Those who forget the past . . .

And here I was SSSOOOO proud of myself for going a whole week without any political garbage. Then, Bush has to go and delcare the Iraqi elections a "resounding success" before they're even over. I would think that he would have learned from his "Mission Accomplished" mistake. Aren't straight-talking-Texans like himself familiar with the old saying "Don't count your chickens before they're hatched"?

Even though the polls closed, there are still many things that could go wrong with the elections. Heck, look at all the problems vote tampering accusations have caused in the last 2 Presidential elections here! Couple that with the rediculous "inconsistencies" in the Afghan election, and does anyone honestly think the results of this election aren't going to be challenged? Plus, while I have no doubt that such a thing won't be allowed to happen, I just can't help but wonder: What if the winner of the election is someone the US really doesn't want in power in Iraq? What if whoever is elected tells the US to pull out? We've already publicly stated that we will pull our military out if asked to do so. So what happens if the newly elected gov't does exactly that? Especially since we've also already announced that we'll be there at least through 2006.

Bush is really getting ahead of himself (again). He's so incredibly eager to declare victory that he's not actually looking at reality. And he's just asking for something to occur that will require him to backpedal (again) and make up excuses (lies) to cover his arse, all the while making himself and our country look like foolish blowhards.

The Great Waffler

Apparently my dog is in one of his waffle* moods this morning. Or maybe it's one of his snit moods. I'm not entirely sure. All I know is that he can't seem to make up his mind whether he wants in or out. He'll knock at the back door (yes, my dog actually knocks at doors--instead of barking, like normal dogs, he will tap twice on the door with his left front paw) to go out. So, I'll go open the door and let him into the back yard. And about 3 seconds after I close the door, he'll knock to get back in. And of course, when I open the door and give him a stern look, he prances on into the house like it's no big deal. Just to give you an idea of how frequently he's doing this, I have had to get up in order to let him in or out 4 times since starting to type this entry.

Now, I know what you're thinking. Why continue to indulge the little pest? Put him out and let him stay out. Well, then he'll start making noise. And it's not barking . . . he'll start whining. And crying. And generally make the neighbors believe that I'm torturing him. And if I still don't attend to his needs, he'll start jumping against the door. The sliding glass door. So anyway, yeah, I'm a pushover. I wonder how much of a door mat I'll become if I ever have kids. BTW, add 2 more to the "get up to open the door" list since beginning to type this.

*I use the term "waffling" a lot, but never could figure how it came about. I mean, I know what a waffle is, but how it relates describing a "flip-flop" mind set, I don't know. Anyone care to elaborate?

Oh, 1 more door opening.

Now ain't she the coolest?

Flirt, from Flirt in a Skirt is going to donate $1 for each comment made on her blog on Monday, January 31, to charity. And the charity will be chosen by the commenters. So, everyone head on over there Monday and rack up that donation amount! Mmmkay?

Who spiked my beer?

I had a beer with lunch today. That's actually unusual for me, btw. I'm not a big drinker. But I can handle my beer. And enjoy "harder" stuff every now and again. The only reason I had the one beer was because there's nothing else to drink in the house except water. And my Brita's broken. And trust me, drinking Salinas tap water is not going to happen. Anywho, my point is, I got buzzed. From one beer. One frickin' beer! How in the hell did that happen? And I'm serious . . . I can actually feel the buzz. Enough to where I don't feel comfortable getting behind the wheel. Usually takes a couple shots for me to feel like this. Maybe it was the combo of not eating all morning, then having the one beer with my pizza. I dunno. But if I find out one of you yay-hoos spiked my beer, I'm gonna be mildly irritated.

Update: Yes, I realize I was just at the grocery store yesterday, as per yesterday's entry. But I was so distracted by getting the last It's-It that I apparently forgot to purchse milk. And yes, I realize it was probably karma pay back for rubbing it in y'all's noses. But I stand by my "neener neener".

Last one

Had to swing by the grocery store today anyhow, and I had this strange desire for It's-It (gee, I wonder why). Well, I wander over to the ice cream section and find that they only have one box left. I got the last one they had. The last one! Do you have any idea what that means? What the implications are? I can now say "Neener, neener, neener! I have a box of It's-It and yooouuu dooo-ooon't!" to all y'all poor lost souls who've never heard of them. Muahahahahaha

Update: I found out that It's-It have their own website (who woulda guessed in this day and age?) for those who don't know what they are.

