Folding, spindeling, and mutilating lauguage for fun since Aug, 2004
Wednesday, 31 January 2007

Anne of Boker Tov, Boulder!  fame has dubbed this guy as a "liberal".

I skimmed it once, and then read it through again, and while he sounds sort of academic in tone, his structure is haphazard and muddled.  While he mouths some liberal-sounding platitudes, (Not all Germans should be demonized by Nazi behavior) his ultimate message appears to be a luke-warm justification for the right of people to deny the Holocaust.


While he seems to claim that people should not be demonized by race, he does blame most of the modern world's problems of Jews...although not directly.  No, he's careful to not come right out and say it.  Yet he tried to tie acceptance of Holocaust denial to the possibility of solving the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.  As though somehow, if we give legitimacy to the Holocaust deniers, it will free us from our preconceived notions about the root of the problems in the Middle East.  (In other words, he’s implying it’s all the Jews fault).


He also has some sort of weird notion that the primacy of the Holocaust in our minds as an example of evil run amok somehow minimizes the sufferings of other people who have suffered similar fates throughout history.  Claiming that there is more evidence and more legitimacy to these events, and that somehow, Jews have wrongfully diminished these events by making the Holocaust so important.  How twisted is that?


Like so many disingenuous right-wing revisionists, whether you are talking about the supposed "harms" of fluoridated water, the pleas for "honest debate" from the Intelligent Design crowd, or the assertion that the U.S. was founded as a "Christian Country"; he claims that all he wants is "open debate" of the controversy.


One give-away to his intellectual dishonesty is where he asks what's the harm in demanding evidence of gas chambers.  Implying that there is no evidence, without having the balls to actually claim it.  How much evidence do you need?  They found the vents for the gas in the ruins of Auschwitz (Thanks, Ben at EclecticsAnonymous for the link).  I have personally stood inside the "shower rooms" at Dachau, and saw it with my own eyes.  He says there are no photographs of the rooms.  I have some.  They are in my photo album.   Come on, only people who desperately need to deny the lessons of the Holocaust will believe this sort of thing.


He plays disingenuous word games with the numbers of people dead from the Holocaust, by claiming that they were not all executed, but died by other means...what, like starvation, disease, and neglect of basic human needs, and no opportunity to attempt to flee to areas where they could better meet their needs?  Really.  As soon as you wall people up and take control of their surroundings, and you control their access to everything they need to live, you become responsible for their lives, you schmuck.  It doesn’t matter if you shoot them, burn them, starve them, or just let them get sick and die while the doctors watch.  You killed them.


And like so many other topics, the debate has happened.  It's over.  There is a consensus, and your side lost, you wing-nut.  No matter how many of your lame-ass arguments we refute, you'll just keep recycling them with new terminology.  No matter how much evidence we bring to the table, you'll just make your bizarre conspiracy theories more wild and paranoid.


All these attempts to change the accepted facts surrounding the Holocaust, to make it "mean" this thing or that thing does nothing to shed any light on our current situation.  Too many people want to take a terrible, monstrous, injustice and warp it into something that supports their particular ideological view of the world.


But what I get out of it is this:  If you can view a group of people as not being human;  when you can see all members of a group being of a uniformly inferior quality; when you can blame them for (or somehow tie them to) everything that goes wrong in the world; when you can justify the necessity of their complete destruction (even if you don’t come out and say it in so many words); when you can split hairs about how many were killed due to this cause, and how many were killed due to that cause as if it absolves you of your responsibility; and when you can minimize and denigrate their suffering – there WILL be tragedy.


All the psudo-academic faux-logic and in the world can't worm it's way around that.

This guy is no more liberal than the Discovery Institute or any of the other wing-nut revisionists who share his tactics.

[Update:  A commenter at Boker Tov, Boulder said this:

    "In my experience, right wing lug-nuts deny the Holocaust ever happened, left wing nutzos are glad it happened. They can both go to hell. It's the middle of the roaders who scare me. One cannot be middle of the road about genocide..." 

 I asked her who was left if the left-right and center were her enemies, and she said it was decent people who stand up to bigots.

But I want to know...what on God's green earth possesses someone to believe that liberals are glad the Holocaust happened?  Seriously, can anyone think of a single solitary liberal who is glad the Holocaust happened?  Where do people get these bizzare ideas?]

Wednesday, 31 January 2007 13:02:54 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [10] |  | #
Tuesday, 30 January 2007

Boker Tov has links to Atlas Shrugs, and Little Green Footballs.


Her caption for the links reads:  Everything you ever wanted to know about Ashoura.


I followed the links, and learned nothing new.


At Atlas Shrugs, they have a couple of stomach-churning pictures of flagellated Muslims.  The site also mentions that the holy day is to commemorate the martyrdom of Mohommad's grandson.  It also mentions that it celebrates the day Moses was delivered from Egypt, and the day Noah left the ark.


The Little Green Footballs link has even less information than that, but the pictures are more disturbing.


Yes, truly disturbing visuals, and surely the result of primitive and backward culture and misplaced devotion.  Truly, our revulsion at any religion that can practice such barbarity is well-place.  We should feel superior, and very, very smug.  It's a good thing none of "our" religions practice such barbarity...


...oh wait...never mind.  Turns out, Christians do it to.  That makes it OK, you know.  Below follows a quote from  Wikipedia:


[gross photo deleted, you can follow the link if you want to see it]

Flagellant in the misterie of Guardia Sanframondi

Modern processions of hooded Flagellants are still a feature of various Mediterranean Catholic countries, mainly in Spain, Portugal and Italy and some former colonies, usually every year during Lent. For example in the comune of Guardia Sanframondi in Campania, Italy, such parades are organized once every seven years.

In modern times, it has been speculated that the more extreme practices of mortification of the flesh may have been used to obtain altered states of consciousness for the goal of experiencing religious experiences or visions; medical research has shown that great pain releases endorphines which can have such effect, and even get some fetishists addicted to pain.

Some Christians in Philippines practice flagellation as a form of devout worship, sometimes in addition to self-crucifixion (during the end of Lent season).

