Hermann Haering told the German daily Tageszeitung.

An international uproar followed the decision to rehabilitate Williamson, an English bishop who has dismissed as "lies" historical evidence that six million Jews were gassed by the Nazis during World War II. Jews and Catholics alike have produced widespread criticism.

"A pardon that tastes of poison," wrote Franco Garelli, an expert in religious history, in Italy's daily La Stampa Monday.

Back in Germany, high-ranking Catholic officials said the pope risked losing vital support.

"There is obviously a loss of confidence" in the pope and "rehabilitating a denier is always a bad idea," the bishop of Hamburg, Werner Thissen, told the daily Hamburger Abendblatt on Monday.
Let me start by saying this is in no way an attack on the Pope, Catholicism, or the many fine Catholics living around the world. We're all sons and daughters of God and I have little patience for sectarian squabbles.

Having said that, it's things like this that completely baffle me. As I understand it (and prefacing any sentence with that should set off an alarm somewhere given my limited understanding) the Pope is the spiritual descendant of St. Peter and the earthly head of the Church. Being human, he is not infallible (pretty sure he's not supposed to be infallible anyway) but if you were to rank people by righteousness he should be in the top 5 or so, we'll say. It's his place to interpret scripture for humanity and to speak for God.

So given that, how can there be talk of a "loss of confidence" in the Pope, or other Catholics calling for him to step down? If he has been chosen by God to be His spokesperson then how could there be any mistake in the matter? The article seems to talk as if he could be impeached or something. But surely such a situation is unthinkable! That would mean the following statements are both true:
  • The Pope is God's representative on Earth and has been chosen, by God, to interpret God's will
  • The Pope can be wrong and can be removed from his position if people disagree with him.
How can both statements be true? This is saying that the Pope only speaks for God when everyone else agrees with him.

Unless I've missed something? If anyone has any thoughts by all means share, please.
 | 
Feb 3, 2009 9:07 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  |  Trackback
Freeze dried pork
Another entry in the long list of bizarre inclusions in the stimulus bill:
The U.S. House of Representatives included $600 million for NASA in the $819 million economic stimulus bill it passed Jan. 25. The Senate version of the bill, due to be taken up the week of Feb. 2, contains $1.5 billion for NASA, including $500 million to shorten the gap between the retirement of the space shuttle and the first flight of its successor.

The House bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R. 1), includes no money for NASA human spaceflight programs. An amendment sponsored by freshman Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-Fla.) that would have added $2 billion to narrow the gap between shuttle and its successor was rejected by the House Rules Committee.

The bulk of the NASA money in H.R. 1 - some $400 million - is designated for Earth science satellite programs and climate change research.

H.R. 1 also includes $150 million for aeronautics, and $50 million to repair NASA facilities damaged by Hurricane Ike last summer.

The Senate version of the bill, S. 336, includes $500 million for Earth science, $250 million for aeronautics and $250 million for hurricane repair and other NASA infrastructure projects.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for providing more funding to NASA. No question about it. And I will concede that some of the money - that used for satellite programs and construction will provide jobs and help the aeronautics industry. I guess. But come on. Climate change research? Earth science? These may be important things (ok, the latter is) but this is necessary to stimulate the economy? We can't have tax cuts but we have to have climate change research to help the economy?
Feb 3, 2009 9:07 AM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Monday, February 02, 2009
Wasteful spending?
More corporate whining c/o ABC:
Despite a near collapse that required $45 billion in federal taxpayer bailout funds, Bank of America sponsored a five day carnival-like affair just outside the Super Bowl stadium this past week as President Obama decried wasteful spending on Wall St.

The event - known as the NFL Experience - was 850,000 square feet of sports games and interactive entertainment attractions for football fans and was blanketed in Bank of America logos and marketing calls to sign up for football-themed banking products.

The bank staunchly defended its sponsorship, saying it was a "business proposition" and part of its "growth strategy."

Critics blasted the spending as a serious abuse of taxpayer money.

"The prominent sponsorship of the Super Bowl says to the American people we'll take your money and then we're going to go waste it," Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, a watchdog group, told ABC News.
Yeah, again, I don't know. Certainly there have been undeserved bonuses and many unwise purchases. But, typically, corporations don't waste money. They might not spend it on things you agree with but it's not waste. If they spend money on something it's either for personal greed or because they expect to make more money off of it than they're spending. The NFL Experience which is - as the article says - "blanketed in Bank of America logos and marketing calls to sign up for football-themed banking products" is clearly a branding and advertising event. They must expect to make more money off of the branding and increased business than they're spending on the event, or why do it? If we're wanting them to pay back some of this "bailout" money then they're going to have to start making money somewhere.
Feb 2, 2009 9:33 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
Surprise auto loans!
Via Newsmax:
The national wave of auto dealership closures has come crashing down on thousands of people who are on the hook for used-car loans that dealers were supposed to absolve.