It's what?

I happened to mention to an Internet friend the other day how much I liked It's-It ice creams. They used to be our "special treats" as kids growing up. Especially any time we went up to The City (SF--where they originated). She responded with "WTF is an It's-It?!" Neither she nor any of her friends had ever heard of them. And it got me to wondering, since she lives in Florida, was it possible that these were a semi-local only treat? Nah, can't be. I mean, they sell the things in Albertson's, Safeway and just about every other grocery chain I can think of for crying out loud. They gotta be available nation-wide, right? So I'm curious, how many of you are familiar with these wonderfully delectible treats? Are they available all accross the US, or are we here in California just special?

The 100

Okay, so as I've been randomly wandering through various blogs via BlogExplosion and the Blogger Navbar, as well as participating in Michele's scavenger hunt, I've noticed an awefull lot of folks have a "100 things you really didn't want to know about me but now that you've seen you'll never be able to purge them from your memory" list. Seems to be a common theme among bloggers (yeah, I figured that out all on my own--aren't you impressed?). So, in order to make my blog even more incredibly unique and different, I've added one as well. It's also available via the link near my profile on the right. Since I didn't want it to appear in the current entries (don't ask why, I'm just anal that way), I backdated it so it's on the March archive. Not sure why I'm explaining all this, rather than just post the link, but I tend to babble (you mean you haven't noticed that about me yet!?!)

How a nomad brain works

Or, rather, imitates working. The forthcoming described events should give you some idea of the kinds of trials & tribulations I deal with every day as the owner of a nomad brain. It demonstrates a typical "train of thought" (which has been known to follow tracks from San Francisco to Honolulu via Gibralter) and why I do some of the things I do. And yeah, it's going to ramble a lot

About 2 months ago my sister moved into a new house. So, of course I got guilted into helping with the move. And of course, as with any time I'm involved with moving furniture and/or heavy objects, blood was drawn. Not much blood, mind you. I was actually impressed with the lack of severity. Really, it was just a scratch. It tried to bleed, but not very hard. Didn't even warrant a bandaid. But somehow it decided to become a scar. Yes, a scar. Here we are, 2 months later, and it's still visible. Which is amazing and perplexing. But it got me to thinking about various incidents of, shall we say, cranial ineptitude in my life that should have resulting in scars but didn't. Car cigarette lighters ("Is it hot?"); pocket knives ("Is this sharp?"); hot lawn mower mufflers ("I probably shouldn't pick this up bare handed..."); hiking excursions ("Why waste my time climbing down this drop when I can just jump?"); bicycles ("Betcha I can jump more garbage cans on my 10-speed than you can!"); and of course, all those combat frisbee laughs.

And that got me to wondering if I still had my old combat frisbee. Now, a combat frisbee isn't like your ordinary frisbee. Obviously, it has to be rather durable, since it needs to survive multiple impacts with nomad heads, pavement, walls, cars, and even the occassional police/security officer. But of course, it has to be lighter than, say, granite. Metal frisbees tend to dent easily. Plus, it's a game, so you don't really want to cause permanent injury to your friends or the occassional police/security officer. Since being able to see your target takes some of the fun out of combat frisbee, it's best played at about 2:00 am. So of course, the frisbee has to be glow in the dark, otherwise it might get lost. Plus, it's just so cool have a glowing green streak of light get flung past your head when everything is pitch dark.

Well, I didn't give it a second thought, since it's been years since I last saw that frisbee. At least, the second thought didn't hit me until about 1:00 this morning. That's when my nomad brain finally processed the question ("Do I still have that frisbee?") and decided to seek the answer. So yeah, my body relunctantly spent 3 hours at an ungodly hour of the morning searching my house for a frisbee. Which, I'm happy to report, I actually found. So, glow in the dark frisbee in hand, looking out the window at the darkness of 4:00 am, I just had to go outside and give it a few flings, for old time's sake. Yeah . . . playing frisbee, by myself, at 4:00 in the morning. Aren't you jealous?