Tuesday, 30 January 2007 17:46:14 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #

A caller on MPR just questioned the conventional wisdom that a volunteer army is really more motivated than an army that was filled by other means (meaning, I assume, the draft).


He said that he thought that most people who joined up had limited options and/or were joining up for benefits that they would receive after their term of service, and were not really motivated by their patriotism.


I know three people who have joined the military post-nine-eleven, and two who were in before.


One of them joined due to patriotism, believed in the war, and specifically believed in the mission in Iraq.  He put his life on hold, and put his ass on the line for what he believed, and he has my undying respect because of it.


One is a former active duty person who originally joined for patriotic reasons because he believed in the mission of the military in general, and still does.  He is not in favor of the war in Iraq, but is re-activating to meet an active duty milestone to achieve better retirement benefits.  Though he was not in favor of going in to Iraq in the first place, and even though his primary motivation for re-activating is financial, he is absolutely committed to finishing the mission and getting the job done so we can leave.  He's always had my respect, but it's double now.


One is a young kid who is absolutely star-struck by the Marines.  I don't know his position on the politics of the Iraq war, but my sense is that he is committed to the military objective of defending the country independent of whether the Iraq war is right or not.  Once again, hats off.  He's a fine young man.  His foster father's pride is well-placed.


I know two national guardsman who had joined before 9/11.


One is in Iraq, a patriot who wanted to defend his country and do good work.  He also liked the extra money for his family.  He served in Bosnia with pride, and did his best because he thought it was a good thing to do.  He appears to be luke-warm on Iraq, but chose to go despite the fact that he could have gotten out of it.  He didn't want to let his unit go without him.  He's committed to his unit, his country, and the larger mission of the military.  He's a good man and his family's pride is well placed.


The other is not in Iraq as far as I know.  I don't know where he is deployed.  He's been balls-to-the-wall National Guard for as long as I know, and most likely always will be.  He was kind of annoying when we were growing up (maybe too much like a brother), but wherever he is, I wish him well and I'm proud of him.



Just from my personal impressions from the interactions I've had and things friends and family have told me about these guys, I would say that, anecdotaly anyway, you can't make that sort of characterization about the intentions and motivations of military personnel.

Tuesday, 30 January 2007 12:28:59 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #

For those who believe that we can't all live together in peace:

A little treat to make you feel better.  A Nazi group announced their intention to hold a book burning in Minneapolis.  A counter demonstration was held.  Look who showed up:


Swanson was joined at the gathering by Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders in the library of the Barry Family Campus at the Sabes Jewish Community Center in St. Louis Park.


When the good guys come together, the bad guys lose.  When we fight against and demonize each other, they win.  Christians should oppose the Christians who preach hate and division, rather than side with them.  Ditto Jews, ditto Muslims, ditto Atheists and Pagans and on and on.


Some people get that.  I'm convinced that ENOUGH people get that, but the more who get it, the better - and the better our time on this planet will be.

Tuesday, 30 January 2007 11:26:55 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

There is a traffic circle in front of Grasshopper's school.  The purpose is for dropping off kids without having to park.  You just drive up and stop in front of the school.  Your kid gets out, you complete the circle, and leave in an orderly fashion.  There are two lanes.  The one on the outside is for parking, the one on the inside is for you to pull into when you want to drive out of the circle.


Simple.  Efficient...


And a complete clusterfuck.


For the several years that I've had kids in that school there's always been THOSE PEOPLE.  The ones who drive past the parking lot, where they are supposed to park, pull up into the traffic circle; and park.  They get out, walk their kid into the school, visit with the teacher, run into someone they know and discuss the weather, use the bathroom…whatever…and leave their damned vehicle parked in the middle of the drop-off zone.


All this to avoid walking a few extra feet.  They turn what should be a really sweet, efficient system into a rat's nest, as people try to drive around the parked vehicle, and nearly crash into people in the driving lane, and EVERYONE ends up in grid-lock.


Worse, the chaos spreads out into the public streets, as traffic backs up and people can't even get near the school and decide not to wait.  Impatient moms and dads in a rush to drop their kids and get off to work unload their children onto the sidewalk.  Those kids then have to use the crossing guards to get across the intersection.  The crossing guards then have to stop traffic  in the streets leading to the school to get the kids across – causing traffic to back up to the intersections a block away from the school.


This affects people who don't even have kids, as impatient people who have waited in line to just get to the intersection decide they won't wait their proper turn at the four-way stop, causing more grid-lock.


Recently, the school posted two guys out on the traffic circle to make these assholes get back in their cars and keep driving.  For about three weeks straight, they enforced proper traffic circle etiquette.  Traffic not only cleared up and got more efficient, it got more polite.


People at the intersection of the street and the school's traffic circle began to realize that they had to let people OUT of the traffic circle onto the street in order for there to be room for them to pull in…so they stopped pulling into the intersection (effectively blocking the path of people leaving and causing gridlock).


The effect is noticeable for at least three blocks around the school during rush hour.


There has been no need for any enforcement now for a month.


My observation is:  Enlightened Self Interest works, as long as there aren't too many selfish jerks who gum up the system.  When people realize that what is good for other people is also good for them, they do what is good for everyone willingly and cheerfully.  When they see that other people get to break the rules, while they themselves are expected to follow them, they stop playing, and everyone suffers.


So the school did the right thing.  They found the source of the problem (the few cheaters) and called them on their behavior.  I didn't even require any sort of "punishment"...just having their behavior pointed out to them, and a request to correct it was enough.


They didn't have to do away with the service of the traffic circle.  They didn't have to reduce the number of people using it.  They didn't have to punish all of the people who were breaking the rules simply to try to function in a broken system...


...all they had to do was temporarily perform a small corrective function to the behavior of the few people who were breaking the system and all the other violators went back to civil behavior in a system that worked properly for the benefit of everyone.

Tuesday, 30 January 2007 11:00:25 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  | #
Monday, 29 January 2007

He has an article in the Washington Post.


