October 14, 2010
September 04, 2010
I suppose the reason this is disappointing to me from a First Amendment standpoint is that there are so many other websites that publish ads that are much more risque than anything Craigslist posts. Maybe it's like having Cosmopolitan at eye level in the grocery store - when you're looking around for lightly used snowboards you shouldn't be assaulted by heavily used untamed va-jay-jay.
August 27, 2010
I'm just stymied at how this whole situation came to be. People in the real world understand that if you don't pay your bills, your service gets cut off. Why did the state think it was exempt from this? The only rationalization I can come up with is that the state figured that with a lack of incoming tax dollars they could cut services to those who aren't paying a portion of the tax burden.
Regardless of who the blame finally comes to rest upon in this whirling dervish of finger pointing, it's obvious that we're seeing a harbinger of things to come. Unfortunately, the resolution I see forthcoming given the current makeup of our state government is legislation requiring doctors and hospitals to accept Medicare and Medicaid for at least a portion of their patient load, regardless of whether it causes docs to run in the red. Never mind that if doctors are running at an income deficit, they're not paying taxes into the system so they can treat patients with government or no insurance. And then there's the issue of the 3,000 patients on the waitlist to see a family doctor at Denver Health - running doctors out of practice by reducing their income causes a shortfall of doctors, which in a free market would mean that doctors could ask for higher compensation, which would encourage more people to become health care professionals, which would lower the compensation rate until market equilibrium was achieved. What part of the free market is failing that there are 3,000 patients without basic medical care? Can't we just set up a clinic where doctors will work for free, never mind the costs of running that clinic and never mind the costs the doctors and nurses and medical technicians and receptionists incurred to become educated to do their jobs, and all the equipment and maintenance for that equipment can be free, and we should be able to just compel the building owner to give the clinic free rent and the utility companies to provide heat and lights for free and the labs should run all the tests for free too!
A concerning side note: We've been hearing that the state is running at a budget shortfall of $60 million. Where would our shortfall lie if the state were paying its bills?
August 08, 2010
The girl worked on a sign, coloring in the letters and decorating it with a drawing of a person saying "Yummy." She made a list of supplies.Children should learn at an early age that the government will stick its greedy fingers into your pockets every chance it gets, and that the government is going to do its best to overwhelm your startup with fees that make it impossible to get a toehold.
Then, with gallons of bottled water and packets of Kool-Aid, they drove up last Thursday with a friend and her daughter. They loaded a wheelbarrow that Julie steered to the corner of Northeast 26th and Alberta and settled into a space between a painter and a couple who sold handmade bags and kids' clothing.
Even before her daughter had finished making the first batch of lemonade, a man walked up to buy a 50-cent cup.
"They wanted to support a little 7-year-old to earn a little extra summer loot," she said. "People know what's going on."
Even so, Julie was careful about making the lemonade, cleaning her hands with hand sanitizer, using a scoop for the bagged ice and keeping everything covered when it wasn't in use, Fife said.
After 20 minutes, a "lady with a clipboard" came over and asked for their license. When Fife explained they didn't have one, the woman told them they would need to leave or possibly face a $500 fine.
June 25, 2010
June 22, 2010
The Legislature was considering Gov. David Paterson's $1.60 increase in the state cigarette tax that's now $2.75 per pack. That would increase the cost of cigarettes in New York state from about $7.60 a pack to $9.20. In New York City, which has its own $1.50 tax, the price could jump to near $11. Paterson's bill would also double the tax on chewing tobacco and many other tobacco products while finally taxing little cigars as much as cigarettes.
BTW, it sounds like they're hurting bad enough on budget to try and shake down the reservations...I hope the Natives fight like hell.
Or better yet, PA should drop its taxes on cigs so we can build a bunch of shops along the NY/PA border, hell, we could do that now as long as the short bus all-stars in Harrisburg don't fuck it up. Hmmm...
June 17, 2010
Giancarlo Galan, Italyâ€™s agriculture and food minister, dismissed the proposal as â€œnonsenseâ€ and wrote a tough-worded letter to Brussels asking for a softer approach. â€œSometimes, the strict application of rules â€¦ reveals their stupidity,â€ he told reporters
*yes, I know I'm leaving myself open for the obscene jokes. Let's just say that Nutella is smooth and creamy but doesn't drip all over the place and leave it at that.
