For those who happen to have an old MacSE sitting around.

I will say it again: it never ceases to amaze me what some people will do to fill the hours.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

I have never liked Johnny Cash.

I have a neutral sort of appreciation for him, as in I know his music, but his music will never know me.

Johnny Cash was always country music. If you're from the Midwest, it's common knowledge that you're a follower of one of two philosophies: you're either country all the way or you loathe it. Generally speaking, with a few exceptions that could be thrown into the "follies of youth" department, I'm with the loathers. Ergo, Cash fell into the category of those who shall be loathed. That's just the way it was. Until he died. And then some bright soul at the record company decided it was time to cross market Johnny Cash to the rock and roll set. Because, you know, of course Cash was a big influence on lots of rock and roll acts. Hence you'd better run right out and buy this brand-spankin' new, digitally remastered, retrospective so you too shall know the genius that was Johnny Cash.

Better yet, you'll be able to tell a friend about it, and then they'll rush right out and buy his retrospective, too. And they'll tell another friend, who will tell another friend...

Until it's, reportedly, common knowledge that the Man in Black was always cool.

When he most assuredly wasn't.

Not by a long chalk.

Although, I will admit a fondness for his recording of Depeche Mode's Personal Jesus.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:19 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 245 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Wow, do I even know who you are anymore? Johnny Cash isn't cool? Yeah, and apple pies taste like cow pies, Minnesota winters are "refreshingly brisk", and sex is overrated compared to cuddling. I was born the year Johnny recorded "Live At Folsom Prison", and my dad tells me stories about going to Des Moines in the late 50's, early 60's to see one of his amphetamine-fueled shows at the old KSO theatre. I've got the man imprinted in my psyche, and it feels pretty good. Johnny's always got a place in my CD collection, right alongside U2, the HooDoo Gurus, Robert Cray, and Derek & the Dominos.

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at November 21, 2005 03:07 PM (ywZa8)

2 OK, if you want to focus on the "wannabes" being annoying, then I'm OK with that - but let's be clear: anything that's worth anything at all is going to have an infestation of poseurs at sometime or another. Johnny's five-disc anthology might be currently marketed with an eye towards profits, but his collaboration with the guys from Def American dates to the mid-90's. I purchased all four of his "American Recordings" discs (and The Lovely Janis got his anthology for me as a birthday present) before his death, and I'm very pleased with the product. There is a lot of stuff that makes you say "W.T.F.?" when you first hear the songs (covers of Neal Diamond's "Solitary Man", Soundgarden's "Rusty Cage", and even NIN's "Hurt"), but Johnny manages to make the songs his own using his unique style. Even the rehashes of his own songs have a twist or two ("Give My Love To Rose" from the American Recordings 4 disc is a good example) that gives a new perspective on an old song. And there's no disputing the fact that when Johnny's on, he's DEAD FREAKIN' ON. His cover of Bob Marley's "Redemption Song" with the late Joe Strummer of the Clash on the 5-disc set was fantastic, and he's done good work with Nick Cave ("Cindy" from the 5-disc set, and the old Hank Williams tune "I'm So Lonesome I Could Cry" from American 4), along with a cover of Cave's "The Mercy Seat". I think you need to sit down with a tall cuppa joe, or a cold bottle of Shiner and listen to a little Johnny. It'll do you a world of good. Please don't think of this as a smackdown; you've got as much of a right to disregard Johnny's music as you do to sprinkle periwinkle paint chips on your banana split - but I hate to see a woman I consider to be a leading arbiter of Sensible Good Taste be wrong about an American legend like The Man in Black. Now, please don't make me go photoshop a picture of Johnny Cash with a Llama head sticking up from the collar of his black suit. No, I'm serious, please don't make me do it......my photoshop skills are, like, nonexistent.

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at November 21, 2005 06:46 PM (6krEN)

3 My mum was a huge Johnny Cash fan. I can quote"'Johnny Cash in the Holy Land", I saw him in concert when I was 7. She had his stuff on LP and 8 Track. I have to admit, I like him a lot more than Elvis (another love of my mum's).

Posted by: Ith at November 21, 2005 10:35 PM (/Ph/n)

4 I hate country music, but...Johnny Cash is most definitely cool. He transcended country. He was awesome, funny, romantic, a rebel and a patriot. I heart Johnny Cash.

Posted by: Paula at November 21, 2005 11:04 PM (gOF1b)

5 I spent the better part of the 80's nominating Johnny Cash for Best Metal Artist each and every year in the annual Playboy Music Polls (but maybe that's just me...)

Posted by: LDH at November 22, 2005 10:29 AM (bqPDz)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

So, we really didn't do much over the weekend. We watched a few movies, both of which could have been better. I made a pot of chili on Saturday night---turned out wonderfully, thanks for asking---and on Sunday afternoon, the husband decided he had a boatload of paperwork to do (he'd been avoiding it) so I decided to go down to Barnes and Noble and see what I could do about blowing the ill gotten gains a/k/a gift cards I'd received for my birthday.

Of course, given my luck, this turned out to be a bad decision.

Now, undoubtedly you're wondering why this was a bad decision. You're thinking that perhaps with the upcoming Christmas shopping season the place was overloaded with holiday shoppers or that the sales staff wasn't being friendly enough, or that perhaps there had been some obnoxious fellow customer who'd ruined the experience for me. In reply, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, I would have to tell you that it was a combination of things that made this an unpleasant shopping experience.

Those and the fact that Jimmy Effin' Carter had decided to have a book signing in that particular Barnes and Noble.

Of all the book stores, in all the world, he had to walk into mine! The bastard!

You see, ever since we descended into Entrepreneurial Hell (TM), I don't get to go and spend money at the bookstore very often. And I miss that. Wandering around a bookstore for hours on end is one of my favorite things to do in this world. I love it. I get a thrill around books. You can walk me into a library and for a split second I'll stand there and let chills run up my spine. There is so much possibility when it comes to entering a book house. It doesn't matter whether it's a bookstore or a library or a friend's house where they have shelf after shelf loaded with books, all of these places signal possibilities---and people who like possibilities--- to me. You have no idea what you could find in those books. You have no idea how you could be enlightened by those books, or, when it comes to a home library, how you could be enlightened by the people who own those books. And that enlightenment creates a sort of awe and wonder in me.

In other words, I treat books the way some people treat the rainforest: there's probably a cure for cancer in there, somewhere, we just haven't stumbled upon it yet.

So, you'll perhaps understand that I enjoy shopping for books. The experience for me is akin to fine dining, or enjoying a particularly nice glass of single malt scotch with a cigar. There pleasure derived from in the act itself and there is also pleasure derived simply because you've done it right. It's one of the finer things in life for me. And, while it's horribly selfish of me to admit this, I just don't get the thrill of it all when budgetary constraints limit me. I know that sounds horrible, but would you go to a five-star restaurant if you were only able to pay for a breadstick? What's the point in that? So, when I'm broke I stay away from the bookstore and stick to the biblioteca. It's a system that works for me and that I'm accustomed to---except when I actually have money to spend, which is when I gear up for a trip to the bookstore, like I did yesterday. My birthday was two weeks ago. I've been holding on to the gift cards and have been waiting for a good moment to go and use them. I was savoring the anticipation of it all. And yesterday turned out to be that moment.

Until I actually got there...

...wherein I walked into the store and was accosted by two eager beaver Barnes and Noble employees, puffed up with their own self-importance, who asked, breathlessly, if I was there for President Carter's book signing. When I said, no, they sloughed me off like I was the dead skin on their loofah, and moved on, breathlessly excited, to the next person who'd walked through the door...who was, indeed, there for President Carter's book signing. As I stood there, taking off my gloves and hat, I, being the Gladys Cravitz that I am, listened to the schpiel. They were to go downstairs and someone would direct them to the end of the line. They were given a wristband the color of a yellow highlighter and were informed that there were no guarantees that President Carter would actually sign their books, it all depended on "how much he felt he up to doing." The very earnest lady on the receiving end of all this breathlessly relayed information, who looked like nothing so much as a Mrs. Potato Head in jersey knit and Clarks' clogs, nodded earnestly and waddled to the escalators, her copy of "Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis," clutched tightly to her expanded universe-like bosom.

Have I mentioned this was at a little after two p.m.? Have I also mentioned that King Bubba the First wasn't expected until six p.m.? And that there were already forty some odd people in line by the time I got there?