And of course, now I'm wondering how many scratches I'll get when I fall off the roof trying to retrieve my combat frisbee in the rain. It really is amazing I don't have more scars.

Fuzzy picking

As you may have noticed, I've been experimenting with facial hair lately. Actually, unless you personally know me, or had a recent out of body experience into my home (in which case, stop messing with my cell phone!), I suppose you wouldn't have noticed. Anyhow, I've contemplated growing a goatee for a few years, and finally opted to give it a go. So, 3 weeks into the experiment, I find myself rather constantly scratching my chin and pulling at the hairs. It doesn't itch, it's just different. I suppose it might be considered a healthier (or at least safer) neurotic compulsion than playing with knives and/or lighters.

Too long

Today was "yard work day". Actually, I didn't get as much done as I had planned, mostly due to an unexpected bought of laziness. But, as I was out there pulling various weeds, grasses and undesirable big leafy green things that annoy me but can't seem to get rid of (which reminds me, if anyone knows how to obliterate an infestation of "elephant ear" plants, let me know . . . I've tried digging every scrap of root I can find, and dousing them with RoundUp, but it hasn't slowed them down), and I come accross several colonies of worms. I don't think they were true nightcrawlers, but similar. Anywho, it reminded me that it's been entirely too long since I last went fishing. Months. Several months. Actually, I don't even recall precisely when my last fishing expedition was. So yeah, I think I'm going to have to do some of that next weekend. Or maybe even sneak off during the week. Guess I'll have to get a license soon, then . . .

Incomming!!!!

Okay, so I've noticed a rather large influx of traffic hitting my blog in the last few days. I'm not complaining, mind you. Heck, the whole point of a blog is to share one's thoughts with the world. But it's got me curious about why the sudden influx and where it's all coming from. So, if you folks would do me a little favor, let me know how you came to be here ("here" being this blog, not how you came into existance--your parents' private lives and indulgences are their own business). If it was through a web search, what engine and what were you looking for? If it was a referral, from who/where? Was it through BlogExplosion? or the "Next Blog" link at the upper right? And of course, let me know what you think of things here. Thanks

We are not alone

My cell phone plays these annoying little tunes when it turns on or off. Honestly, it's part of the reason I never turn it off. The sounds just annoy me. But I haven't figured out how to turn them off yet. Anywho, Friday night it dawned on me that I hadn't charged the phone in a while, and should probably do that the next day. Me being me, I forgot. So it didn't surprise me yesterday afternoon when, from another room in the house, I heard the annoying little tune of the phone shutting off. So, I went and got the phone, along with the charger, with the intent of (obviously) recharging the battery. But then I noticed something. The phone was turned on. And the battery was showing a half charge. Just for the heck of it, I turned it off, then back on. And it dawned on me that the tunes I heard were the ones it plays when turning on, not off like I had thought. So, apparently the phone had shut itself off for absolutely no reason without my noticing (not surprising, since there've been a couple times when I left the house without it), then mysteriously turned itself back on!

Shortly after moving into my house some 5+ years ago, my dog (who never barks) started growling and barking at thin air in the front room one day. Something really had his hackles up, but I couldn't figure out what. My sister claimed my house was haunted, but I just laughed it off. Now, after years of unexplained noises, items mysteriously disappearing only to reappear somewhere I know I wouldn't have put them, and now the cell phone incident, I'm not laughing things off. Starting to think maybe I should hire an exorcist . . . or maybe just sell the house & let the next owner deal with it.

For the time being, I think I'm going to call the ghost George, just because George is a good name for a ghost. So nobody tell George I'm looking to evict him. Cuz then he might go all poltergeist on me, or hire a hit ghost.

Shouldn't all criminals be forewarned?