May 27, 2010
[This] means that developers will be able to create their own apps that integrate seamlessly with GOP.com, and help guide the development of the GOP platform and the online conservative movement. It also means that instead of using a series of disconnected apps, individuals will now be able to take advantage of a system of integrated tools to help them accomplish their goals.
I'll take a look at it more after work and see how useful it is.
April 29, 2010
March 28, 2010
Speaking before his arrest, he said: ''Everybody wants a flame thrower on a motor bike.
''I don't need a flame thrower on the back of my bike, I'm not going to set fire to people's car's, it's just something interesting to do.''
March 27, 2010
Why am I not surprised that this nanny state shit is coming from California?
Actually, I'm fairly surprised that instead of trying to ban toys in fast food meals, these liberal douches aren't trying to slap an extra tax on them, instead.
(Oops, sorry if I gave anybody an idea.)
March 23, 2010
With the sweeping, transformative, unprecedented, [insert-other-O-bot-adjective-here] health care legislation about to hit the nation like a ton of bricks, I thought we would all like to take a glimpse into the future via this purty crystal ball. Actually, it's not a crystal ball. It's just the United Kingdom.
Smoking should be banned in all cars as well as in public places where young people congregate, doctors are urging.
The Royal College of Physicians wants England's imminent review of anti-smoking laws to consider such measures to protect the young.
It says passive smoking results in 300,000 extra child visits to GPs in the UK every year for problems such as asthma and bacterial meningitis.
But driving and smoking lobby groups say cars are a "private space".
A number of medical bodies have supported a ban on smoking in cars transporting children, but the RCP goes a significant step further, urging a blanket ban on anyone lighting up in a vehicle - regardless of whether children or indeed any other passengers are inside.
It is calling for a two-pronged approach which would see children protected from second-hand smoke and shielded from the sight of adults smoking - whether in the playground or on the TV.
The RCP's report - Passive Smoking and Children - is being released ahead of the three-year review of the ban on smoking in enclosed public spaces in England. Similar bans have been introduced across the UK, with Scotland having led the way.
Drawing on a series of studies, the report suggests that in the UK, tens of thousands of youngsters are falling ill as a result of exposure to cigarette smoke.
These calculations include 20,000 chest infections, some 22,000 new cases of asthma and wheezing, as well as 200 cases of bacterial meningitis and 40 cases of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome - or cot death.
Each year it claims these account for more than 300,000 visits to a GP - some of which end up in hospital - costing the NHS Â£23.3m.
The report does concede that these figures are only estimates, but says it is confident they give an "indication" of the number of children who become ill.
I am way too tired to point out how grossly fucking stupid this is. So I'm just going to go ahead and say that this is fucking stupid.
February 23, 2010
Yesterday, it was hot dogs. Today, it's movies.
I don't go out of my way to find this kind of nonsense, I swear. Somehow, it just keeps fucking finding me!
Film characters disappear into thin air, travel through time, and know how to fly. They're all scientific impossibilities, but since they take place on the silver screen, we suspend our disbelief and go along for the ride.
But one scientist has had enough and is calling on filmmakers to temper their creativity by obeying the rules of science.
At a recent meeting of American scientists, physicist Professor Sidney Perkowitz suggested a new rule: every film should be allowed just one major suspension of belief for the sake of the story.
In other words, films shouldn't repeatedly violate scientific laws. And they definitely should avoid internal inconsistencies - breaking scientific rules established in earlier scenes.
"If it's scene after scene, it becomes greater than I can stand," says Prof Perkowitz. "I understand the dramatic impulse behind it. The natural tendency is to hype things up."
Others in the scientific community agree.
In order to emphasise a sense of "impending doom", filmmakers often ignore realities like time, says Dr David Kirby, a lecturer in science communications at University of Manchester. After all, if the asteroid in Armageddon was spotted years before it threatened to hit Earth, the story would lack tension.