Now, I'm not going to deny the moonbats a chance to see their bunny-rabbit fearing leader. I don't really care about that. What I do care about, however, is that the entire freakin' store was given over to this momentous occasion. To the exclusion of all else. The entire fiction section was littered with people who were lined up within the rows. If you tried to go and, God Help You, look for a book in that section you were shot nasty looks and, in one memorable exchange, accused of cutting in line. (Sha. As if!) Another section, upstairs, was entirely roped off as well. It looked to me as if they were preparing it for an extended queue but didn't want anyone in there, at all, until the line needed to be managed. As I passed that section, a book on one of the verboten shelves caught my eye. I wanted to look at it, but considering there were Cake Eater City cops and dogs from the Hennepin County Canine Unit posted nearby, I decided not to risk it. I asked a passing clerk if she would help me, and at which point said sales clerk had to forcibly restrain herself from rolling her eyes and said in an exasperated tone, "If you want something from there, why don't you come back tomorrow? We're a bit busy today," before storming off without extending an apology.

There is one rule of doing business that everyone should be aware of. And if you're not, you're probably bankrupt and you deserve to be so. Are you waiting with bated breath for me to tell you what this rule is, my devoted Cake Eater Readers? I'm sure you are, so I won't keep you in suspense any longer: NEVER MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR CUSTOMERS TO GIVE YOU THEIR MONEY. While I would generally refer this rule when receiving slow service at a cash register---particularly with stores who only take certain kinds of credit cards, and who sneer at cash, etc.---the rule nonetheless can be boiled down to simply having merchandise you would like to sell. You do everything you can to facilitate sales, because, if you don't facilitate sales, ahem, you will be out of business.

Now, it may not be common knowledge, but book stores have events like these to drive traffic into their stores. These CRAZY managers are working under the utterly mad assumption that, hello!, the more people you have in the store, the greater the chances are you will sell stuff. Bring in a celebrity or two or maybe an ex-President of the United States of America and maybe, just maybe, you'll get an extra few hundred people to show up to purchase wares you just happen to sell, the lure of rubbing elbows with famous people a money-making charm like no other. So, while you'll sell more than a few copies of said famous person's book, you'll also sell a lot of magazines, newspapers, drinks and food from the in-store Starbucks, and especially important this time of year, Christmas presents---I'm sure you, my bright Cake Eater readers, can see that it would be very, very stupid to tell someone they should come back tomorrow instead of helping them today. When they're there, right there and then, with a gift card burning a hole in their pocket.

At that point, I took the one book I had in my hands, went to the cash register and checked out. I was asked if I had a discount card, and then when I said, no, I was asked if I wanted to purchase one. I said, no, again (and, honestly, people if you bought one of those you're, well, you're not a rocket scientist,are you? It's not really a discount if you're paying for it, is it? Like, duh.) and then she handed me my card and my bag and asked loudly if she could help the next customer in line. What did she miss, I ask you, my eager beaver, dying-to-learn-the-basics-of-customer-service Cake Eater Readers? That's right. You, like every five-year-old who's been taken down to DEFCON 1 on a manners alert exercise, caught that she didn't say thank you.

Way to go, Barnes and Noble at the Galleria. You should be really proud of your employees!

Posted by: Kathy at 01:46 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1609 words, total size 9 kb.

Just in case I haven't beaten the Which-Darcy-Is-the Best horse enough, I've been meaning to point you to this bit from Mil Millington's very funny, but sadly no longer updated Things My Girlfriend and I Have Argued About page. To explain, Mil has a girlfriend, Margaret, and they fight quite a bit. About odd stuff. Just go and read the page to get a feeling for their relationship.

Without further ado...

Did you see that re-showing of Pride and Prejudice that was on TV the other week? No, of course you didn't; you're all Americans. What the hell am I thinking? Right, so, there's this old, but very good, adaptation of Pride and Prejudice that the BBC did ages ago and, here in Britain, they recently repeated it. Though, perhaps you have all seen it anyway, eh? Because, if anything manages to lure you briefly away from a reading a good book, then that thing is sure to be PBS, isn't it? Oh, mercy - my poor ribs.

Anyway, I was watching it with Margret, and this is the situation: she is reclining on the sofa, on the floor by her side is a cup of tea which I have made for her and brought in, she's resting her legs by placing them across me, and I am by turns gently stroking them and massaging her feet. On the TV, Colin Firth -- playing Mr Darcy -- glances up slightly in response to something Elizabeth Bennet has said. Margret pouts mournfully and says to me, 'Why can't you be romantic like that?'

Let me go over the salient points of that again.

