"But it's thought that since the MRSA strain is in pigs in Canada, it is likely in pigs in the United States also, because there's international movement of pigs from Canada to the United States." (emphasis mine)
This is from an article in Salon that basically suggests that the strain of Staph (MRSA) that is going around right now (it's in Autumn's day care) might be a result of the antibiotics that are fed to the pigs we eat. I know, that's a heady subject. One that people with little kids should seriously consider. But come on, 'there's international movement of pigs from Canada to the US'. That's just a funny sentence.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Pot/Kettle black
Dana Perino is the White House Press Secretary. She speaks for the president:
But to suggest so boldly that these things fit the Constitution? Either Ms. Perino hasn't been paying attention, or she really does think what her boss is doing is constitutional. Take a look:
First Amendment: In September, a federal judge ruled that the FBI’s use of secret “national security letters” to obtain citizens’ personal data from private companies for counterterrorism investigations “violate[d] the First Amendment and constitutional provisions on the separation of powers.”
First Amendment, Fourth Amendment: In Aug. 2006, a federal district court in Detroit ruled that the Bush administration's NSA warrantless wiretapping program was unconstitutional, violating the “separation of powers doctrine, the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and Fourth amendments to the United States Constitution, the FISA and Title III.”
Article I: Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June, then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales attempted to justify the administration’s detainee policy by claiming, “There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.” (Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution reads: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”)
Article II: In June, House investigators revealed that Vice President Dick Cheney had exempted his office from an executive order order designed to safeguard classified national security information by claiming that he was not an “entity within the executive branch.”
Look: it's possible that the things the Bush Administration are doing to chip away at American's freedoms are in fact going to protect us. Perhaps the ability to listen to our calls, hold us indefinitely without charge, rifle through our e-mails will ensure the safety of all of us.Q: Is it ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?
MS. PERINO: In our opinion, no.
But to suggest so boldly that these things fit the Constitution? Either Ms. Perino hasn't been paying attention, or she really does think what her boss is doing is constitutional. Take a look:
First Amendment: In September, a federal judge ruled that the FBI’s use of secret “national security letters” to obtain citizens’ personal data from private companies for counterterrorism investigations “violate[d] the First Amendment and constitutional provisions on the separation of powers.”
First Amendment, Fourth Amendment: In Aug. 2006, a federal district court in Detroit ruled that the Bush administration's NSA warrantless wiretapping program was unconstitutional, violating the “separation of powers doctrine, the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and Fourth amendments to the United States Constitution, the FISA and Title III.”
Article I: Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June, then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales attempted to justify the administration’s detainee policy by claiming, “There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.” (Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution reads: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”)
Article II: In June, House investigators revealed that Vice President Dick Cheney had exempted his office from an executive order order designed to safeguard classified national security information by claiming that he was not an “entity within the executive branch.”
Monday, November 05, 2007
check this out
"The cost of the average used car in Europe is now cheaper than the cost of gasoline to drive it for a year– talk about razor and blades businesses."Interesting perspective on oil. How is gas so cheap when oil is almost $100 per barrel?
Fall back
We set the clocks back yesterday, but as we feared, Autumn didn't get the memo. Her 'afternoon' nap came at 11:00AM. She fell sound asleep on the way home from the grocery store.
And even though we tried to keep her entertained and awake, bedtime came at 7:00PM, and we were pushing it. Fact is, autumn can't tell time. Her body though, can. She's accustomed to certain moments in the day. Nap time. Bath time. Bed time. We're pretty good about making them at the same time, so when this whole arbitrary clock thing happens, she didn't get the memo.
Meaning, this morning, she was up at 5:00AM. Do you think that telling her that it isn't 6:00AM works? Nope.
We'll have a few more days of this. But man, did you ever think the clock going back would have this much meaning?
And even though we tried to keep her entertained and awake, bedtime came at 7:00PM, and we were pushing it. Fact is, autumn can't tell time. Her body though, can. She's accustomed to certain moments in the day. Nap time. Bath time. Bed time. We're pretty good about making them at the same time, so when this whole arbitrary clock thing happens, she didn't get the memo.