Ya know, I heard him on MPR just today.  I was listening as I put the second coat of paint on the walls of the guest room.  I didn't agree with everything he said, but at the very least, he was speaking more-or-less reasonable and measured and refrained from acting anything like Ann Coulter.  And I actually agreed with some of his basic ideas.


So I followed the link at Pharyngula to the WP article, and to my surprise, he comes off as a megalomaniacal nut in print:


The second reason can be gleaned from the common theme in the reviews: that mine is a dangerous book. But if a book says things that are obviously untrue and can be disproved, then it is not dangerous -- it is merely fiction and should be ignored. A book is dangerous only if it exposes something in the culture that some people are eager to keep hidden.

And what is that? It is that the far left seems to hate Bush nearly as much as it hates bin Laden. Bin Laden may want sharia, or Islamic law, in Baghdad, they reason, but Bush wants sharia in Boston. Indeed, leftists routinely portray Bush's war on terrorism as a battle of competing fundamentalisms, Islamic vs. Christian. It is Bush, more than bin Laden, they say, who threatens abortion rights and same-sex marriage and the entire social liberal agenda in the United States. So leftist activists such as Michael Moore and Howard Zinn and Cindy Sheehan seem willing to let the enemy win in Iraq so they can use that defeat in 2008 to rout Bush -- their enemy at home.

When I began writing my new book, this concern was largely theoretical, because the left was outside the corridors of power. Now I fear that the extreme cultural left is whispering into the ears of the Democratic Congress. Cut off the funding. Block the increase in troops. Shut down Guantanamo Bay. Lose the war on terrorism -- and blame Bush.

Pointing this out is what makes me dangerous.


He must have given that part of the speech while I was out of the room replenishing the paint in my paint tray.

He's all, you know, ooooh look at me, I'm a big scary subversive.  As if opposing a Gold Star Mother best known for camping in a field, a documentary maker, and a Poly-sci professor while supporting the guy who has all the trained troops under his command is soooo subversive.

Here's another quote:


 One radical sheik even told a European television station a few years ago that although Europe is more decadent than America, the United States is the more vital target because it is U.S. culture -- not Swedish culture or French culture -- that is spreading throughout the world.


It's dangerous to say that American Culture is pernicious, infectious and offensive to religious fundamentalists?  Well, maybe.  It might inspire some Eric Rudolph wanna-be to set of a dirty bomb in L.A.

But I have to wonder, how is it that WE get saddled with the pop culture?  I mean, when I list the five or so people who I personally know who don't own televisions; only one considers himself a conservative - and he's not opposed to gay marriage, thinks Bush botched the handling of the Hurricane Katrina crisis, and is disgusted at the management of the war in Iraq despite the fact that he was all for it before it happened (I think he just doesn't like to pay taxes).

Most of the liberals I know consume very little mainstream culure.  Most of them are voracious readers of books across a wide spectrum of subjects and styles.  Almost all of them are married and in bed by ten o'clock most nights.

They still think Brittney Spears is the current teeney-bopper pop star.  Many could not pick Brittney Spears out of a Tiger Beat line-up.

Seriously, make up your mind people, are we the "Intellectual Elite" in our Ivory Towers with our tweed jackets and plether elbow patches, or are we the mainstream heartbeat of America’s decedent culture?  Or are we just everyone you don't like lumped into a big stew pot you call "liberal" and there's really no reason to it at all?

Seriously, I think you should all just get together, have a meeting, decide once and for all who the "liberals" are, and what their REAL agenda is (we can't build the fire while we're pouring the water, now, can we?)

At any rate, the one that burns me up is this: how is it that "liberals" want us to lose in Iraq so that we can defeat Bush at home?  Who do these people think we are?  Do they think we don't have friends and family fighting that damned war?  No, we may not have wanted it to begin with, and we might want it to be over as soon as possible…but we DO NOT want to lose this war.

And, intellectual elite that we are, we would know that it was a bad deal to sell out our men and women in uniform to defeat a guy who can't even stand for re-election.

Monday, 29 January 2007 22:00:37 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #

I heard Dinesh D'Souza on MPR and I was surprised to hear him called a "conservative" commentator.  Except for his inflamatory title of his book, and the fact that he blames "liberals" for all our troubles with Millitant Islam, he sounds "liberal".

1) He says that Millitant Muslims make up a small percentage of the Muslim world.

2) He doesn't insist on calling Islam "Islamofascism".

3) He characterizes the situation for most traditional Muslims in the world today as a defacto choice between Secular tyranny and Religious tyranny without implying that either are inherant failings of Arabs or Islam.

4) He talks about how the U.S. is a liberal country, and has been liberal from it's founding.  He also claims that conservatives guard that foundation.  And he's right.  REAL conservatives do.  There used to be a lot of progressive conservatives in this country.  There's still a few of them left.  I may not agree with them all the time, but at least when we argue, we argue from the correct foundation.

The one thing I had a problem with is his reasoning for the tenacity of the insurgents.   He blames their perception that if Democrats are in charge, we will leave Iraq without an orderly exit stratagy that provides for a stable Iraq. 

I agree that that is a major factor, but I don't think the Democrats are responsible for that perception.  I think the Republicans are.  They are the ones who have been useing the words "cut and run"  The democrats are talking about strategy change, about stepping up the pace of achieving the goals, about ways to bring the Iraqi government up to speed, and asking when we can expect these things.

OK, Dennis Kuchinich and a handful of others with little or no real leverage have said stupid stuff, but they just get air-time because the MSM love to play clips of them saying stuff and watch Rush Limbaugh's face get all red and puffy.  Then he says stuff that makes some dipshit "liberal" pundit's face get all red and puffy.  The John Stewart makes fun of whoever acted like the biggest dick.  Then I laugh...but I digress.

There's no way we're getting out until the job is done.  So let's get on that.

You want another 20,000 troops, let's hear about how the way your going to use them is going to be more effective than the way you use the one's you've got there now.  Let's hear how the "surge" is going to get us out of there faster.  And I want to hear real retired generals say they think it'll work.

Hey, I don't even need to hear the words "slam dunk".  I'd settle for it passing the sniff test, which, by the way "we'll be greeted as liberators" never did.  And neither did the WMD thing either.

Which is one other problem I have with Mr. D'Souza:  He says that President Bush made the best decision he could based on the intel. he had about the WMD.  Not true.  There was tons of information that Iraq had no real WMD capability.  People were all over the place talking about it.  You might remember the names Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame, for instance?  There were many people saying that it just wasn't likely at all.  The Pres. just didn't listen to them.

Monday, 29 January 2007 13:47:42 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

No more watching "Rome" and "Battlestar Galactica" in the same night.

I can't take that much of man's suffering and inhumanity to man (or Cylon) due to his petty, short-sighted, self-serving nature.

I was in and out of sleep with terrible dreams all night.  Between Adama on Galactica, and the prostitute/assasin boy on Rome (and what's become of Verinus), I was completely done for as far as a night of restful sleep.

Monday, 29 January 2007 08:16:38 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  |  | #

A little while ago, over at Boker Tov, Boulder, a commenter scoffed at my assertion that I don't believe that Arianne Huffington's 360 degree conversion from "conservative" to "liberal" was 100% genuine.  Mostly because she has people like Deepak Chopra writing "liberal" articles that are just plain brain-pudding-by-products meant to sound generically and blandly "spiritual", while meeting the primary criteria of slamming science.


Now, Anne Lieberman waxes incredulous (as if this is the first that she has ever heard anything remotely to indicate that there is a somewhat less-than-lefty influence at the HuffPo).


I'd comment directly on the post, but she's shut off the comments section to her blog.  (It wasn't my fault, honest, it was some lady who thought it was weird that Anne quoted Robert Novak in a pro-Jewish blog.  The lady referenced a general perception of Novak's apparent anti-sematism by calling him an "ex-Jew".  Also, there was the fact that some inarticulate anarchist called her a "moron".  I suggested that she not let mentally ill people get her down, but she closed down the comments anyway.  *shrug* for someone advocating the eradication of an entire religion, she sure has thin skin.  I really did think she had some chops...oh well.)


Anyway, here is Ann's post about the topic.


My favorite quote from her excerpt of the HuffPo article:


If you talk about tolerance constantly - and hilariously tolerate genocide and suicide bombers because those actions undermine your more intimate opposition, the American right - then you're a patriotic terrorist.

The only difference between a patriotic terrorist and a real one? Real terrorists are simply patriotic terrorists who've taken the extra step - choosing to actually die for their beliefs - rather than simply talking about them ....


Once again, the old canard of "if you support due process, you are on the side of the terrorists".


I guess Senator Stevens is "on the side of the terrorists" now...seeing as how he didn't like having his wife tagged as one and treated as such due to the appearance of her name on a do-not-fly list.


Or maybe it's only injustice when it happens to White Republicans.


Too bad they figured it out so soon.  I would have been interested to see his argument as to why his wife didn't deserve to have a bag thrown over her head and be whisked off to some third-world country and tortured.  It might look suspiciously like "patriotic terrorism".

[Retraction:  Anne says that she does not advocate the eradication of any religion.  I was careless in attributing that sentiment to her, rather than expressing that it was the impression I got from her blog.]

Monday, 29 January 2007 01:43:44 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] | #



Anne over at Boker Tov had this nifty cartoon.

Cox & Forkum, March 27, 2003


Of course, if it was "Rightists in space" it would read:

"Don't just stand there!  Round up our Kleenor crew members and passengers and blow them out an airlock!  That'll show 'em!...except for the ones in the Carlyle group, get them private safety pods."

Monday, 29 January 2007 00:53:54 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #

From Xenoferox  Via Pharyngula

Let us all unite in giving Dr. Kennedy a hearty well-wishing for him to retire peacefully, and live out his last days (may they be many and filled with joy) surrounded by friends and family.

And that his ministry Coral Ridge Ministries fall into ruin and neglect, it's followers lured away by the bright light of reason and human brotherhood!  A natural, peaceful death for Dominianism: an idea whose time has come.


Monday, 29 January 2007 00:32:05 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Saturday, 27 January 2007
It's not just for ignorant hicks in pole-barn churches anymore.
Saturday, 27 January 2007 22:55:17 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #

"Ye simple men, on both sides of the question, do ye not see through this courtly craft? If ye can be kept disputing and wrangeling about church and meeting, ye just answer the purpose of every courtier, who lives the while on the spoil of the taxes, and laughs at your credulity.  Every religion is good that teaches man to be good; and I know of none that instruct him to be bad."

                                                                      --Thomas Paine "Rights of Man (part two)

Saturday, 27 January 2007 20:11:13 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Friday, 26 January 2007

I KNEW it would only be a matter of time before they started burning books.  The anti-immigrant rhetoric, the "Liberals hate America and Western Culture" rhetoric, the T.V. Presenters saying "We need more white babies" as if that sort of crap is OK and mainstream, The promotion of the assumption that "we" need to defend ourselves violently against "bad ideas"...all the repugnant "Christian Identity" crap that normal everyday people have picked up and parroted as though it made any sort of sense at all... all creats an environment that emboldens these guys and leads directly to this.  Bastards.

Neo-Nazi group's plan to burn Jewish books in the Twin Cities draws protests

Pioneer Press

A group of religious leaders and government officials are denouncing plans by a neo-Nazi group to burn copies of Jewish books in the Minneapolis area.

The book-burning will take place Saturday at an undisclosed place and time, according to website of the Minneapolis-based National Socialist Movement.

Alan Silver, president of the Jewish Community Relations Council, said the choice of Saturday for the book burning was obviously no accident, since it is the anniversary of the liberation of a Nazi concentration camp in Auschwitz. The day is now commemorated as International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Attorney General Lori Swanson said only a concerted effort by those who oppose hatred and prejudice would quell the efforts of neo-Nazi and similar groups. She wanted to participate in that, she said.

"I think it's important for public officials to stand up and say, in our Minnesota, we don't tolerate hatred and bigotry," she said.