Me:

* Tea.
* Reclining Assistance.
* Legs - Support of.
* Legs - Stroking of.
* Feet - Sensual Palpation.

Colin Sodding Firth:

* Glances up slightly.

What about that, then, eh? How much earth moving machinery would it take to level that bleeding playing field, do we think?

Tons, Mil.

Sorry. But life's just not fair, is it?

Posted by: Kathy at 03:00 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 346 words, total size 2 kb.

AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Oh, for the love of all that is good and holy, is NOTHING sacred? As if it wasn't bad enough that they're completely screwing with the book, they have to have a separate ending, tailor-made for what they presume the American market wants?

Excuse me, but I'm going to collapse now. The vapors have descended.

{Insert "thud" sound here}

Posted by: Kathy at 02:02 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

What's the best food to have leftover?

I believe it would be my recipie for chicken pot pie, which, while damn tasty when eaten for dinner, is truly better the next day for lunch.

The husband, I believe, would be an enthusiastic advocate for cold pizza.

Discuss.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:56 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.

Everyone's favorite Commie pinko is having a Best Blog Post contest and a certain post which I had absolutely nothing to do with is nominated.

I'm not telling you which post to vote for, per se, but I think we all know what happens when people cross me. So, if you know what's good for you...

Posted by: Kathy at 12:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.

The Cake Eater Comment Policy can be found here.

Ignore it at your peril.

Posted by: Kathy at 09:32 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.

I think we can all agree meeting with Teddy Kennedy can be a traumatizing experience.

Poor Judge Alito.

Forget buying a new robe. The poor man's going to need money for therapy.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

Sweet!

You scored as Susie. You are Susie. Simple and sweet, you can insult Calvin in just the right way. You get perfect grades and help Calvin fail his tests. Because of you, the club G.R.O.S.S. started up. Isn't it great that you make a difference in the world? Susie 86% Mrs. Wormwood 79% Hobbes 61% Mom and Dad 54% Calvin 46% What Calvin & Hobbes character are you? created with QuizFarm.com

Hat Tip: You know Who

Posted by: Kathy at 05:23 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm having sinus problems and my head feels completely off-balance, like I'm a bobblehead doll.

It's just so weird.

UPDATE: Yeah, I know this is probably one of the lamest posts you've ever had the opportunity to read. I'm sorry I wasted your time with it, but really you should learn that this blog isn't about you, per se, but is about me, and the shit that is important and interesting to me. You're just along for the ride, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, and it's a free freakin' ride, too, so you really don't have all that much room to bitch, do you? Hmmmm?

UPDATE DEUX: My, my, my aren't I passive-agressive today?

UPDATE TROIS: I don't really have anything to add. I just figured it would be cool to update one more time to freak out the people who are reading this thing via RSS.

Ain't I a stinker?

Posted by: Kathy at 02:27 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

1 You're definitely an original

Posted by: Ith at November 17, 2005 05:52 PM (Fv0oe)

2 yeah, an original psycho, but definitely original

Posted by: Kathy at November 18, 2005 12:07 AM (wN32K)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Because none is needed:

LAS VEGAS - Former "Hollywood Madam" Heidi Fleiss says she's bound for a brothel in the southern Nevada desert that she wants to help remake into a resort featuring male prostitutes serving female customers.

"I am moving to Crystal," Fleiss said Wednesday of a desert crossroads 20 miles north of Pahrump and about 80 miles outside Las Vegas. It features two bordellos and little else.

"I am opening up a stud farm," Fleiss declared from her Hollywood home overlooking the Sunset Strip. "I am going to have the sexiest men on earth. Women are going to love it."{...}

Posted by: Kathy at 02:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.

Yet another Thursday has rolled around, hence we have yet another riveting episode of As The Divas Turn, which is being sponsored today by Proctor and Gamble. Well, no, not really, but I wish it was. I could use a bit of that household product payola---I think everyone could, in fact. Ah, but, as usual, I digress...

Our topic today: What women/men say and what they really mean and why do men grunt instead of speaking?

Now, I don't know who threw in the "Why do men grunt when speaking" but that sounds like more like someone's beef with their significant other than an actual topic so I will address that one first because it sounds like someone needs my help demystifying a few things.

And we all know I'm about demystifying things for my devoted Cake Eater Readers.

Ahem.