Okay, so it's just some jackass physicist who apparently has no concept of fun, but still, people, please. The article goes on to mention the three "worst" movies for science - among them, one of my all-time favorite bad movies, The Core. Frankly, if you think the American people are so fucking uneducated that they think the vast majority of a flick like The Core could actually fucking happen, then the issue isn't with science.
It's with the education system.
And if you can't put aside your disbelief long enough to enjoy a movie, then you really need to score some hookers and blow and have a night out on the town. Maybe while we're at it, we should ban such literature as Azimov's Foundation Series - after all, it's obviously scientifically impossible to predict the fucking future. Or Burroughs' Martian Tales - really, folks, active life on Mars? teleportation? atmosphere on Mars? And, fuck, while we're at it, World War Z might convince the poor stupid American public that the zombie apocalypse is coming right now. (Okay, strike World War Z. We all know teh zombies are coming.)
Lighten the fuck up and enjoy a bad damn movie.
February 22, 2010
Oh, for fuck's sake, can't we even fucking enjoy hot dogs any more? In case you've had your head up your ass for fuck knows how long, giving your toddler a hot dog that hasn't been cut into tiny pieces may pose a choking hazard. As such, it is imperative that the government step in and tell us that we should redesign the "shape" of hot dogs so that kids don't choke on them, or at least affix grapes, hot dogs, peanuts, and who knows what else with warning labels.
"Any food that has a cylindrical or round shape poses a risk," he pointed out. Smith said that hot dogs were high on the list of foods that could be redesigned -- perhaps the shape, although he said it would be up to the manufacturers to figure out the specifics.
Hard candies, on the other hand, could be designed so they're flat rather than round, said Smith, who is also director of the Center for Injury Research & Policy at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.
The AAP policy statement appears in the March issue of Pediatrics and is the first such guidance on the subject from that group.
The policy statement called for the government to establish a "mandatory system . . . to label foods with appropriate warnings according to their choking risk, to conduct detailed surveillance and investigate food-related choking incidents, and to warn the public about emerging food-related choking hazards."
Manufacturers' responsibility would be to affix "choking hazard" labels to high-risk products and to consider shapes, sizes and textures when designing products.
"I think there should be a commitment from the entire industry to label not only hot dogs but all high-risk foods with some type of informational label that allows consumers to make informed decisions," Smith said, adding that he thought companies would figure out that "safety sells."
My daughter likes hot dogs. Without any government intervention, my husband and I had the completely unoriginal thought to cut them into small pieces that are easy for her to chew and swallow. It's a fucking miracle that she's still alive, isn't it?
February 17, 2010
Okay, look, I get annoyed by an unruly kid as much as the next guy. Even my kid. Actually, come to think of it, especially my kid. However, if I move in next to a daycare, or an elementary school, I better expect that kids are going to be kids and are therefore going to be noisy while they learn and play. Apparently, that was not the case in Germany:
In Berlin alone, hundreds of complaints are made each year about noise levels in kindergartens and children's playgrounds.
Some day-care facilities have even been forced to close after local residents have gone to court in search of a quiet life.
Now Berlin's local government, the senate, has passed a law giving children the right to be noisy, the first law of its kind in Germany.
Axel Strohbusch, from Berlin's Department of Noise Protection, said it was "the first time we have it written in law that we have to consider the rights of children to shout and make noise while they are growing up and this must be considered by all the neighbours".
Oh, Nanny State, how do I love thee. Let me count the ways.
February 05, 2010
A farmer who built a castle hidden behind a stack of straw bales has lost a High Court bid to save it from being demolished.
So this guy builds a castle in secret without permits. Then, the government finds out about it and because he didn't have the permits they demolish it? Fucking bullshit. At MOST, they should be able to inspect it and see if it meets code and, if not, issue a fine or something. If that was me I'd be on the roof with a rifle when they came to tear it down.
Wait, I guess not in England.
Fucking building codes. I can get behind them for businesses because they are de facto semi-public locations and its nice to be confident that a restaurant's roof isn't going to collapse on your head. But in private homes, they should butt the fuck out of any permits that can't DIRECTLY effect your neighbors' safety*. You know, fire hazards and such. But if I want to build a neat little castle tower in my back yard they can shove their permits up their fucking asses with hot sauce.
I mean, in Milwaukee you need a rather expensive permit to build a FUCKING SHED. Explain to me one good fucking reason they should have a say about a shed. One.
Yeah, this shit pisses me off since we've been renovating our house non-stop since we bought it and apparently the stupid fucking government of Milwaukee has a say in almost anything we do. Statist bastards. I think we should pass a law that requires elected officials to get a permit from a citizen every time they want to take a shit. $10.00. I'm reasonable.
* - On the other hand, I am completely in favor of neighborhood organizations (willfully entered) that can set limits on what you can do with your property. That's not police state shit, that's voluntary contract stuff. That's fine.
February 04, 2010
February 01, 2010
Laws banning cellphone use while driving apparently havenâ€™t reduced crashes, according to a study released on Friday that compared the number of total crashes before the ban with the number after. The study found virtually no difference in the numbers, a finding that had the researchers scratching their heads.
Might as well be scratching your asses, tardos because your world view disallows you from understanding why this is the case.
Simply put, the people that, when texting, were more likely to get into accidents are exactly the same people that are more likely to get into accidents while NOT texting. Sure, texting while driving is probably dangerous but the people that drive inattentively will tend to text more dangerously than people who, all things being equal, would be less likely to get into an accident anyway.
So, your stats don't show a decrease because those same sub-standard drivers found some other way to fuck up no matter how many baby gates you put between them and their own stupidity. Similarly, no matter how many weapons you make illegal or foods you ban, fucking fat people will still kill each other.
But, dillweeds, of course you can't understand that.because it is imperative that the risk of death and failure in general society be somehow revised to zero. No matter how much evidence exists pointing out that natural selection gets its fucking cut, you insist on tilting at the windmill of perfect safety at the expense of general freedom.
So, you know... get fucked. Die in a fire.
January 11, 2010
The geniuses in New York have decided that, since they've defeated food that tastes good by banning trans fat, now it's time to defeat food that tastes kind of good by attacking salt.
On Monday, the Bloomberg administration plans to unveil a broad new health initiative aimed at encouraging food manufacturers and restaurant chains across the country to curtail the amount of salt in their products.
The plan, for which the city claims support from health agencies in other cities and states, sets a goal of reducing the amount of salt in packaged and restaurant food by 25 percent over the next five years.
Public health experts say that would reduce the incidence of high blood pressure and should help prevent some of the strokes and heart attacks associated with that condition. The plan is voluntary for food companies and involves no legislation. It allows companies to cut salt gradually over five years so the change is not so noticeable to consumers.
â€œWe all consume way too much salt, and most of the salt we consume is in the food when we buy it,â€ said Dr. Thomas Farley, the city health commissioner, whose department is leading the effort. Eighty percent of the salt in Americansâ€™ diets comes from packaged or restaurant food. Dr. Farley said reducing salt from those sources would save lives.
Sure, it's voluntary now, but do any of us really believe that it'll stay voluntary? After all, once upon a time, they were just nicely asking retaurants to cut back on trans fat.
I fucking hate this kind of bullshit. It drives me up the goddamn wall; it's my body, I'll eat what the fuck I want, and if I get high cholesterol or blood pressure or whatever the fuck problem, then it's my own damn fault for not thinking, "Hmm, this can of processed fucking cow fat mixed with pig lard covered in salt might not be the best thing I've ever put in my fucking mouth." If you can't fucking control yourself as an eater, I shouldn't have to give up my damn occassional indulgences just because this "should help" reduce fucking heart attacks and strokes. Stay the fuck out of my food, damnit. If I want to kill myself on Big Macs, that's my mother-fucking business.
January 07, 2010
Go read this, then meditate for a while on healthcare and welfare in Massachusetts, and then tell me how a disabled mother of nine kids got a tubal ligation during a C-section without signing a consent.
Side bets will be taken on whether the ensuing settlement requires the state to pay for egg harvesting and implantation so that this gal can have one more kid with the father of three of her rugrats.
59 queries taking 0.1327 seconds, 168 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.