The neo-Nazi group's site states participants in the "Great Minnesota Book Burning" will "torch degenerate books such as the Talmud, and other anti-American and/or anti-White books."

Friday, 26 January 2007 16:25:14 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  | #


Quote sent to my by my friend, Paula, from the St. Paul Pioneer Press:


The state should stop giving money to nonprofit organizations until it gets better at tracking its grants, a Republican Minnesota House member proposed Thursday.

"Until state agencies enact better controls and procedural safeguards, the only responsible course of action is to enact a moratorium," said Rep. Chris DeLaForest, R-Andover.

Rep. Erik Paulsen, R-Eden Prairie, also wants the state to create a publicly accessible Web site to make it easy to see how the annual $4.7 billion the state pays to nonprofits is used.

The proposals come on the heels of a state report released earlier this month that found Minnesota has a "fragmented and inconsistent" approach to tracking grants to nonprofits and doesn't do needed checking to see how well the money is used.

"Taxpayers deserve to know where their money is spent," Paulsen said.

— Rachel E. Stassen-Berger

Friday, 26 January 2007 15:34:03 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Thursday, 25 January 2007
Exploring whole new worlds of WTF.
Thursday, 25 January 2007 16:19:40 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  | #

Much is being made of Michelle Bachman's apparently needy and worshipful insistance on touching, kissing, and prolonging contact with President Bush on Tuesday.

I'd hate to be a famous person whose every moment is recorded for posterity and parsed for signs of my secret nature.

Hey, we all have moments where we forget where we are and what we're supposed to be doing.  While this is embarassing for Ms. Bachmann, and entertaining for those of us who don't like her, I think it's only right to keep it in perspective.  It was a heady time, it was probably the biggest night of her life up to this point, and she got carried away.

Of more concern is what Ms. Bachman does when she is focused on doing her job.  This woman wants creationism taught in science classes.  She opposes equal rights for and, promotes fear and hatred of, gay people.  She wants to institutinalize a particular religious viewpoint into our government.

While it might be fun for the moment to mock her human frailties (which we all have), that's not the best use of our time, is it?

Thursday, 25 January 2007 13:36:58 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #
In case anyone needed it
Thursday, 25 January 2007 11:02:40 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Wednesday, 24 January 2007

Huge WTF? via Pharyngula


See, a University of Minnesota Professor sent out an e-mail to a number of people asking them to help out with Al Franken's campaign.


Cue the hue and cry.  Those damn liberal intellectual elites wasting tax-payer money on behalf of a liberal candidate!


I mean really, do you know how much it COSTS to send an e-mail?


Furthermore, it might look bad, like an endorsement of a party by someone who holds a public trust, which would be a BIG no-no.


David Schultz, an ethics expert at Hamline University, said "what's bad about it is that it lends credence to the perception that academics and professors are all liberal and using college resources to help Democrats. ... You shouldn't use your e-mail or your title or your position to leverage help for particular candidates."

Absolutely!!!  I mean, it's not like Senators endorse other candidates, or do fund raising, or distribute the proceeds from extortion and money laundering in exchange for political leverage to boost key members of their party, and thus earn a nickname like "the hammer".  You don't see George Bush leveraging HIS position of public trust to promote candidates HE favors.  It's not like he flies into a town, spends half-an-hour on a flash visit to a grade school or a meat-packing plant or whatever so he can ride Air Force One to a $1000 a plate fundraiser for one of his pet legislators.


College professors should be held to AT LEAST that high of a standard when it comes to their e-mail accounts.  From now on, the good professor should be sure to put, at the top of her e-mails "Reminder:  My office hours are 1:00PM-3:00PM.  Anyone needing to consult with me on their academic work should contact me at that time.  Oh, and by the way, if you want to help Franken out, give me a call."


I mean , who does she think she is?


Hangin's too good for her.  Burnin's to good for her.  She should be torn into itty-bitty little pieces, and buried alive. (Ten brownie points to the first person to correctly identify the source of the preceding passage).

Wednesday, 24 January 2007 20:40:51 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [6] |  | #

If gold is such a great investment "in these troubleing times" - How come Monex can't afford to update their marketing campaign?

It's the same as it was the LAST time we had a Republican president with an incompetent economic policy.

Wednesday, 24 January 2007 12:29:29 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #

     I'm sitting here, the night that the President gave his SOTU.  Sporatically, there is a mention of the main themes of the speech, and a terse sentance or two describing the rebuttal.

     Then they spend a stomach-churning amount of time trying to whip me up into a frenzy about Dakota Fanning's participation in an on-screen rape scene, which they assure me, is graphic and disturbing and very very likely to boost ratings, guaranteed to keep people nailed to their couches 'till the next commercial break, bad.

     I havn't seen the movie.  I am not likely to see the movie.  I'm not competent to decide if a crime was comitted, or if Ms. Fanning is mature enough to decide to participate in her own choices on the matter.  I'm not qualified to say anything about the appropriatness of her parents giving their consent.  I trust that people who ARE qualified, and who DO see the movie will do their jobs. 

     I just know that I don't want to see it, and as such, I would really really really appreciate it if my news presenters didn't insist on infusing my news with the words "Child rape" over and over and over again.

     It would also be really great if they didn't look and sound so damned self-serving, self-satisfied, and exceited while saying it.  Over and over and over again.

Wednesday, 24 January 2007 01:53:56 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #
Monday, 22 January 2007
Blog entry over at sixty-six

The longest serving units in Iraq to date:

172nd Stryker (Active Duty) - 450 days

1st Armored (Active Duty) -455 day

1/34th BCT (National Guard) - 365 + 125 = 490 days

During WW2 the 34th Infantry held the record for the most days of continuous combat operations. It looks like we may soon hold the record for Iraq as well.