Why do men grunt when speaking? Well, it's because they can. They can get away with making sounds like that, so they do it. Women, being the dainty little things that we are, can't get away with making sounds like that. It would be considered impolite if a woman made a sound like that, grunting going into the "not very ladylike" catgory of incorrect female behavior, which, let's face it, is the largest category of incorrect female behavior---by a long chalk. It's pretty simple.

Anyway, as far as the difference between what people say and what they mean, well, what exactly is new there, eh, kids? People---man or woman---always say one thing and mean another. That's just the way the world works.

However, it's how you a. suss out the difference between what's said and what's meant and b.handle the difference that matters. You could be a moonbat about it: you could whine on about lies, lies, more lies, the inequity of the lies, that the lies are loud and are told by bigger liars with the ever evil lying megaphone of the conspiracy to kill puppies for profit, ad nauseam, ad infinitum. In other words whining about the lying liars and the liars who love them being your only solution to the problem. Oh, and you'd light the occasional candle and sing "Give Peace a Chance" with Mother Sheehan every now and again, but really, all you care about is bitching about the lying. Or you could be like a Marine: you could recognize the problem, and then you could adapt and improvise to overcome the problem.

As the philosopher John McClane once said: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Stop being a part of the problem! So it shouldn't take a great leap of the imagination, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, to guess which option I would recommend you take in divining the truth of your significant other's words.

First, you must in fact realize that there will sometimes, indeed, be a disconnect between what someone says and what they mean. As pointed out above, that's just the way the world works. Second, you must realize that, generally speaking, there's no harm meant in the disconnect. In fact, I would venture a guess and say that when you spot a disconnect, it's that there is enough vulnerability going around to choke a horse. Case in point: when I ask the husband "Do I look fat in this?" He will correctly divine that, yes indeedy, I'm feeling a wee bit sensitive about my body at that point in time, and will---correctly, in my humble opinion---dodge like a mo'fo. He knows that lying isn't an option. That if he says, "no, darling, your ass is as small as a grain of rice," I'll know he's lying. He also knows that telling the truth isn't an option here, either. Because if my ass is, indeed, reminiscent of the rear end of a 1950's Buick, I don't want to hear about it---the brutal truth not always being the best option if you'd like to keep your head attached to your body. The husband, instead of lying or telling the truth, will dodge with a convenient, "You know there's no right answer to that question, so why do you bother asking?" See, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, is he not clever? He has, in one fell swoop, thrown that live grenade back to me, and I can guaran-frickin'-tee you that he's hoping and praying I'm going to stick the pin back in, in essence, leaving it at that. He has, indeed, adapted, improvised and overcome. At this stage of the game, he would be well within his rights to say, "Hoo-ah," in a manner reminiscent of Clint Eastwood, and shove a cigar in his mouth to celebrate the fact he's still alive.

But enough of my bloviating, go forth and read what the Sadie, Silk and Phoenix have written on the topic. Also make sure to check out one of our newest Divaesques, Miss Vile, yet another Kiwi, whom we're very glad to have with us on this adventure.

For the testosterone laden perspective, go and read StiggyPUFFY (Wait a minute. You've changed your blogging persona---again? What's this "Cloud" shit? Sorry, darling, but I'm not squeezing the Charmin this time round. It's getting confusing, so I'm going back to calling you PUFFY. Because, damnit, that's the one you started off with and it's the easiest. Even if you are no longer the world's first highly evolved blogging fish, I still like it.), Phin, The Naked Villains and Jamesyboy. Our guest XY'er this week is That 1 Guy from Drunken Wisdom.

Posted by: Kathy at 01:04 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 925 words, total size 6 kb.

1 Heheh... Clostiguffy Derringer had me all messed up at first, too! Your hubby is a very perceptive, very self preserving kind of guy!

Posted by: That 1 Guy at November 17, 2005 02:11 PM (AkcbV)

2 It is only by the grace of the highly evolved and generally rational woman that is Kathy the Cake Eater, My Bride, that I can point out the reality of the conundrum of the large ass once posited and survive. Many men and women aren't so fortunate and have as spouses individuals as likely to explode as the random emotional munitions they toss about. Who the hell talks like that? Did I write that? Anyway: "As the philosopher John McClane once said" L M A O !!! That was funny.