Now doesn't it just make absolute, positive, logical sense to announce ahead of time that you're going to arrest someone? Maybe it's so that Chalabi will be a stand-up guy and make things easy on them by standing still and waiting for the police to show up and arrest him. I mean, that's what he's done every other time, right? Like when he was charged with (and convicted of) fraud in Jordan. Oh wait, he fled the country and has spent the last 13 years dodging the law on that. Okay, like when he was charged with counterfitting and passing highly classified US secrets to Iran. Oh wait, he fled the country on that one, too. I'm actually rather curious why it is we (the US) have not arrested him at this point, since he's back in Iraq, on the governing council, running for President in the Jan 30 elections and generally being publicly available. I mean, as far as I know, the espionage charges (leaking secrets to Iran, providing outright lies to US intelligence leading up to the invasion) and embezzlement (of millions of US taxpayer dollars) were never resolved. But regardless, now that Iraq's defense minister has done the public the courtesy of announcing ahead of time that Chalabi is going to be arrested, who's going to be surprised when Chalabi flees Iraq? Not me. Will be rather interesting to see where he flees to, though.

Rediculous!

NASCAR has taken their stupidity to new heights. The whole "Chase for the Championship" introduced last year was lame enough, but now they're effectively doing away with qualifying. It used to be that if you weren't fast enough in qualifying to make the race, you didn't race. Simple as that. Then they started in with the provisionals so that certain "fans" wouldn't be disappointed if their driver didn't make the race (and one must seriously question how much of a fan they are of the sport if they want the rules changed so that their driver, who isn't good enough to make the race on speed, isn't left out). Then they kept expanding the number of provisionals in each race . . . last year I believe there were 7 provisional spots. Out of a field of 43, that's a pretty big chunk of competitors who were getting into the race even though they didn't qualify on speed. And now here NASCAR is changing things once again to garuntee the top 35 teams (from the previous season) will make the Daytona 500. Who cares if they're 10 mph slower than the next slowest car in qualifying? Who cares if they come in dead last in the qualifyer race? Gotta have them in the "big show" so the "fans" won't be disappointed. Heck, why don't they just award the trophy to whoever wins the popularity contest? Who needs or wants actual racing anyhow?

Y'know, next month I'm going to be at the Daytona 500 for the first time, and I can garuntee it'll be the last Cup event I ever attend. Heck, once Rusty retires at the end of this season, I probably won't watch another Cup race. NASCAR is really screwing the pooch, and I'm not putting up with it.

Bloated ego

I had no intention of watching the Presidential Innaugeration at all. It's all just a bunch of pomp & circumstance and waste of taxpayer money, IMO. But, I did actually catch about 5 minutes of things by accident. And I found it utterly amazing how large Bush's ego has gotten. Don't get me wrong . . . I've known he was an egomaniac ever since he claimed it was God's will that he be President after September 11. But, there he was on TV, sitting with his family. And after apparently making the 100,000 or so people gathered there wait in the cold for several hours beyond the scheduled start time, Bush was (according to reporters) getting impatient that the parade hadn't started. So, I guess he wasn't so impatient that he wanted to get to things on time . . . nah, it's okay that he's a couple hours late. But how dare they keep him waiting! I guess he expected everyone to stand in the "ready" position, waiting anxiously for his overdue arrival so that they could start on a moment's notice.

Now, granted, it is not uncommon for Presidents to be late for this sort of thing. When my brother's high school band went back east for Clinton's innaugeration, it was a similar deal. They waited for a few hours in the cold as well. But my point is, Clinton didn't get impatient about it. At least, not to the point where it was obvious that he was getting ancey. Maybe if Bush wants things to move along quickly and according to schedule, he should make an effort to keep to the schedule!

Upchuck Airlines?

So, wait a second. There's concern about the "drinking" water in airplane lavatories. Um, how many people actually go into an airplane bathroom so they can drink out of the tap? If you get thirsty, that's what the beverage service is for . . . they even have bottled water.

Linux bash

I'm not really anti-Linux. Actually, I like it. But I do thoroughly enjoy this, even if some folks view it as Linux bashing. It's still fun.

Of course, if you're not weak of stomach, and feeling particularly viscious, you might try this version instead.

Bye bye pal

Had to put the family dog to sleep today. Panda was a touch over 15 years old (pretty darn good for such a big dog), and unfortunately it was just "that time". He's been in for surgery a couple times recently for cancerous lumps, was at the point where he couldn't hardly even get up, and when he did get up he couldn't hardly walk more than a few feet.