If the government is going to continue to use us like active duty units they had better unass our benefits or they won't have a National Guard. They can start with retirement. Active duty Soldiers draw a pension as soon as they retire. National Guardsmen have to wait until they are 59.
OK, Back to me again:
*note: BOHICA stands for "Bend Over, Here It Comes Again
I know a couple of these guys, and I can tell you that they are patriotic, dedicated, and professional.  America can be very proud of them.  It's time our leadership gets on the ball with respecting their commitment as well.
Governor Pawlenty, a man who I have very little in common with, dislike intensely and have no respect for what-so-ever has made noises about getting these guys some of the props they have coming to them due to the treatment they have recieved (recently found out that their tour was extended).
I'll support him in that.
Monday, 22 January 2007 21:34:49 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

No wonder "Smooth" over at Smooth Stone has such a warped view of the world.  He appears to rely heavily on a paranoid conspiracy site called "Discover the Networks".

Discover the networks appears to have a mission to somehow link everyone they don't like to the events of 9/11.

Look out.  If you:

1) Aren't a card-carrying, Ann Coulter-certified arab-hater.

2) Don't enjoy having government employees able to open you mail at will.

3)Want to have a phone conversation in private.

4) Did a church bake sale to raise money for medical care for Palistinian orphans

You could end up on their list.  Well, probably not really.  They only really go after celebrities, politicians and academics.  Those people are so much easier to objectify.

It's interesting, though.  The people they target, the intellectuals, artists, academics, and the people who speak out for freedom of speech and assembly...those are the same people that Stalin and Pol Pot and Mao went after.

Through some sort of tortured reasoning, the Discover the Networks people use the same rhetorical tactics as Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao...and then they equate Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao with the people they are useing that rhetoric to demonize.  Brilliant.  Insanely brilliant.


Monday, 22 January 2007 18:13:45 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

After a few weeks of stress and family problems, and stress and home improvement woes, and the good (but still stressful) stress of a long string of many out-of-town guests, and the allergies (from the dust stirred up by home improvement) and the cold, and the bronchitis...

...I returned to Kung Fu on Sunday.  Of the three hours of intense training I usually do, I made it almost 1 and 1/2.

My ab muscles feel like someone is taking a rake to them.

Today, all I managed to do was take the dog for a walk.

Somebody call the whahmbulance.

Regaining lost fitness levels is the suck.

Monday, 22 January 2007 17:16:59 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
You know the Bible 91%!

Wow! You are awesome! You are a true Biblical scholar, not just a hearer but a personal reader! The books, the characters, the events, the verses - you know it all! You are fantastic!

Ultimate Bible Quiz
Create MySpace Quizzes

Stolen shamelessly from Geek Goddess.
Monday, 22 January 2007 14:54:19 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Sunday, 21 January 2007

Boy, those humans do NOT react well to you chewing a hole in the indoor grass.  Sheesh. You'd think it dosesn't grow back or something.

Sunday, 21 January 2007 21:24:18 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Saturday, 20 January 2007
Those darn lefties at the CIA, with their leftist propaganda.
Saturday, 20 January 2007 09:46:43 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Friday, 19 January 2007

I've got a new Tag for y'all.

Spoof or no spoof...where I go out into the internet, and find the most outrageous website I can find, and we all vote on if it is a spoof or not a spoof.  It doesn't matter what the truth is, just what we decide.

Come on, it'll be fun.

So, our first candidate is this:

I got the link to this from Pharyngula.  So, whaddaya think?  Spoof, or No spoof?

Please explain your answer, and show your work.  OK, pick up your pencils, and begin.

Friday, 19 January 2007 23:14:15 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [6] | #

Karen continues her IM conversations with her Iraqi friend.

Friday, 19 January 2007 22:40:59 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

My regressive-minded Republican neighbor lets his dog run free all the time. 

The dog comes up and pees on my deck, or on the steps leading up to my deck.  It poops in my yard, and it menaces Jay (my 4-month old puppy in case you don't know).

I've talked to him about it, he said "Oh", shrugged, and walked away.

Apparently, "It's a free country" means the right to let your animal run wild and ruin your neighbor's property.

It's kind of a metaphor for their version of "religious freedom" -- "Hey!  It's a free country!  It's against my religion for people to (pick one or more: use birth control/teach kids the medical facts about sex/be gay/ let someone die with dignity/take a yoga class/other) !  You're oppressing me!"

In other words:

"I have a right to practice my religion, and if some of it has to splash on your life and make it stink , then that's just the way it has to be!"

Someone suggested that I should get a wrist rocket and shoot the dog a couple of times to get it to stay off my deck.  But I can't see punishing a stupid dog who doesn't know any better just because his master is a clueless wonder.  I understand that neither one of them has the capacity to do anything but what they do.  The owner has to be an inconsiderate, self-centered jerk, and the dog has to be a dog.

Sometimes it sucks being a bleeding-heart liberal.


Friday, 19 January 2007 17:46:38 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] | #
It's not just for backward hicks in basement churches anymore.
Friday, 19 January 2007 14:06:08 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Thursday, 18 January 2007

The Weapon (Part II of Fear)

We've got nothing to fear -- but fear itself?
Not pain, not failure, not fatal tragedy?
Not the faulty units in this mad machinery?
Not the broken contacts in emotional chemistry?

With an iron fist in a velvet glove
We are sheltered under the gun
In the glory game on the power train
Thy kingdom's will be done

And the things that we fear are a weapon to be held against us...

He's not afraid of your judgement
He knows of horrors worse than your Hell
He's a little bit afraid of dying
But he's a lot more afraid of your lying

And the things that he fears are a weapon to be held against him...

Can any part of life be larger than life?
Even love must be limited by time
And those who push us down that they might climb
Is any killer worth more than his crime?

Like a steely blade in a silken sheath
We don't see what they're made of
They shout about love, but when push comes to shove
They live for the things they're afraid of

And the knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them...

Thursday, 18 January 2007 16:25:27 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  |  | #

Sheet music is DELICIOUS!

Thursday, 18 January 2007 08:01:18 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] | #
Wednesday, 17 January 2007

Anne Lieberman, over at Boker Tov! Boulder, uses a quote from the Zohar to prove that marriage is ordained by God to only be between one man and one woman (and calls "liberals" who don't want to roll the clock back some 2000 years* and follow ancient Jewish mysticism as public law "regressives").