Meaning, this morning, she was up at 5:00AM. Do you think that telling her that it isn't 6:00AM works? Nope.
We'll have a few more days of this. But man, did you ever think the clock going back would have this much meaning?
Friday, November 02, 2007
You. Can't. Be. Serious.
Zogby Poll: 52% Support U.S. Military Strike Against Iran.
That's 52% of likely American voters favor starting another war against another country that didn't invade or attack the US. Holy smokes. Look around people, according to Zogby, more than one out of every two people you see wants to start another war.
That's 52% of likely American voters favor starting another war against another country that didn't invade or attack the US. Holy smokes. Look around people, according to Zogby, more than one out of every two people you see wants to start another war.
More Hockey, less heroes
A writer's strike looms. If they go on strike today, and that seems likely, it means no Daily Show next week. It means, depending on how long the strike goes for, a looming freeze in the Heroes season.
But thankfully, the Sabres write their own scripts every night.
But thankfully, the Sabres write their own scripts every night.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Halloween, a scary night
We dressed up Autumn in her cow costume. We went for a walk to meg's and the jody's. Since Autumn wasn't going to eat any of the chocolates, we focussed on showing her off. In order to keep her happy, I carried a stash of little pretzels, which she decided were the greatest things ever.
Back home, she sat on the front porch with mom and I and handed out chocolates to the hundreds of kids that come by. I don't mind giving out chocolate bars to people who aren't dressed up. We live in the 'rich' section of town.. so it's sort of expected. I think overall, Autumn enjoysed it. She watched the kids come to the door, smiled, looked cute, and then tried to run away.
She never once told us what a cow says. But oh well.
Later though, she had a bad night. Up a lot, she had a hard time getting to sleep. I think she'll most likely sleep a lot today. And then perhaps tonight, she'll sleep well again.
Still, we're through Halloween. Bring on Thanksgiving.
(Sorry it's sideways, blogger is being grumpy)
Back home, she sat on the front porch with mom and I and handed out chocolates to the hundreds of kids that come by. I don't mind giving out chocolate bars to people who aren't dressed up. We live in the 'rich' section of town.. so it's sort of expected. I think overall, Autumn enjoysed it. She watched the kids come to the door, smiled, looked cute, and then tried to run away.
She never once told us what a cow says. But oh well.
Later though, she had a bad night. Up a lot, she had a hard time getting to sleep. I think she'll most likely sleep a lot today. And then perhaps tonight, she'll sleep well again.
Still, we're through Halloween. Bring on Thanksgiving.
(Sorry it's sideways, blogger is being grumpy)
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Monday, October 29, 2007
NFL in London
The NFL played a game of "American Football" at Wembley Stadium in London on the weekend. This headline, from Sky News, got my attention this morning:
That's awesome. He did go to Florida State. But I guess he didn't take geography. I suspect the people from Florida State will not want to use him to tout their scholarly wares.
"Miami Dolphins linebacker Channing Crowder has admitted not knowing people speak English in London."
That's awesome. He did go to Florida State. But I guess he didn't take geography. I suspect the people from Florida State will not want to use him to tout their scholarly wares.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
What does a cow say?
For the last three weeks, we've been asking Autumn what a cow says:
"wwmoooo". She laughs.
This is the reason:
Thankfully, Saturday was a pre-Halloween test-run. And while this part wasn't the highlight (as you can tell), things got better. We walked up and down our street as all the stores offered candy to other little costumed kids. The people in the stores handed us chocolate bars knowing good and well that our little cow wouldn't be eating it -- we would be. It's almost extortion, really. Anyway, as you can see, things got better.
As you might have guessed, she never once told us what a cow said. Until we took off the costume.
"wwmoooo". She laughs.
This is the reason:
Thankfully, Saturday was a pre-Halloween test-run. And while this part wasn't the highlight (as you can tell), things got better. We walked up and down our street as all the stores offered candy to other little costumed kids. The people in the stores handed us chocolate bars knowing good and well that our little cow wouldn't be eating it -- we would be. It's almost extortion, really. Anyway, as you can see, things got better.
As you might have guessed, she never once told us what a cow said. Until we took off the costume.
Friday, October 26, 2007
It's about time: politics
From a speech on the senate floor this morning, this is proof that my $25 was well-spent on Senator Dodd.
Mr. President, for six years, this President has demonstrated time and time again that he doesn’t respect the role of Congress nor does he respect the rule of law.
Every six years as United States Senators we take the oath office to uphold the Constitution. Our colleagues on the House side take that oath every two years. That is important.
For six years this President has used scare tactics to prevent the Congress from reining in his abuse of authority. A case and point is the current direction this body appears to be headed as we prepare to reform and extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Many of the unprecedented rollbacks to the rule of law by this Administration have been made in the name of national security.
The Bush Administration has relentlessly focused our nation’s resources and manpower on a war of choice in Iraq. That ill conceived war has broken our military, squandered resources and emboldened our enemies.
The President’s wholesale disregard of the rule of law has compounded the damage done in Iraq and has made our nation less secure and as a direct consequence of these acts, we are less secure, more vulnerable and more isolated in the world.
Consider the scandal at Abu Ghraib – where Iraqi prisoners were subjected to inhumane and humiliating acts by U.S. personnel charged with guarding them.
Consider Guantanamo Bay. Rather than helping to protect the nation, the prisons at Guantanamo Bay have instead become the very symbol for our weakened moral standing in the world.
Consider the secret prisons run by the CIA and the practice of extraordinary rendition that allows them to evade U.S. law regarding torture.
Consider the shameful actions of our outgoing Attorney General who politicized prosecutions – who was more committed to serving the President who appointed him than the laws he had sworn to uphold.
And consider, of course, the Military Commissions Act – a law that allows evidence obtained through torture to be admitted into evidence.
It denies individuals the right to counsel.
It denies them the right to invoke the Geneva Conventions.
And it denies them the single most important and effective safeguard of liberty man has known – the right of habeas corpus, permitting prisoners to be brought before a court to determine whether their detainment is lawful.
Warrantless wiretapping, torture – the list goes on.
Each of these policies share two things in common.
First, they have weakened our ability to prosecute the global war on terrorism – if for no other reason than they have made it harder, if not impossible, to build the international support and cooperation we need to fight it.
And second, each has only been possible because Congress has not been able to stop this President’s unprecedented expansion of executive power, although some in this body have tried.
Whether or not these policies were explicitly authorized is beside the point. In every instance, Congress has been unable to hold this Administration to account for violating the rule of law and our Constitution. In each instance, Republicans in the Congress have prevented this body from telling this Administration that “a state of war is not a blank check.”
And those aren’t my words, Mr. President – those are the words of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor who was nominated by Ronald Reagan.
And today, it appears that we are prepared to consider the proposed renewal of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act – a law that in whatever form it eventually takes will almost certainly permit the Bush Administration to broadly eavesdrop on American citizens.
Legislation, as currently drafted, that would grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped this Administration violate the civil liberties of Americans and the law of this country.
Mr. President while it may be true that the proposed legislation is an improvement on existing law, it remains fundamentally flawed because it fails to protect the privacy rights of Americans or hold the Executive or the private sector accountable if they choose to ignore the law.
That is why I will not stand on the floor of the United States Senate and be silent about the direction we are headed.
It is time to say “no more.”
No more trampling our Constitution.
No more excusing those who violate the rule of law.
These are our principles.
They have been around at least since the Magna Carta.
They are enduring.
What they are not is temporary. And what we do not do in a time where our country is at risk is abandon them.
My father was Executive Trial Counsel at the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals during 1945 and 1946.
What America accomplished at those historic trials wasn’t a foregone conclusion. It took courage – when Stalin and even a leader as great and noble as Winston Churchill wanted to simply execute the Nazi leaders, we didn’t back down from our belief that these men—as terrible as they were—ought to have a trial.
We did not give in to vengeance.
As then, the issue before us today is the same.
Does America stand for all that is still right with our world? Or do we retreat in fear?
Do we stand for justice that secures America? Or do we act out of vengeance that weakens us?
Mr. President, I am well aware that this issue is seen as political. I believe that Democrats were elected to strengthen the nation – elected to restore our standing in the world.
I believe we were elected to ensure that this nation adheres to the rule of law and to stop this Administration’s assault on the Constitution.
But the rule of law is not the provenance of any one political party – but of every American who has been safer because of it.
Mr. President, I know this bill hasn’t even been reported out of the Judiciary Committee yet.
But I am here today because if I have learned anything in my 26 years in this body—particularly during the last 7 years—it is that if you wait until the end to voice your concerns, you will have waited too long. That is why I have written to the Majority Leader informing him that I will object to any effort to bring this legislation to the Senate floor for consideration.
I hope that Senator Leahy is able to remove this language – he is a dear friend and I know his respect for the rule of law runs deep.
But if he cannot, I am prepared to filibuster this bill.
President Bush is right about one thing: this debate is about security. But not in the way he imagines.
He believes we have to give up certain rights to be safe.
I believe the choice between moral authority and security is a false choice.
I believe it is precisely when you stand up and protect your rights that you become stronger, not weaker.
The damage that was done to our country on 9/11 was stunning. It changed the world forever.
But when you start diminishing our rights as a people, you compound that tragedy. You cannot protect America in the long run if you fail to protect our Constitution. It is that simple.
Mr. President, history will likely judge this President harshly for his war of choice and for fighting it with a disregard for our most cherished principles.
But history is about tomorrow. We must act today to stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law.
Mr. President, this is the moment. At long last, let us rise to it.
Mr. President, for six years, this President has demonstrated time and time again that he doesn’t respect the role of Congress nor does he respect the rule of law.
Every six years as United States Senators we take the oath office to uphold the Constitution. Our colleagues on the House side take that oath every two years. That is important.
For six years this President has used scare tactics to prevent the Congress from reining in his abuse of authority. A case and point is the current direction this body appears to be headed as we prepare to reform and extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Many of the unprecedented rollbacks to the rule of law by this Administration have been made in the name of national security.
The Bush Administration has relentlessly focused our nation’s resources and manpower on a war of choice in Iraq. That ill conceived war has broken our military, squandered resources and emboldened our enemies.
The President’s wholesale disregard of the rule of law has compounded the damage done in Iraq and has made our nation less secure and as a direct consequence of these acts, we are less secure, more vulnerable and more isolated in the world.
Consider the scandal at Abu Ghraib – where Iraqi prisoners were subjected to inhumane and humiliating acts by U.S. personnel charged with guarding them.
Consider Guantanamo Bay. Rather than helping to protect the nation, the prisons at Guantanamo Bay have instead become the very symbol for our weakened moral standing in the world.
Consider the secret prisons run by the CIA and the practice of extraordinary rendition that allows them to evade U.S. law regarding torture.
Consider the shameful actions of our outgoing Attorney General who politicized prosecutions – who was more committed to serving the President who appointed him than the laws he had sworn to uphold.
And consider, of course, the Military Commissions Act – a law that allows evidence obtained through torture to be admitted into evidence.
It denies individuals the right to counsel.
It denies them the right to invoke the Geneva Conventions.
And it denies them the single most important and effective safeguard of liberty man has known – the right of habeas corpus, permitting prisoners to be brought before a court to determine whether their detainment is lawful.
Warrantless wiretapping, torture – the list goes on.
Each of these policies share two things in common.
First, they have weakened our ability to prosecute the global war on terrorism – if for no other reason than they have made it harder, if not impossible, to build the international support and cooperation we need to fight it.
And second, each has only been possible because Congress has not been able to stop this President’s unprecedented expansion of executive power, although some in this body have tried.
Whether or not these policies were explicitly authorized is beside the point. In every instance, Congress has been unable to hold this Administration to account for violating the rule of law and our Constitution. In each instance, Republicans in the Congress have prevented this body from telling this Administration that “a state of war is not a blank check.”
And those aren’t my words, Mr. President – those are the words of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor who was nominated by Ronald Reagan.
And today, it appears that we are prepared to consider the proposed renewal of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act – a law that in whatever form it eventually takes will almost certainly permit the Bush Administration to broadly eavesdrop on American citizens.
Legislation, as currently drafted, that would grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped this Administration violate the civil liberties of Americans and the law of this country.
Mr. President while it may be true that the proposed legislation is an improvement on existing law, it remains fundamentally flawed because it fails to protect the privacy rights of Americans or hold the Executive or the private sector accountable if they choose to ignore the law.
That is why I will not stand on the floor of the United States Senate and be silent about the direction we are headed.
It is time to say “no more.”
No more trampling our Constitution.
No more excusing those who violate the rule of law.
These are our principles.
They have been around at least since the Magna Carta.
They are enduring.
What they are not is temporary. And what we do not do in a time where our country is at risk is abandon them.
My father was Executive Trial Counsel at the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals during 1945 and 1946.
What America accomplished at those historic trials wasn’t a foregone conclusion. It took courage – when Stalin and even a leader as great and noble as Winston Churchill wanted to simply execute the Nazi leaders, we didn’t back down from our belief that these men—as terrible as they were—ought to have a trial.
We did not give in to vengeance.
As then, the issue before us today is the same.
Does America stand for all that is still right with our world? Or do we retreat in fear?
Do we stand for justice that secures America? Or do we act out of vengeance that weakens us?
Mr. President, I am well aware that this issue is seen as political. I believe that Democrats were elected to strengthen the nation – elected to restore our standing in the world.
I believe we were elected to ensure that this nation adheres to the rule of law and to stop this Administration’s assault on the Constitution.
But the rule of law is not the provenance of any one political party – but of every American who has been safer because of it.
Mr. President, I know this bill hasn’t even been reported out of the Judiciary Committee yet.
But I am here today because if I have learned anything in my 26 years in this body—particularly during the last 7 years—it is that if you wait until the end to voice your concerns, you will have waited too long. That is why I have written to the Majority Leader informing him that I will object to any effort to bring this legislation to the Senate floor for consideration.
I hope that Senator Leahy is able to remove this language – he is a dear friend and I know his respect for the rule of law runs deep.
But if he cannot, I am prepared to filibuster this bill.
President Bush is right about one thing: this debate is about security. But not in the way he imagines.
He believes we have to give up certain rights to be safe.
I believe the choice between moral authority and security is a false choice.
I believe it is precisely when you stand up and protect your rights that you become stronger, not weaker.
The damage that was done to our country on 9/11 was stunning. It changed the world forever.
But when you start diminishing our rights as a people, you compound that tragedy. You cannot protect America in the long run if you fail to protect our Constitution. It is that simple.
Mr. President, history will likely judge this President harshly for his war of choice and for fighting it with a disregard for our most cherished principles.
But history is about tomorrow. We must act today to stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law.
Mr. President, this is the moment. At long last, let us rise to it.
Question from Right Field
If you write a check to yourself from one bank and deposit it in another bank do you have to endorse it? I, Matt Hames, write a check to Matt Hames, sign it with Matt Hames, and then deposit it into Matt Hames' account using a Deposit Slip that I, Matt Hames, fills out.
So, thoughts?
Turns out, you do have to endorse it. Thus, I'm telling the bank that yes, I endorse the check to me, made out by me, in front of you.
Banks are stupid.
So, thoughts?
Turns out, you do have to endorse it. Thus, I'm telling the bank that yes, I endorse the check to me, made out by me, in front of you.
Banks are stupid.
Insanity
A President who didn't get elected the first time, who may not have actually won Ohio (and the Presidency) the second time, with a 25% approval rating, who has managed to do absolutely nothing of substance in 6 years, is about to start another war that just might make things in the Good old USof A a little less stable.
Here's the thing: the war in Iraq, the one that Paul Wolfowitz promised would pay for itself (he was wrong, and for being so wrong on the numbers, they put him in charge of the world bank), will most likely end up costing each of us (Autumn included) $8,000. that being said, outside of a little outrage, the war really doesn't impact us. We get up, go to work, come home, watch some tube, play with Autumn, and repeat. In Iraq, of course, there hasn't been normalcy for a long time, but that's a whole different point.
The point is, when war in Iran comes, and it will come in the next few months, that's when things change. Don't believe me? The Senate already almost unanimously voted to call Iran's Army a terrorist force. Even Chris Dodd, the guy I think has recently showed leadership, voted for it. And thus, one day soon, Iran's army will engage the American Army, either because the American Army enters Iran, or some other reason, and President Bush will come on tv and announce tactical bunker busting munitions (with nuclear material in them) and launch them on Iran. And then, all hell will break loose.
Consider for a second. This whole war on terror came from 19 guys based in Afghanistan, most of them Saudi Arabian (none of them Iranian or Iraqi). The response has been to invade then leave Afghanistan. Invade and stay in Iraq. And now most-likely, invade Iran. All the while, the guy who claims responsibility for the whole thing is somewhere in the country you left, or in Pakistan. To think that people in Pakistan and India will sit back and continue to watch America run willy-nilly around western Asia is like thinking Iraq's oil will pay for this war.
I wonder when the day comes that Autumn's country won't be at war in her life. I'm afraid it won't be soon.
Here's the thing: the war in Iraq, the one that Paul Wolfowitz promised would pay for itself (he was wrong, and for being so wrong on the numbers, they put him in charge of the world bank), will most likely end up costing each of us (Autumn included) $8,000. that being said, outside of a little outrage, the war really doesn't impact us. We get up, go to work, come home, watch some tube, play with Autumn, and repeat. In Iraq, of course, there hasn't been normalcy for a long time, but that's a whole different point.
The point is, when war in Iran comes, and it will come in the next few months, that's when things change. Don't believe me? The Senate already almost unanimously voted to call Iran's Army a terrorist force. Even Chris Dodd, the guy I think has recently showed leadership, voted for it. And thus, one day soon, Iran's army will engage the American Army, either because the American Army enters Iran, or some other reason, and President Bush will come on tv and announce tactical bunker busting munitions (with nuclear material in them) and launch them on Iran. And then, all hell will break loose.
Consider for a second. This whole war on terror came from 19 guys based in Afghanistan, most of them Saudi Arabian (none of them Iranian or Iraqi). The response has been to invade then leave Afghanistan. Invade and stay in Iraq. And now most-likely, invade Iran. All the while, the guy who claims responsibility for the whole thing is somewhere in the country you left, or in Pakistan. To think that people in Pakistan and India will sit back and continue to watch America run willy-nilly around western Asia is like thinking Iraq's oil will pay for this war.
I wonder when the day comes that Autumn's country won't be at war in her life. I'm afraid it won't be soon.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
More on Amnesty
Or should that say moron amnesty? This is a simple chart from the guy I guess I support. And while it might seem like I'm a one-issue guy, I'm not really. This is called leadership. And when it comes to leadership, actions matter more than words. Even though Obama is now against Amnesty, and there's no doubt Hillary will eventually be against it, neither one showed leadership. In my humble little Canadian opinion, that's what's needed from our leaders. Some leadership. So, here's the thing. Click on it to find out what to do, if you want.
Connectivity
This blog is an unprecedented tool for connectivity. And it's merely one tool. I've tried to set my parent's up with Skype, a free internet service that lets you call each other, using your computer, to talk.
Then there's Flickr and Tabblo, more places to share photos of Autumn. There's YouTube and LiveVideo, where you can watch videos of Autumn.
On the surface, this seems like Autumn's life is an open book. But that's clearly not the case because a few blog posts and a few pictures don't constitute her life. But they constitute a level of connectivity that seems at once huge and minuscule at the same time.
What tools are you currently using to connect to people? To friends? Are you using anything?
Update:
This is how I stay connected. This seems like a good thing for England in the next World Cup.
Then there's Flickr and Tabblo, more places to share photos of Autumn. There's YouTube and LiveVideo, where you can watch videos of Autumn.
On the surface, this seems like Autumn's life is an open book. But that's clearly not the case because a few blog posts and a few pictures don't constitute her life. But they constitute a level of connectivity that seems at once huge and minuscule at the same time.
What tools are you currently using to connect to people? To friends? Are you using anything?
Update:
This is how I stay connected. This seems like a good thing for England in the next World Cup.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Washing out mouth with bar soap
At the search engine Dogpile, you can monitor in real time what people are searching for. I was just there grabbing a screen shot for something I'm working on when I noticed someone searching dogpile for "Washing mouth out with bar soap".
I got my mouth washed out with soap for saying this word. The simple fact is, I have not said this word in front of my mom since that day. In light of this fact, it's hard to argue against 'washing mouth out with bar soap.' Somewhere, someone must have said a dirty word.
I got my mouth washed out with soap for saying this word. The simple fact is, I have not said this word in front of my mom since that day. In light of this fact, it's hard to argue against 'washing mouth out with bar soap.' Somewhere, someone must have said a dirty word.
I gave money to a Senator
I don’t blog too much about politics these days because it makes me sad. My congressman voted to repeal Habeas Corpus when his party wasn’t in control of congress and his vote didn’t help them repeal a writ that’s been on the book for almost 1,000 years. Outside of helping my sister understand Bruce Springsteen's rants, there's not much a blogger can do.
Plus, the current congress is a complete do-nothing congress. They are trying to ride a coattail of discontent from voters about the Republicans. It seems they are sitting back and doing nothing on purpose so that things are as bad as possible in 2008. Don’t stop the war and then call it the Republican War in Iraq. Don’t fix the assault on the constitution and call it the republican assault on your freedoms.
The current batch of Presidential contenders are very uninspiring. They debate, and the debates are boring, staged, and silly. The national press attacks democrats for stupid things. Hillary for her laugh. Edwards for a haircut. Obama for a lapel pin. Meanwhile, on the right, one of the leading contenders is another actor who plays the role of good-old boy, even thought he’s a millionaire former lobbyist turned actor.
This week though, I got inspired. Senator, and Presidential Candidate Chris Dodd actually did something. In the on-going FISA scandal, the President is accused of spying on Americans since just after 9.11 with the help of the telecom companies. A federal judge has already ruled that these companies knowingly broke the law. so they went to congress to get retroactive immunity. A decidedly un-American thing.
Anyway, since the Dems don’t seem to want to find out if the President was illegally spying in Americans, a group of lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation sued the telecom companies. This is a good resource to read about it.
Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller, who personally took immense amounts of money from telecoms, crafted a bill last week that would give the telecom companies retroactive immunity.
And Chris Dodd stopped it. So I gave him $25. And you can too. Go, give him $5. Tell him to stand up for the constitution. Show him that real leadership isn’t saying the stuff you’ll do, but it’s doing something. Maybe Clinton and Obama will get the message. Perhaps Edwards can talk about it (even though he’s not a sitting Senator.)
It's a sad day when you need to reward senators for doing their job. But that's where we are. So reward him.
Plus, the current congress is a complete do-nothing congress. They are trying to ride a coattail of discontent from voters about the Republicans. It seems they are sitting back and doing nothing on purpose so that things are as bad as possible in 2008. Don’t stop the war and then call it the Republican War in Iraq. Don’t fix the assault on the constitution and call it the republican assault on your freedoms.
The current batch of Presidential contenders are very uninspiring. They debate, and the debates are boring, staged, and silly. The national press attacks democrats for stupid things. Hillary for her laugh. Edwards for a haircut. Obama for a lapel pin. Meanwhile, on the right, one of the leading contenders is another actor who plays the role of good-old boy, even thought he’s a millionaire former lobbyist turned actor.
This week though, I got inspired. Senator, and Presidential Candidate Chris Dodd actually did something. In the on-going FISA scandal, the President is accused of spying on Americans since just after 9.11 with the help of the telecom companies. A federal judge has already ruled that these companies knowingly broke the law. so they went to congress to get retroactive immunity. A decidedly un-American thing.
Anyway, since the Dems don’t seem to want to find out if the President was illegally spying in Americans, a group of lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation sued the telecom companies. This is a good resource to read about it.
Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller, who personally took immense amounts of money from telecoms, crafted a bill last week that would give the telecom companies retroactive immunity.
And Chris Dodd stopped it. So I gave him $25. And you can too. Go, give him $5. Tell him to stand up for the constitution. Show him that real leadership isn’t saying the stuff you’ll do, but it’s doing something. Maybe Clinton and Obama will get the message. Perhaps Edwards can talk about it (even though he’s not a sitting Senator.)
It's a sad day when you need to reward senators for doing their job. But that's where we are. So reward him.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)