The fluffy Panda Bear 

He was a good dog, lead a good and loving life. He was a friend, and I'm going to miss him.

Family ties

Ah, yes. There's nothing like giving up your weekend so you can drive 3 1/2 hours in order to stand around in a Lowe's store while your sister decides she really has absolutely no fracking idea what kind of closet organizer she wants, despite the fact that she was supposed to have one picked out a month ago, since installing said closet organizer is the whole reason you're there in the first place. Then, following it up spending most of the day hanging out with your trailer trash side of the family before making the 3 1/2 hour return trip. Isn't that exactly how everyone wants to spend their weekends?

Dufus me

Yeah, so I guess I should have verified that the Serenity trailer really was opening with Elektra today. Turns out it's been pushed back to May. Grumblegrumblegrumble. Oh well. The movie was still worth it. Fun ride.

Aliases

I've pretty much been a fan of Alias since the premier episode. About the only time I "strayed" was during the whole Rambaldi thing . . . just got too mystic & supernatural for my tastes. So, anyway, I was understandably in anticipation when the new season started a couple weeks ago. But I gotta say, I was a bit disappointed. And after this past Wednesday's episode, even more so. The opening scene of the season premier was done simply to have Jennifer Garner strut around in sexy lingerie. Now don't get me wrong . . . seeing Jennifer Garner strut around in sexy lingerie is a pleasant thing. But that's not the reason I enjoy the show (well, okay, not the main reason). I like the show because of the quality acting, intriguing story, and cool action. And when they start putting more of an emphasis on Ms. Garner's body than on the story, it just cheapens the whole show. And in this case, that's all it was. There was no need for the opening sequence. None. Especially since they showed it again (well, portions of it) later in the show. They easily could have opened with the chase sequence that followed. Actually, that would have been a better opening, from a story stand-point.

The other problem I've got with the new season so far is that it has now been 2 episodes in a row where Sydney (Garner's character) is captured, then rescued by her sister. I have a big problem with the capture bits, because Syd is a kick-ass, and they gloss over the capture. In both cases, she is "instantly" captured, as if she didn't even put up a fight, but the capture itself isn't shown. I say "instantly" because in both cases help was on-scene within moments, so her entire capture and spiritting away must have been accomplished within a minute or two. Then there's the whole Nadia issue. From what I recall, Nadia (Syd's half-sister) is brand new to the spy world. Yet she's apparently got all the skills necessary to be a top-notch agent and even save the life of her sister, who has years of experience and training . . . twice in a row! I have a feeling that the producers are doing this because they plan on having both Syd and Nadia strutting around in skimpy, sexy outfits on a frequent basis, in order to draw more of the sex-craved ogglers. Hopefully, the series will get back to its roots, and focus on solid, intriguing story lines.

And, speaking of Ms. Garner, Elektra opens today. Gonna have to go see it. Originally, I figured this would be a DVD rental for me, since I couldn't even sit through an entire viewing of Daredevil. But, since the Serenity trailer is supposed to be premiering with it, I guess I'll just have to find my way to a theater today.

Political Correctness

Eeesh . . . PC has really gotten out of hand. When people are arrested for telling jokes, things have gone too far. The whole point of the "freedom of speech" in the First Amendment was to protect an individual's right to say things someone else may not like. These two men were not threatening anyone. They were not causing a situation that fostered danger (i.e., the yelling "fire" in a crowded room argument). They were telling lawyer jokes, that's it. And now they're up on criminal charges. I got news, folks . . . just about every joke ever told is offensive to somebody out there. Does that mean that we should declare joke-telling illegal, to protect everyone's feelings?

And if this isn't a case of oversensitivity, I'm not sure what is. Folks, it was a costume party for crying out loud! Prince Harry wore a costume for the party. It's not like he was participating in a neo-Nazi parade, or spouting Nazi propaganda. What the hell is so "offensive" about a kid wearing a Nazi costume to a costume party? At the time of this writing, the CNN poll shows that 69% found it "offensive" . . . to those 69%, I say get a life and learn not to be so overly sensitive about such non-issues.

Why dogs are better than cats

This is like reason 10,463 why dogs rule and cats drool. Betcha'd never see a cat do something like this.