Follow the link in the word "Zohar" to the wikipedia entry about the Zohar.


Of course, as always, read wikipedia critically, and do your own explorations into the subject.


But if you have an enquiring mind (as in, you read about Madonna's involvement with Kaballah in the National Enquirer and are curious as to what that's all about), you will find this interesting.


Given a choice between living under Shar'ia law as Anne believes we will have to do (She thinks the liberals are going to hand the U.S. over to the mullahs), or living with the Torah or the Bible, or the Zohar (or, more likely, all three together) as the imposed religious law of the country... 

... well, I imagine that beheading is faster and less painful than stoning or burning, but I'd probably just learn French and go help Canada defend it's borders.


In the mean-time, let's just do what we can to keep either from happening -- K?

* or more, if you buy that the Zohar was passed down orally from the Talmudic period, and then transcribed roughly 2000 years ago.

[Update]  Ben has posted a reply to the discussion in the comments  It's a pretty good reaction.  Especially if you happen to think I was too mild-mannered in my response.  What can I say, I've been fighting an upper repiratory infection for weeks now that has become bronchitis.  I guess I'm a little wrung out.  :-)

Wednesday, 17 January 2007 12:05:33 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [10] | #
Tuesday, 16 January 2007
Film at eleven.
Tuesday, 16 January 2007 09:48:15 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [5] |  |  | #
Friday, 12 January 2007
Why you need ammunition
Friday, 12 January 2007 23:50:39 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  |  | #
Ammunition against those who would insist that the US was founded as a "Christian" country.
Friday, 12 January 2007 22:47:51 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #
Thursday, 11 January 2007

"Smooth", over at "Smooth Stone" claims that American liberals are in league with the "Islamofascist" scum and together, they are trying to destroy America and take over the world.


Prof. Myers, at Pharyngula has brought my attention to proof of the REAL allies of the "Islamofascists (whatever that means)".


Of course, it's fun-duh-mentalist creationist wackos (A.K.A. "Real Americans" in Smooth's world).


In this week's NATURE magazine, Mehmet Somel, Rahsan Nazli Ozturkler Somel and Aykut Kence write a letter from Turkey, where they tell a tale of woe about how their country came to be the only country worse than America when it comes to understanding and accepting a fundamental truth of most of our modern biological sciences: the Theory of Evolution and Natural Selection.


The major reason for this has been the conservative influence on education in Turkey during the past 25 years. In 1985, the then minister of education contacted creationists in the United States, a cooperation that led to the inclusion of creationism in the high-school biology curriculum and textbooks.


That's right kiddies, the same people who claim that the "lefties" are destroying America and encouraging our enemies.  The same people who claim that Islam is incapable of ever being compatible with modern thought and the modern world have been exporting their ignorance and insanity to Turkey, and sabotaging modern thought and the seeds of the modern world-view in a predominantly Muslim country.


For twenty-five years, they have been striving to return both the US, and at least one Muslim country back to the middle ages.  So when they have succeeded, and we are a "Christian" nation ruled by "Christian" values, and Turkey and the rest of the Muslim world are equally ignorant and easily manipulated, then what?  Why then, dear children, they can fight about whose God did the creatin' without any of those pesky liberal free-thinkers soiling the sandbox.


Somebody wants a crusade, and will do ANYTHING to get it, I guess…even if they have to collaborate with their own "enemies" to get the party rolling.

Thursday, 11 January 2007 21:43:10 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] |  | #

I followed the link to "Smooth's" blog.

I assume that the title of this blog,  Smooth Stone is a referance to David bringing down Goliath with a single smooth stone propelled by a sling into the giant's forehead.

How was David, a simple shepherd, and still a boy able to down Goliath?

God was on his side, of course.

Of course, everyone in this terrible conflict believe that they have God on their side.

Problem is, God has not provided, from any of the religions embroiled in this battle, a young man who can end it with a single, smooth stone.

So we'll just keep killing until he gets with the program, I guess.

In the mean-time, each side will continue to insist that their religion is a religion of peace, while the others are religions of hate and incompatable with humanity.  Each side will insist that the other side "Started it" by delving farther and farther back into history to the previous atrocity comitted by the other side (and there is plenty to go around).  Each side will continue to mock and belittle the pain of their enemies, and glorify and take ghulish delight in detailing the suffering of their side, indulging in victim-fetish mentality.

If you read the atrocities and suffering and claims of inhumantiy from all sides, I think it's clear to see:  God isn't on anyone's side.  God doesn't live here, or if he does, he doesn't give a flying squirril who wins.



Thursday, 11 January 2007 17:03:05 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Wednesday, 10 January 2007
Wednesday, 10 January 2007 21:34:39 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [8] | #

"...if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding use of the Koran."

                                                           --Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA)

                                                              Dec. 7th, 2006


"For those of you unfamiliar with the Virgil Goode position, in the Kama Sutra it's where a man masturbates while his head is up his own ass."

                                                           --Jon Stewart, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart

                                                              Jan. 9th, 2007

Wednesday, 10 January 2007 11:14:05 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Tuesday, 09 January 2007

My friend Karen has has an IM friend for three years now.  He's an Iraqi living in Iraq.  Formerly imprisioned by Saddam Hussein's government, he worked for a while for an NGO, and is now unemployed.

Here are links to a couple of the IM conversations that they had:

1 A conversation with an Iraqi

2 Further conversation with an Iraqi

3 Conversation with an Iraqi disclaimer


I just thought you might be interested.

[UPDATE:  The links, they have been fix'ed, and a fourth one added]

Tuesday, 09 January 2007 20:53:32 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  | #
OR: Ellison Wonderland (With apologies to Harlan Ellison for stealing one of his titles)
Tuesday, 09 January 2007 12:52:49 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #

Ever get depressed about the future?  Ever find yourself sighing and muttering dispiritedly about "kids these days?"

I've got the cure:  Go here and read some of the entries at this blog.

Ben at EclecticsAnonymous did a profile on this smart, thoughtful, tough-minded young lady.  You can read that too.