Posted by: MRN aka "The Husband" at November 17, 2005 05:10 PM (wN32K)

3 Comedian Rob Becker said (something like) studies show that the average woman speaks 5,000 words a day, while the average man speaks only 2,500. And that's the reason men grunt - we're out of words. I had a post last month that listed some powerful 3-word sentence men can use with their significant others without jeopardizing their quota. Here's the link, if I may: http://thenightwriterblog.powerblogs.com/posts/1129172057.shtml An update to that post has a link to a great piece by I Love Jet Noise that ties in nicely with this topic as well.

Posted by: Night Writer at November 17, 2005 11:59 PM (3PGCi)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

One might well ask People what took it so damn long to come to the correct conclusion.

I've said it before but that man is so freakin' hot that bricks melt when he walks on them.

{insert fanning of self here}

Posted by: Kathy at 11:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.

Particularly when it comes to the dubious information regarding secondhand smoke and the need for smoking bans. Well, kids, I hate to tell you this, but year-on-year sales numbers don't lie.

Keegan's Pub opened three and one-half years ago in the revitalized Old St. Anthony area of Minneapolis. For three years we met our financial projections before every level of government stepped in to put an end to it.

The Federal government forced the State to give us .08

The State government forced us to give a pay increase to our bartenders and servers, our highest paid employees.

Hennepin County gave us the smoking ban.

Minneapolis gave us a smoking ban and more costly and restrictive parking for our customers.

Now Hennepin County can recognize the economic hardship it has caused and act on it. Please do so!

For the first three months of 2005, our sales were up 8% over the same months in 2004. For the most recent three months our sales are down 7.5% compared to the same months in 2004. That is a swing of 15.5%. Although our percentage decrease is smaller than some, it represents the difference between profit and loss. We have not had a profitable month since April, and the trend is downward. October 2005 was 17% down from October 2004. Cold weather will only accelerate the trend as smokers will be less willing to smoke outside. Hence, they will go to locations where they can smoke inside.

{...}One final thought: The argument that non smokers will flock to our restaurants now that we are non smoking is totally bogus. Where are they?{...}

Just in case you're not familiar with the restaurant/bar biz, they make most of their money on liquor sales. The typical profit margin for liquor is, generally speaking, through the roof. That bottle of wine you purchased at the liquor store for $25.00? Well, the restaurant purchased the same bottle wholesale for $8.00---they'll charge $9.00 a glass and will get three and a half glasses out of that bottle. They made $23.50 in profit. One would hope that you're asking yourself, "where's the catch?" Well, here it is: liquor profits pretty much float everything else that's sold in a restaurant or a bar. Food sales aren't, generally speaking, all that profitable. The bottom line is quite clear: if you want a profitable restaurant, you want people to drink. It's pretty damn simple. That three hundred percent markup on booze has to pay the rest of the costs. Like labor. Someone has to pour that wine, after all. The industry average for labor is right around forty percent, and it is, generally speaking, the largest cost. Forty percent of that $23.50 is $9.40, which leaves you $14.10 for things like glassware, tables and chairs, food and liquor costs, rent, and of course, taxes. and there's not going to be that much left over, after that's all said and done. This, of course, is grossly simplified and it's just late enough that I'm not sure I'm doing the math properly, but I'm sure you get where I'm going with all of this.

This is why most bars and restaurants fail within the first year of operation. The margins are razor thin. And when sales of your most profitable item are down because the smokers, the people who buy that very profitable item, are going elsewhere, you'd better realize the jig is going to be up very very soon. 17%, kids. SEVENTEEN FREAKIN' PERCENT. That's huge. If I was still in the restaurant biz and I was the one who was facing those year-to year numbers, I'd be having a heartattack right about now.

Just go ahead and try and tell me the smoking ban isn't hurting bars and restaurants.

St. Anthony Main---where Keegan's is located---when I first moved to Cities, was a dump. The husband and I were down in that neck of the woods recently, and we commented that the only thing that used to be in that neighborhood, besides crack houses, was Surdyks. People have worked very hard and it is now a very nice, interesting part of the downtown Minneapolis scene. I would hate to see all of that progress just die because of the smoking ban.

If you're inclined to act, email the Hennepin County Board of Commisioners at
board.clerk@co.hennepin.mn.us

Posted by: Kathy at 11:27 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 738 words, total size 4 kb.

Oh, me dear lads....

I suppose, since I'm one of the oldest and dearest Llama blogging pals, that it's time for me to tell you that, ahem, there's no way in hell either one of you is going to hit that.

Give up la poltergeist, boys. It's not going to happen.

Posted by: Kathy at 03:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.

In the great state of Minnesota, if you're charged with your second DWI within ten years, the DOT will impound your regular license plates and will issue you new plates. These plates are called "special registration plates" and identify you to all and sundry as someone whose car was involved in an alcohol-related offense. These plates all start with a "W" and, as such, are called "Whisky Plates." If you have these plates on your car, the police do not need probable cause to pull you over; the fact that you have the plates on your car is enough cause in itself, or so the Legislature would have you believe.

The husband and I have long wondered why the ACLU hasn't taken this one to court. After all these plates are a blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against search and siezure without probable cause. One would think that since this is a pretty important violation of the Constitution, and, furthermore that since the ACLU is all about defending the Constitutional rights of the accused, if you'd put the two together, you'd have found a case worth fighting for. Unfortunately, this hasn't been the case. It's not popular to defend drunk drivers, and no one, but no one---including the ACLU---wants to get on the bad side of MADD, so they haven't touched these types of laws with a ten-foot pole.

Until Now. Why, you ask, are they getting involved now? Well, because the plates the great State of Florida would like to stick on drunk drivers are pink.

A Florida state senator wants to require convicted drunken drivers to have license plates that start with "DUI."

The proposed law would also require bright pink license plates on vehicles driven by people with restricted driving privileges due to convictions for driving under the influence.

"Maybe it will embarrass people and keep them from drinking and driving," State Sen. Mike Fasano said. "Maybe they'll think twice."

The bill also says police "may stop any vehicle that bears a DUI plate without probable cause to check the driver."

Ohio and Michigan have similar laws in place. Other states have debated the issue, but failed to pass it due to privacy reasons.

"Pink plates would hold out individuals for punishment as well as ridicule. We are very opposed to it," said Larry Spalding, legislative counsel for the
American Civil Liberties Union in Florida.{...}

So, it's not really about the Fourth Amendment violations for the ACLU. Civil rights have very little to do with it. It's about the fact that the proposed plates would be pink and would "hold out individuals for punishment as well as ridicule." That's a problem worthy of the ACLU's attention.

Yet again, it's no surprise why everyone and their mother thinks they're a worthless organization.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:35 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 474 words, total size 3 kb.

What, exactly, is a 'cyclone ranger' and why would everyone want to avoid you if you were one?

*bonus points to whomever can tell me what inspired this question

Posted by: Kathy at 01:53 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Why, because then I would be turning Japanese, I really THINK SO. (I posted on my blog about it -- before I could comment. Talk about persistent, hey?) Heh.

Posted by: Margi at November 16, 2005 04:11 PM (nwEQH)

2 actually, the correct version is "Psyched Lone Ranger" and no, I have no idea what THAT means, either.

Posted by: RHJunior at November 17, 2005 04:15 AM (KPnkN)

3 "Cyclone Ranger" LMAO. This might have been a few years before your time, Kathy, but there used to be a student who would bring a cape & mask to ISU basketball games and run laps around the balcony walkway of Hilton Coliseum during the second half. The crowd would go nuts cheering for him, and usually a "wave" would form and follow him around Hilton. I'm thinking it was in '87 or '88, and I'm not sure if he was still doing it when you came to ISU, but he DID refer to himself as the "Cyclone Ranger".

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at November 17, 2005 09:53 AM (ywZa8)

4 Yeah, that was before my time I didn't start school until '89. Totally sounds like something someone at ISU would do. God, that guy sounds like he needed to get laid.

Posted by: Kathy at November 17, 2005 09:58 AM (wN32K)

5 I've never been all that concerned about the meaning of "cyclone ranger" meself (of course, I also like the poetry of Wallace Stevens, so maybe it's just me...)

Posted by: LDH at November 17, 2005 01:54 PM (bqPDz)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

It keeps going on and on and on and on.

I don't think Sony BMG had any idea what sort of Pandora's box they were opening up when they allowed that rootkit onto their CD's. First4Internet, the company that promoted and sold the rootkit idea to Sony BMG as the solution to their DRM problems, is not going to exist soon because Sony's getting sued left and right, so it only makes sense that Sony BMG would lay off the liability on them. This isn't going away anytime soon.

Which leads one to wonder what sort of lesson Sony BMG and other record labels will pull from this misadventure. Will they think that it was all right to do insert malware onto people's computers, but that they just need to be stealthier about it next time around? Or will they take the freakin' hint already and shy away from that sort of thing in the future? One would think it would be the latter, but where Digital Rights Management is concerned, and there's loads of money lying about to be spent on lawyers and lobbyists, one can't be too sure about anything.

This is the first battle in the DRM war for as long as I can remember that the record companies have lost. That they've been willing to retreat on because it became patently obvious that their chosen method of DRM was bad for business. One wonders when they will realize that DRM in itself is bad for business?

{...}I'm all for the capitalist system. But I'm also very much a strict constitutionalist and for individual liberties. DRM systems are not a business model, they're an abuse of the legal system: a means to extract fees and control above and beyond the original intention of a simple business transaction.{...}

For me, DRM falls into the same category as the Kelo decision. Personal property rights are an absolutely crucial ingredient to the liberty and prosperity that Americans enjoy. My opinion of the Kelo decision is that it is possibly the most damaging legal ruling in the history of the United States. The entire mortgage industry, which has enabled more people in America to own their homes than in any other country, and which for the past 30-50 years has been the chief enabler driving the economy is all based upon the idea that the property of an individual has value. If the government can come in and expand the definition of Eminent Domain seemingly arbitrarily, that property will cease to have the same value it has in the past. This has the potential to undermine the economy in a way that oil shortages and natural disasters never can. This erodes the trust and covenent between the individual in a democracy and the government elected to represent that individual.

That may look like it has nothing to do with DRM, but to my mind its the same thing on a different scale. If I buy a piece of music, does Sony and it's lawyers get to tell me what I can do with that music? If so, then what did I just pay for? Can Sony and its lawyers change the definition of what I can do with that music after the purchase? If so, then they can arbitrarily affect the value of the thing that I supposedly own without compensating me for the change in value. This is truly dangerous.{...}

Posted by: Kathy at 12:27 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 611 words, total size 4 kb.

The only UN jerk-off shitcanned for participating in the Oil-For-Food Scandal has been reinstated by the UN.

Joseph Stephanides was fired on May 31 after a U.N.-appointed inquiry led by former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker accused him of improperly steering an oil-for-food contract to a British firm.

The mid-level aide maintained he was acting on behalf of unnamed superiors in advising Lloyd's Register Inspection Ltd. to lower an open bid to win a contract.

A joint staff-management disciplinary panel reviewing his dismissal had recommended he be reinstated and given a written apology and two years' pay in damages.

Based on the review, Secretary-General Kofi Annan decided to rescind the dismissal and effectively restore four months of pay to Stephanides, who had been scheduled to retire in September.

But Annan rejected an apology and damages. "The secretary-general still maintains his position that Mr. Stephanides has violated the procurement rules," a U.N. official said.

{...}Annan, himself under attack for mismanagement of the Iraq oil-for-food program, dismissed Stephanides after Volcker's February 3 report. It accused him of colluding with Britain's then-U.N. ambassador, John Weston, by suggesting Lloyd's Register Inspection Ltd. would win a $4.5 million contract by lowering its bid.

While French firm Bureau Veritas was the low bidder, U.N. officials decided they could not select a French firm because they had recently given another contract to a French bank and hired a Frenchman as a U.N. oil overseer for the program, Volcker's report said.

Christopher Burnham, the U.N. undersecretary-general for management, said in a letter to Stephanides that he violated a U.N. requirement of impartiality by "advising the British Mission how much lower the Lloyd's bid needed to be."{...}

Hmmm. Now, there's something I'm finding curious in all of this: where's Stephanides' payola? How much did he get from Lloyd's---and where did he put it? Everyone else in this deal made some coin: there's no mention in the article of Stephanides' having received any cash. Never mind that Kojo Annan received $200K from a Swiss firm for steering Oil for Food business their way and his father hasn't been so much as slapped on the hand for it; never mind that Benon Sevon made some cash with oil payments, and he was allowed to resign; it's simply interesting to me that they would fire the one guy who didn't receive any cash for his efforts.

That really doesn't make much sense, does it?

Unless he's the patsy. Then it makes a whole lot of sense.

Hmmph. I don't know.

But I do know that I love that I just had the opportunity to use the word "patsy." I'm, like, all Oliver Stone-ish now with the conspiracy theory.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:41 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 449 words, total size 3 kb.