It's all so clear

So, let me get the gist of this straight:

After a complete search, we've discovered that Iraq had no WMDs. They had no stockpiles. They had no capacity to manufacture them. They had no plan in place to resume building WMDs should sanctions be lifted. And any informal plans they may have had were "primarily for defense against Iran." So, given that Iraq wasn't a threat to the US (something most everyone except the US and UK agreed on), and that our "reason" for attacking Iraq was "pre-emptive self defense", and our gov't consistently defends Israel's actions with the "they have a right to protect themselves" argument, why is it that Bush is still claiming we were justified in invading Iraq? Apparently (according to the Bush Administration), we have the right to kick the crap out of anyone we want in the name of "self defense" even when they don't pose a threat at all, and our allies have the right to commit human rights violations and massacres in order to "defend themselves", but anyone else who wants to build weapons like ours in order to defend themselves is a "threat to the world" and needs to be obliterated. Not to mention the various times Bush outright lied (where are the cries for impeachment from the moral right-wingers?) when he claimed WMDs had been found, or that evidence of WMD production capability was found, when in fact according to our own investigators, no such evidence exists. And people wonder why the Administration is so loathed . . .

Llama llama duck!

Hehehe . . . llama's is cool. Don't even try this without sound.

I just don't get it

Why do some women think they're "in love" with guys who treat them like crap? You hear about it all the time. See it on talk shows, or on COPS. Read about it in the paper. And probably know one or two personally. My friend Liz is a perfect example. She's a truly beautifull young woman . . . incredibly pretty, usually smiling, smart as a whip, caring, an absolute sweetheart. But her boyfriend's a jerk. She's convinced that she's completely and utterly in love with him, and that he loves her too. But I don't understand how she can believe that. He's stated outright (to her and others) that they should both continue seeing other people--supposedly so they'll appreciate each other more [gag!]. I've seen him publicly bring her to tears, and then still not let up and keep arguing. And usually the argument in question comes about because of his own selfishness. When she's feeling down, or ill, he's nowhere to be found--off having fun with his friends. I and others have talked with her about things. But she's just convinced that we're all wrong and simply "don't understand" his love for her. I just hope she comes to her senses before making a huge mistake like letting him get her pregnant or something. But in the meantime, I just don't understand why she puts up with him.

Matrix Revoltings

Way back when The Matrix came out, I was in awe. Plain and simple, it was a fabulous movie. Incredible action sequences, solid plotline, and just enough hint to get the viewer thinking philosophically. I saw it twice in the theaters (which is almost unheard of for me), and immediately bought it on DVD as soon as it was out. So, back when Matrix Reloaded hit theaters, I was really looking forward to another great movie. Unfortunately, for various reasons, I never made it to the box office for that one. And, of course, I didn't want to see Matrix Revolutions until I saw Reloaded. So, a few months back a friend of mine loaned me his Reloaded DVD. Wow, what a disappointment. Completely mindless action sequences designed entirely to "one up" the previous sequence; terrible "plot" (or, rather, what passed for a plot); numerous loopholes, contradictions and unanswered questions. All in all, a poor effort. Well, I figured it was about time I might as well rent Revolutions, just so I could say that I saw the whole trilogy. And wow, I had no idea it could have been worse than the second installment. The only portion of the movie that was even remotely fun was the APU scene . . . I'm even willing to overlook the incredibly lame-arse design of having a front-line, heavy armor unit with no front armor to protect the pilot. That sequence was just good fun. But that's it. No other redeaming qualities to that film at all. Really wish I had seen just the first one and left it at that. The Wachowski Brothers should be ashamed of ruining such a good thing.

Poster case

Okay, now if this isn't a perfect example of a b.s. frivolous lawsuit, I don't know what it. Aitken has seen "Fear Factor" often, so he knows the show gets disgusting. But for some reason he decides that they were so out of line showing people eating pureed rats that he feels he's entitled to $2.5 million. He claims he's just "trying to send a message" and isn't interested in the money. What a load. The way you send a message like this is by turning off your TV . . . by sending your concerns to advertisers . . . by filing a complaint with the FCC. Filing a $2.5 million lawsuit means you want money, nothing more. He knew what to expect when he tuned into the show. He had the option of not watching it. And at most, his nausea and headache (from walking himself into a wall) is worth $10, if that. Not only should this case be thrown out, it is a prime example of a situation in which the plaintiff (Aitken) should be forced to pay any and all legal costs of the defandant (NBC/Fear Factor) because of the pure frivolity of the suit.

Double-speak

From this article . . .

So, Gonzales says he's "sickened and outraged" by the torture photographs. Notice how he doesn't say he's outraged at the conduct of the soldiers, or the content of the pictures. He's outraged at the photos. Gonzales says he's "deeply committed to the rule of law", yet authored at least one memo to President Bush stating that the rule of law doesn't apply to prisoners in the War on Terror. Like others in the administration, Gonzales "absolutely [does] not" approve of torture. However, as has been demonstrated in the past, there's a wide variance on what the administration considers to be "torture" and what is just "acceptable interrogation tactics".

But, I think the most interesting & telling statement is his "explanation" of how his attitude will change if confirmed as Attorney General. Apparently, according to him, as White House Council his only concern when advising the President is to protect the White House, and serve its interests. As AG, however, he would have the "broader responsibility" of protecting all Americans. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the White House's responsibility to serve the American public? So shouldn't any advisor to the President have the American public's concern & safety in mind at all times? Isn't it rather interesting that Gonzales says, essentially outright, that the White House's concern is the White House, and not America?

Just more political double-speak and b.s. Gonzales' only concern is facilitating President Bush's policies, no matter what the repercussions. And he's just saying what people want to hear (or, rather, something that resembles what they want to hear, without actually promising anything, so it's not technically a "lie").

Quote of the week

"My toilet hurts. And my socks are wet."


Yes, there's a story behind it. But I'll just let the quote stand for itself.

Slip me something good

I really need a pair of slippers. Actually, I need a pair that fits. I got 2 pair for Christmas, but they turned out to be the wrong size. Which is really annoying. Way too small. They're the same listed size as my hiking boots, but just way too annoyingly small. So, every morning, and even many evenings lately, my poor tootsie-toes are freezing, while 2 pair (TWO PAIRS!!) of slippers sit in their boxes unusable until I can get the receipts so I can exchange them. Yeah, slippers . . . need some.

Sensationalism at its finest

So, the Feds announce that they think terrorists might use lasers to blind pilots during landings, even though by their own admission they have no evidence supporting the theory. And now the press is gobbling it up and reporting on it left and right. Apparently they seem to be overlooking the fact that morons have been doing this for several years--mostly it's jerkwaters who think it's a funny prank. And, of course, any stray light in the cockpit is immediately labelled as a "laser" and is assumed (by the press) to be a terrorist action. Who cares that there are perfectly reasonable explanations for stray light. Never mind the fact that any laser with a low enough diffusion to put a spot in the cockpit of a plane 1.5 - 2 miles away without lighting up the entire plane would be the size of a workshed (including generator) and cost a few tens of millions. Never mind the fact that even if someone could easily get their hands on a laser that was easily concealable/mobile, there's a pretty good chance that it's some morons or kids playing pranks after seeing the announcement about terrorists doing this. Never mind the fact that even if it were actual terrorists, they would have realized by now (after several years of trying with zero success) that it ain't working.

Just more sensationalism and hype designed to spread fear within our populace, so that more papers are sold and the government can hold a tighter grip in the name of "security".

Bliadhna mhath ur

(That's "Happy New Year" for those of you who don't speak Gaelic)

In the New Year, may your right hand always be stretched out in friendship, but never in want.
~ Irish Toast ~

Rude awakening

So, yeah . . . was up late last night (though not out as late as I wanted/planned--but that's not something I'm going to get into right now, as I'm just too friggin' pissed off about the reason), as I'm sure most of you were. And then, at 8 o'clock this morning, my wonderfull neighbor decides to wake up the neighborhood blasting mariachi music. Now personally I think this is pretty damn rude and disrespectfull on any Saturday morning. But to do it the morning after New Year's should be a hangable offense. Thank God I'm not hungover. Whatever happened to common courtesy in this country?