Read "Say 'HI' to Freckles"

I'm adding her to my blogroll as well.  Please go read.  You will be glad you did.

Tuesday, 09 January 2007 08:49:42 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Sunday, 07 January 2007

"When, in countries that are called civilized, we see age going to the workhouse and youth to the gallows, something must be wrong with the system of government.  It would seem, by the exterior appearance of such countries, that all was happiness; but there lies hidden from the eye of common observance, a mass of wretchedness that has scarcely any other chance, than to expire in poverty or infamy.  Its entrance into life is marked with the presage of its fate; and until this is remedied, it is vain to punish.

Civil government does not consist in executions; but in making that provision for the instruction of youth, and the support of age, as to exclude, as much as possible, the profligacy from the one, and despair from the other.  Instead of this, the resources of the country are lavished upon kings, upon courts, upon hirelings, imposters and prostitutes; and even the poor themselves, with all their wants upon them, are compelled to support the fraud that opresses them."


                                           -- Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man, part two" 

Sunday, 07 January 2007 22:19:29 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [2] |  | #
Why must so many regressive analogies suck so bad?
Sunday, 07 January 2007 12:38:59 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] | #
Saturday, 06 January 2007
Thomas Paine said it.
Saturday, 06 January 2007 09:57:19 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [4] |  | #
Thursday, 04 January 2007
What Battlestar Gallactica Character Are You?

Spunk, angst, moxy, spirit, bloodlust, passion - you have all of that and more. You are full of energy and don't always put it where you mean to, often causing plenty of problems with the boss. But your fighting spirit is rare and your willpower is exceedingly powerful - while that may cause strife it also allows you to live life to its fullest. You don't ever go down without a fight, and you always show authority your true colors.
Take The Quiz Now!Quizzes by

Thursday, 04 January 2007 21:00:55 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [6] | #
Wednesday, 03 January 2007

     On December 27th, I was going to the airport to pick up my friend, Val.  I was listening to MPR, and I heard a strange spot that they did on a new disease called Morgellon's Syndrome.


     The symptoms sounded so preposterous that, had the story been aired on April First, I would have laughed out loud, assuming it to be made up entirely. (bugs crawling around under the skin, cellulose fibers growing from the skin, involvement with or resemblance to just about every single hazy, difficult to diagnose, treat or even prove the existence of condition on the face of the Earth, etc.)


A couple of days ago, I chanced across a website where a man suggested that Morgellon's was perhaps a brilliant and sick instance of viral marketing.


I have since come across several conjectures about what Morgellon's is: that it is a hoax, that it is a variation of delusional parisitosis, that these poor people are actually suffering from a real disease.


At any rate, the site that suggested that it was a viral marketing campaign for the movie based on Phillip K. Dick's Through a Scanner Darkly had the most interesting comments.


The suggestion that Morgellon's was not a real disease brought out people who vitriolically demanded that the author retract his statement.  They told of their pain and anguish, their emotional and physical torture with the disease, and they even made comments wishing the disease upon the author so that he could know how much they suffered with it, and then he would not belittle their disease so much.


I don't believe that Morgellon's is a real disease.  I am prepared to find out I'm wrong, and retract that statement, but until I see something, anything resembling a rational explanation for the bugs, the fibers, or the lesions that the people are supposedly subjected to, I'm just not going to believe it is real.


I have not seen a picture of the bugs.  I haven't heard what their taxonomic category is.  You would think it would be simple to come up with the chemical composition of the fibers, and some process by which they can be manufactured.  "Information" sites about the disease are only so much noise.  With pictures and technobabble that says nothing.


The symptoms are so incredible as to be...well...incredible.


Therefore, I do not believe it is real until it can be demonstrated otherwise.


And if anyone posts a vitriolic response demanding an apology, and demanding that I accept their pain and anguish and suffering as sufficient cause to ignore my reason and what knowledge I have, I'm sorry, but I can't do that.


I'm sorry for people's pain...but me believing the same as they do about the cause of that pain will not ease their pain one bit...whereas compromising critical thought to emotionalism is certainly harmful.

Wednesday, 03 January 2007 09:25:25 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  | #
Tuesday, 02 January 2007

My friend, Karen asked me to put in a plug for her aunt's Fibromyalgia website.  I said I would, and that I would put it in my navigation bar.

Unfortunatly, I misunderstood the purpose of the site.  I thought it was purely an information site.  When I went to look, I found that she was offering services as a coach.  I DO want to help out a friend's aunt...but I DON'T want to appear to be endorsing paid services of a person I don't know helping people with a disease that is not fully understood.

Each individual is different, each individual finds different things effective.  Information is key to that, and I think that this site has lots of information that people might find useful in their personal search for ways to cope.

I imagine that the coaching of an experianced patient might be very useful in managing this very complex condition.

So here is the site.  I hope that anyone who needs it finds important and useful information here.  If you are looking for a coach in dealing with Fibromyalgia, you will need to use your own judgement to determine if Karen's Aunt can provide the expertise you need.  She is very up-front about her qualifications.

Karen's Aunt's Site:

Other information can be found at these sites.

There are lots more information sites available with an internet search for the term.  I try to avoid information sites that advertize products on the front page as part of the site design (as opposed to side-bar advertizing). 

Tuesday, 02 January 2007 09:12:01 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [0] |  | #
Monday, 01 January 2007

My last official act before the dawn of the first day of 2007 was to participate in a snowball fight at about 3:00 AM in the morning.  I got creamed several times, didn't really get any good hits in, and got tackled to the ground twice.  It didn't help my neck much, but it was still fun.  When I came in and took off my coat, a boat-load of snow fell out.  The whole inside of the front of my coat was packed solid from neck to waist with snow.  We were all soaked and frozen.


I don't really have a lot to say about 2006.  It wasn't our year.  We're glad to leave it behind.  We're glad we ended it with a big party, surrounded by friends and acting like children.


2007 finds us back on our footing, and ready to run into the future.  See you there.

Monday, 01 January 2007 22:29:07 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [3] | #
Admin Login
Sign In
Pick a theme: