@Randem

Top astronomers and scientists from around the world have been meeting to determine just exactly what qualifies as a planet. The focus appears to be on two heavenly bodies in particular — Pluto, and J-Lo's ass — which, in spite of their size and gravitational pull, appear to bear none of the other characteristics exhibited by the other eight planets in our system.

Personally, on the subject of Pluto, I agree with Brian Marsden, who thinks Pluto shouldn't be a planet. I'm still undecided on J-Lo's ass, however, which has an orbit far more planetary than Pluto.

Labels: science

Or does the terrorism threat level always go up a few months before an election? See, these politicians think we're going to all get scared, and vote Republican because they keep us safe, but I think they're wrong.

I think they're out of touch with America. You see, Americans don't have much of an attention span. We'll all stand up and take an interest the first time... but eventually we're going to get bored.

This high threat level means long, slow lines at the airport. It means no liquids or gels in your carry on. It means you have to take your damn shoes off again. And don't even think about bringing that dangerous lipstick or eyeliner on-board!

Yes, it means a lot of things... but one thing it does not mean is increased safety. Nobody's going to detonate a lipstick container, or take the captain hostage with his toothpaste tube -- not when it's still so easy to sneak a bomb into the luggage.

And that's the problem -- we have CNN, ABC, the local news, whatever. We know how easy it is for rookie reporters to sneak a suspicious package into a plane without ever being scanned.

This increased threat level, and all the hassles that go with it, are only going to make voters hate the Republicans. I, for one, would vote for anything but a Republican, just so that in the coming years, I can board an airplane in a timely manner -- and do it without having to take off my shoes first.

Republicans don't keep me safe. Hell, they don't even keep me scared. All they do is find ways to inconvenience me.

Labels: national security, politics

In response to the thwarted terrorist plot against us, which comes conveniently as the mid-term elections start up, President Douche-bag called it a "stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists." (link)

I haven't necessarily been keeping a strict count but so far, by my estimation, this is the first time he's actually come out and said it. We're at war against Islam. Oh sure, he used some politically correct-sounding language... but he's starting to ease it in there. He's saying it at a fundraiser in Green Bay to see if he can get away with saying it later on tv to America.

I hope there's a country left when his term finally ends.

Labels: national security, politics

This is priceless!

Labels: fun, humor, video

Is it just me? Or are others feeling like our representative government — of the people, by the people, and for the people — doesn't really seem to come from the people nor ever do anything for the people?

We know politics is corrupt. We accept that, because the world is corrupt. We accept that because humans are involved, and any time you put humans into the equation, it becomes impure. But at this point I believe the systemic corruption has made any real representation of the people ineffectual, if not non-existent.

Really. When you get special interest money to vote for a bill, and you get special interest money to vote against a bill, you're just going to go to the highest bidder. And if there's no special interest money? Well then there's no representation, of course!

Well, you have all these people who are elected to represent their states... to represent their districts. What do you think happens when you take those people out of those distrcits, and out of those states, and put them into a tiny little city together, with a bunch of high-paid lobbyists surrounding them at all times? Over the course of one term, that district or state may change so much that he's not even representative of his own people by the end of his term.

This is a fast-paced age. It's a digital age. It's time to take the Congress out of Washington and put them back into the states they represent. You don't need to be in the same building to vote any more. But you do need to be in the state to know what the issues in that state are.

This also keeps the politicians from gathering in one area for easy lobbying. Sure, companies can send lobbyists to all the various states, but then they're paying hundreds of lobbyists for 635 politicians, rather than just having 2 or 3 in a K-Street office, conveniently poised to bribe — er, I mean consult — all of the Senate and the House in comfort.

This is what we need. The world has moved to a speed that the framers of our Constitution could not have envisioned. Still, it wouldn't require starting over to catch our policy up to our world. I'm not saying to disband the Congress, I'm just saying it's time to put them to work doing the very thing the Constitution set out for them to do.

Not only that, but if these idiots actually had to use the technologies they're legislating, maybe they'd make better decisions. At the very least, they'd understand how it works.

Labels: politics

I wonder what would have happened if Alice could have stopped the white rabbit, just for a moment, and asked him where it would lead.

Let's say life is like a decision tree. The choices you make earliest determine on which fork of the tree you will end. Though you will still make many choices later, your earlier choices have negated a myriad of other possible outcomes. That's what I believe in. No fate. No destiny. Just a series of outcomes influenced by a series of causes and effects.

Now let's say you go along planning for an particular outcome. You're making choices in the present not because of the immediate results, but because in the long-term you've decided that you ultimately want to land in a particular sector of the tree. Each day that you get closer to that part of the tree. Each decision puts you closer to your chosen outcome.

And assume that suddenly you come to a new fork — a new choice to be made between two branches, and suddenly you realize that this other one looks pretty damn good, too! And what if you see a short-term gain that beats any of the longer-term stuff you've planned for, but you can't see past this short-term gain.

The risk/reward is higher on the one side than the other. The potential climb is greater, but so is the potential fall. Meanwhile, on the other side, the climb is shorter, but the fall is one you know you can survive.

Do you take of the training wheels and work without a net? Or do you continue to perform tricks that get applause from the crowd but never amazement? That tightrope walk from tree to tree in your back yard will impress your friends, but the one across the Grand Canyon will impress the world.

What if Alice asked that white rabbit where it would lead, and he told her "I can't tell you where it will lead, but let me tell you where it can lead..."

Labels: life, philosophy

It's amazing how much you can feel your life turn over the course of a morning. I haven't been sleeping well lately, which in my case means over-sleeping. Where I normally sleep for about 5 hours a night, I've been sleeping 8 or more hours for the last few weeks, and still not wanting to wake up.

Some events this weekend gave me a lot to think about. I'm not going to get into the details, but it helps the story if you understand that I woke up this morning with a lot on my mind. And that I sat up, wide awake, after 5 hours exactly. Add to this that I got just under 6 hours the night before, and I'd say I'm over the sleep troubles, albeit in trade for a different stress.

My morning was spent, mostly, responding to phone calls and emails from recruiters with positions they want me to fill. Most of them were the typical formal stuff — the candy-coated "getting to know you" experience that I hate — but three were very matter-of-fact, very positive conversations. All three are in different cities in the mid-west, and all three pay very well. However, none of the three is in Columbus.

So I know I can find work, but it seems like it's everywhere except the place I wanted to be. However, it's worth noting that I can get round-trip tickets all over the midwest for $99, and at my pay rate, I could do that every weekend without hesitation. That just makes these decisions all the more difficult...

Well, lunch rolls around and I decided to go check the mail. My passport is back, and this time it's spelled right. And better yet, they returned my money order for expedited fees, so I can get a refund for that $60. That's a welcome turn of events. Now if I start flying all over every weekend, I can rack up some frequent flyer miles and get out of the country. ¡America del Sur, ya me voy!

I wonder how hard it would be to live in Columbus and work in Chicago...

“To be without some of the things you want is an indispensable part of happiness.” -Bertrand Russell

Labels: qotd

You've got to see this...

Labels: fun, humor, video

It's amazing how much light there really is in the dark. After leaving the shutter open for nearly 30 seconds, I was able to gather enough light to make this almost look like a daytime shot.

Once again, the presence of water makes this photo interesting. I'm starting to wonder if a career could be made shooting only photos that contain some form of moisture.

Labels: photography

“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” -Albert Einstein

Labels: qotd

This is the height of American laziness. We've got pharmaceutical scientists researching a way to “immunize” people against weight gain. You see, when the politically correct crowd refers to obesity as a disease, you start getting research to cure it. Jesus. Imagine that: rather than eating properly, and being active, you can just get your shot and keep eating like a pig.

The scientists have isolated a chemical called ghrelin, which regulates appetite and energy metabolism. And now, they have engineered a way to trick the immune system into attacking ghrelin, thus preventing it from causing your body to store energy in fat cells.

Mice injected with the vaccine ate just as much as untreated mice but had about a 20 or 30 percent reduction in weight gain. However, the mice were fed low-fat, low-energy diets. It's not certain that a ghrelin vaccine would be effective against the burger-rich, high-fat diet that many Americans eat, the researchers noted.

Notice the disclaimer given there. It is widely accepted that people are obese because of their diet. Obesity is not a disease. Is it really smart to treat it like one? Once you've tricked your immune system into thinking ghrelin is a foreign body, will it stop when you stop using the vaccine? Or will anyone even bother to stop?

Labels: health, science

The US House of Representatives just passed the Deleting Online Predators Act by a vote of 410 to 15, which just goes to show how little congressmen really know about the Internet. The new law would forbid minors in any publicly funded institution (schools, libraries, etc) from accessing any web site with a social networking element to it. OUT-LAW.com has this to say about the DOPA.

The law suggests that the FCC consider as social networking sites any site that allows users to edit a profile, chat to users or post personal data.

Under that loose definition a very large number of sites would qualify, including Amazon.com, which allows users to post lists of preferences and create profiles of authors, Ebay, in which each user has a profile which changes as they shop, or any number of major news sites, where users can discuss stories online.

And I agree. Not that I think kids should be using eBay from school... but there are plenty of legitimate web sites online, such as news sites or learning sites, that would be banned. For example, it seems to me that Wikipedia would qualify as having a social networking element.

It's shameful that Congress would vote in such a poorly worded, open-ended law without any resistance. You see, since it will be up to the FCC to determine what web sites are offensive, this essentially puts an information weapon into the hands of our government allowing them to censor certain information from a child's education. I hate to imagine such a tool could be wielded in the deceptive hands of a snake like Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, or King George II.

Now look. I really don't see any good reason for kids to be using MySpace at school. But there's just no reason why our government should be allowed to stop them from using it at the library. For every kid who encounters a stalker there are thousands who have no problems. You don't punish the kids for the mistakes of the occasional pervert.