When a car buyer still owes money on a vehicle he is trading in, the dealer promises to pay off the outstanding loan, then resells the vehicle. But as more dealers go out of business, some are sticking consumers with the bill. Lenders can then go after the previous owner who thought the debt was paid, or repossess the car from the new owner who assumed it came with clear title.
Some states are forcing dealers to post insurance bonds or prove that they're paying off the liens before transferring the title, but not all of them.
Consumers are left to sue the dealer, which typically has declared bankruptcy and has no money to reclaim, said Armando Botello, a spokesman for the California DMV. He said the state can suspend the dealer's license or refer the dealer to local prosecutors but cannot recover buyers' money.

Before they land in trouble, used-car buyers should insist on seeing a vehicle's title to make sure it has no liens, consumer advocates say. They also say buyers offering trade-ins should first pay off the loan themselves if possible, or deal only with high-volume dealers who are part of a larger auto group and thus are less likely to fold.
Feb 2, 2009 12:37 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Sunday, February 01, 2009
Wow, that would be a Great Leap Forward for the UK
Jonathon Porritt, chairman of the UK's Sustainable Development Commission:
Couples who have more than two children are being "irresponsible" by creating an unbearable burden on the environment, the government's green adviser has warned.

Jonathon Porritt, who chairs the government's Sustainable Development Commission, says curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming. He says political leaders and green campaigners should stop dodging the issue of environmental harm caused by an expanding population.

A report by the commission, to be published next month, will say that governments must reduce population growth through better family planning.

Porritt, a former chairman of the Green party, says the government must improve family planning, even if it means shifting money from curing illness to increasing contraception and abortion.
Well that's excellent. Nicely done. Jonathan Swift would be proud.
 | 
Feb 1, 2009 9:46 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
Anyone else see what's wrong here?
Obama's Weekly Radio Address:
Americans know that our economic recovery will take years -- not months.
Later that day...
The president pleaded for urgent action, saying, "If we do not act boldly and swiftly, a bad situation could become dramatically worse." Obama's remarks came as he is lobbying for quick congressional passage of an $825 billion stimulus package to pump up the economy.
Ok, so I'll say it. If it's going to take years for the economy to recover (which is kind of convenient) then why is it so urgent for this stimulus package to be passed? So urgent that it has to be loaded up with pork and liberal special interest money so it'll be passed in a hurry. We can't take a little more time? Consult with some of those other non-majority lawmakers? Maybe write up some details for the voters to see as part of that whole transparency thing?
Feb 1, 2009 9:31 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  |  Trackback
Ah, well, it was a nice idea
First official broken promise:
One of President Obama's major campaign planks was making government more open and accountable. It's a reaction to a habit in Congress of rushing bills through the House and Senate without giving people much opportunity to know what the bills would do. Indeed, sometimes members of Congress don't even know what's in the bills.

So Obama pledged during the campaign to institute "sunlight before signing."

"Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them," Obama's campaign Web site states. "As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days."

But the first bill Obama signed into law as president -- the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act -- got no such vetting.

In fact, the Congressional Record shows that the law was passed in the Senate on Jan. 22, 2009, passed in the House on Jan. 27, and signed by the president on Jan. 29. So only two days passed between the bill's final passage and the signing.

The legislation was not posted to the White House Web site for comment in any way that we could find.

We see no way the bill could be deemed emergency legislation, even taking the broadest view. The bill overturns the effects of a Supreme Court decision that limited when workers could sue for pay discrimination. Most pertinently, the bill is retroactive to the time of the court decision -- May 28, 2007. Obama earned a Promise Kept from us for signing the law. But it would have the same effect if had been signed a few days later, so it's clearly not an emergency.

We asked the White House about this and if they planned to begin posting laws to the Web site for comment soon, but we got no response.
It's too bad. I was really impressed by the idea that Obama would institute this level of transparency. Between posting all executive orders and this I thought it would really increase accountability. Legislation's always been such a (often purposefully) murky thing to explore and this would help voters know better what's going on.

But now... eh. Even if he starts doing it now, barring some mea culpa and explanation, I'll always be wondering what he's leaving out and not posting.
Feb 1, 2009 8:33 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback