May 11, 2005
{...}Yet Columbia remains a holdout, not least because of Mr. Bollinger's dismal leadership. It certainly didn't have to be this way. The 1994 Solomon Amendment forbids universities that exclude ROTC from their campuses from receiving Pentagon funding--reason enough, we would think, for a university president to bring his school into compliance with the law. In April 2003, Columbia held a student referendum on ROTC. Two-thirds voted to bring it back. This led the university senate to appoint a 10-member panel to examine the subject; it split down the middle on the question of readmitting ROTC "as soon as is practicable."{...}
See, this is where the Opinon Journal missed a big opportunity to take a big, fat whack at Columbia's politically correct, lefty ponfitications.
ROTC, along with being an armed forces training/recruitment device, is also a huge scholarship program. You see, if you join up with the Reserve Officer's Training Corps, you get money to pay for school, and while you are required to serve for a specified period of time after you graduate, it's no different than the Americorps program, which I don't believe Columbia has an issue with.
Columbia, with its hoity-toity attitude is depriving its students of the potential of financial aid. You know, getting the government to pay for education, which is something I believe is something the lefty professors and adminstrators would advocate. This policy, one could also suppose if one were so inclined, discriminates against those who perhaps don't qualify for a large financial aid package, who haven't received scholarships ad infinitum, and need yet another way to pay for school without taking out a small fortune in student loans.
How much is tuition at Columbia again?
Too bad the Opinion Journal missed that one.
Posted by: Kathy at
01:06 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 313 words, total size 2 kb.
@#$#!!@#@ MADD!
I hate OMVI laws. For the uninitiated, OMVI means "Operating a Moving Vehicle While Intoxicated." That doesn't necessarily exclude a car or a motorcycle, but could also include riding mowers, bicycles, and yes, horses. A horse, it seems, is a "moving vehicle." Don't tell the horse; he'll probably be insulted.
I would really like to know how many people were killed in the past five years by a drunk lawn mower driver. Same with drunk cyclists. Do we really need to protect the citizenry of this country from these people? Is there such a dire need for protection from these people that the police really need to be arresting drunken equestrians? I don't think so. I think this is about money and the raising thereof for shiny new cop cars and cop shops. And God only knows anyone charged with an intoxication offense of any kind gets milked for all they're worth.
It's just like speeding tickets; it's easy money, baby. Why the heck not charge someone?
Nanny state, we greet thee.
Posted by: Kathy at
12:30 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.
May 10, 2005
Posted by: Kathy at
11:50 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 6 words, total size 1 kb.
Questions, darling, questions. I need questions for Divas Sez on Friday.
Don't be mediocre, darlings. That simply wouldn't do.
/Edna voice
{Clicket on baby-got-back-girl over on the right sidebar to receive an email prompt}
Posted by: Kathy at
03:29 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.
Of course you are, being the good little geeks that you invariably are.
Far be it from me to keep you in suspense...so away we go.
- What Rebel snowspeeder pilot had the callsign Rogue Two?
- Who reactivated the hyperdrive on the Falcon during its escape from Cloud City?
- What was Han Solo's first line in The Empire Strikes Back?
- What, according to Han, was the destination of the stolen Imperial shuttle?
- What creature is the typical meal for a wampa?
- Who went full-throttle during his Death Star trench run to keep TIE fighters at bay?
Go to it. As always, either throw your answers in the comments section or send a secret transmission to the Evil Cake Eater Empire's mailbox.
Posted by: Kathy at
01:51 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.
Congratulations to you both!
You can find the answers after the jump. more...
Posted by: Kathy at
01:42 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 100 words, total size 1 kb.
Ahhhhhh. Yeah, I know. everyone's favorite subject. Well, at least it is for some of the men in the audience. For the women? Well, that's another story entirely. In my experience, women, on the whole, do not like strip clubs. Nor, for the most part, do they like strippers---unless they happen to be one. Strippers are seen as a threat to a happy home. This is why men, wisely enough, tend not to advertise when they go to a club. When was the last time any man told his wife, "Yeah, honey, I'll be at such and such bar for a time, then we're planning on going over to the King of Diamonds after that. I don't know when I'll get home. But I'm going to need cash, and I'm going to need it in small denominations, so can you get me $100 in five dollar bills when you go to the bank?"
Yeah, like that's going to go over well.
If they divulge that information at all it's after the fact and not before. I know many a woman who simply does not want to know, so it's a "don't ask, don't tell" situation. One of the husband's friends, however, has a wife who would hit the roof if she found out where he'd been, so he has, on occasion, asked lil' ol' me to cover for him, should his wife call and wonder where he is. Fortunately, she's never called, so I've never had to cover for him.
I, on the other hand, have absolutely no illusions about the husband's activities. He's been. I know he's been. He knows I know because he's told me. I know that, sometime in the future, he'll go again. I see no reason to disillusion myself in regards to this, or demand that he not go: I wouldn't want to put him in a position where he has to lie to me, and I must say that I don't understand women who don't get this. Men are going to go to strip clubs. This is a fact of life: why not just deal with the facts as they are rather than trying to bend them to your particular whims? While you may think that your man's visits to a club means something about your relationship, you should probably know that, unless your man is going on a daily basis, those visits have absolutely nothing to do with your relationship. They do, however, have everything to do with looking at naked women.
Men go to look at naked ladies. They have reached the stage of their life when they have some brass in pocket, and they can pay to see a naked woman, rather than having to work for that particular payoff. I truly believe this activity is them trying to get in touch with the glories of sex and women as seen through the eyes of a teenager, when sex was new and any naked woman was gorgeous, even if she was, in reality, a hag. Nowadays, they just let their eyes wander in an unfocused sort of way to get back to that feeling. They just can't touch.
Now, I can understand how men can go to these places. No hassles there. What I don't understand is why women would want to go. And there are women who dig those places. If you're one of them, well, know this much: I don't get you. Those places are for men. They appeal to men. They smell like men. They are populated with men. This is their clubhouse. If you show up at one of these places, a muppet will pop up and will start singing "Which one of these things is not like the other?" Furthermore, I don't think men want you there. It ruins the illusion for them. How do I know this? Because I've been, and I was a less than enthusiastic visitor. If you want the rest of the story, take the jump.
And no, Mom, you're not allowed to take the jump.
For those of you who would like to skip the jump, you can go and read what the other Delicious Demystifying Divas have to say about this topic. Make sure to go over to Meanderings where one of our Red Hat divas, Michelle, has also thrown in her two cents. You can also go and read if Pete, Zonker, Puffy or Phin have confirmed or denied my suspicions.
UPDATE: Pammy also has chimed in. more...
Posted by: Kathy at
12:46 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1887 words, total size 11 kb.
Pete: thanks, sir. that's very kind.
DEATHS from cervical cancer could jump fourfold to a million a year by 2050, mainly in developing countries. This could be prevented by soon-to-be-approved vaccines against the virus that causes most cases of cervical cancer - but there are signs that opposition to the vaccines might lead to many preventable deaths.The trouble is that the human papilloma virus (HPV) is sexually transmitted. So to prevent infection, girls will have to be vaccinated before they become sexually active, which could be a problem in many countries.
In the US, for instance, religious groups are gearing up to oppose vaccination, despite a survey showing 80 per cent of parents favour vaccinating their daughters. "Abstinence is the best way to prevent HPV," says Bridget Maher of the Family Research Council, a leading Christian lobby group that has made much of the fact that, because it can spread by skin contact, condoms are not as effective against HPV as they are against other viruses such as HIV.
"Giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful, because they may see it as a licence to engage in premarital sex," Maher claims, though it is arguable how many young women have even heard of the virus.{...}
{empahsis mine}
Let's see if we can follow the logic the FRC is using here. HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. They believe sex before marriage is bad. Hence if you're vaccinated against HPV, you are, from there on in, going to be ruled by your hormones, because, obviously any lessons you've received over the course of a lifetime about abstaining from sex before marriage will fly right out of your head the minute the vaccine hits your bloodstream. It's apparently tricky that way. It gives women "a license to engage in premarital sex."
But Kath, you say, how could this affect other women?
Well, I'm glad you asked. Let's follow that one down the line, shall we?
What about married women? What does that mean about them if they get vaccinated against HPV? Hmmm. Could that mean they're going to go right out and cheat on their husbands? Why would they need it if they're in a committed, monogamous relationship? Hmmmm? Furthermore, I suspect these wicked married women are just giving their husbands a free pass to go out and get laid in the back of their local Perkins if they get vaccinated, because why would they need to protect themselves with the vaccine if it were otherwise?
What about rape victims? Does this mean that if a woman was vaccinated against HPV that they were asking for it? That this, like a woman asking for her rapist to use a condom, means she consented? Well, then, she wasn't really raped, was she?
I could go on, but I think you get the gist.
For an organization that promotes issues of faith, well, it sure would be nice if the FRC had some in women.
{Hat Tip: Andy}
Posted by: Kathy at
12:17 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 505 words, total size 3 kb.
May 09, 2005
Methinks Dementee might also feel differently when another pharmacist decides to hold his prescription hostage because not only is said pharmacist not morally obliged to fill Dementee's prescription, he's in a position where he could shove his morals down Dementee's throat---who may or may not agree with them. And we all realize what a tempting option that is, don't we kids? Mmmhmmmm. Good stuff there, the opportunity to proselytize from the back of a Walgreens! There's no power to be had at the back of a Walgreens, is there? Nope. None at all. After all, there's no state license required to dish out drugs...anyone can do it!
Perhaps, until then, Dementee should realize that this is a slippery slope he's advocating and perhaps, just perhaps, it requires a more nuanced answer than simply assuming that the pharmacist has the right to do whatever they damn well please. The Establishment Clause isn't going to shield a pharmacist from a lawsuit when someone dies because of their refusal to dish out drugs they might have problems with.
I suppose if Dementee's got a problem with all of that, perhaps he can go and fuck himself, no?
Posted by: Kathy at
04:37 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.
Heh.
As far as Arianna Huffington's new group blog is concerned, well...
I suppose it's going to be good to have a potential one-stop-shop for all your mockery needs, eh? I mean, come on. It's not everyday you get to link directly to the puffed-up pontifications of Mike Nichols, David Mamet and John Cusack.
Should be good fun, no?
UPDATE: OOOOOOOOH, OOOOOOH, MISTAH KOTTAH!
Check out the Terms of Service
{...}(a) Unless expressly permitted, you may not copy, reproduce, distribute, publish, enter into a database, display, perform, modify, create derivative works, transmit, or in any way exploit any part of this Service, except as permitted under the last sentence of this Section 4(a) and except that you may make one print copy that is limited to occasional articles of personal interest only. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing (but subject to the last sentence of this Section 4(a)), you may not distribute any part of this Service over any network, including, without limitation, a local area network, nor sell or offer it for sale. In addition, these files may not be used to construct any kind of database. Just as THP from time to time excerpts materials from other sources in order to support the various commentaries and writings contained herein, we respect the right of others to make "fair use" of the materials contained on THP; accordingly, you may from time to time excerpt and use materials set forth on this site, provided, that you must give the original author credit and such use must be for a non-commercial purpose only and not, for example, for re-sale.{...}
If the party of the first part decides to rob the party of the second part blind, well, the party of the second part is completely entitled to fuck the party of the first part up the ass with a particularly pointy broom handle.
Jesus, Mary and Joseph. This blog is a dream come true!
Posted by: Kathy at
02:06 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 340 words, total size 2 kb.
Jokes aside, mazeltov, congratulations, etc. to the both of you from the Cake Eater.
Posted by: Kathy at
12:49 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
{...}The Real ID Act, which was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday and likely will clear the Senate next week, would require most license applicants to show a photo ID, a birth certificate, proof of their Social Security number and a document showing their full name and address. All of the documents then would have to be checked against federal databases.{...}
I'm not concerned so much with added scrutiny in regards to granting driver's licenses. What concerns me---and many geeks---is the last sentence of that paragraph: "All of the documents then would have to be checked against federal databases." The problem here being that with this bit of language it will be much easier for a hacker to steal your identity should this be signed into law.
{...}The bill dictates that all states collect, at a minimum, personal information from citizens in order to obtain a driver's license, including name, date of birth, gender, driver's license or identification card number, digital photograph, address and signature.Whereas collection of this particular information is not new, the linkage of states' databases is. The bill specifies that states link what are at present discrete databases, creating, in effect, one nationwide database with personal information pertaining to all citizens. {...}
Right now, a hacker would have to attack the databases of all the DMV's in all fifty states to get the information that, should this bill pass the senate and be signed into law, would be available in one place. This would create one big ass bullseye instead of fifty bullseyes.
Data convergence is all well and good until the Federal Government gets its grubby paws on the data. Given that Lexis-Nexis had the information on 310,000 of its customers stolen recently, and the same happened to Time Warner employees, do you really think the Federal Government will be able to keep your data safe from hackers?
I don't.
Call or email your senator today. They're trying to slip this one in under the wire to please those who watch the Lou Dobbs Xenophobe Hour of Power by attaching it to an Appropriations Bill, with no debate or hearings allowed. This is what the focus on illegal immigration has wrought. Pat yourselves on the back, big boys. You should be proud of what you've accomplished! Way to put everyone in jeopardy! THANKS!
{Hat Tip: Mike at Techdirt}
Posted by: Kathy at
12:37 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 425 words, total size 3 kb.
You're probably scratching your head and wondering why this is important. Well, it's not really...but you should know that it means there are only TEN DAYS left until Episode III is released.
wOOt!
Anyway, we're halfway done here. Are you having fun yet, kids? I sincerely hope so. Here are your questions for today. There's a definite theme going on here.
- Who grabbed his blaster rifle for protection when he saw Sand People approaching?
- What spearlike weapons do Sand People wield?
- Who frightened away a group of Sand people?
- What planet are Sand People native to?
- What creatures do Sand People ride?
- What order do Sand People ride their mounts in?
Throw your answers in the comments or send them to the Cake Eater inbox.
Posted by: Kathy at
11:48 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.
The only problem is that it's Doug. Again.
Congratulations to him. To the rest of you, get with the program here and have some fun! You can only have said fun by answering the questions!
You can find the answers after the jump. more...
Posted by: Kathy at
11:42 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.
May 08, 2005
The part, however, that had me flipping my head in manner reminiscent of Gary Coleman and saying, What you talkin' about Willis? was this bit:
May 8, 1945 - a day to remember for Germans and their WWII opponents. There is a remarkable uneasiness among German elites how to commemorate this day: defeat for Germany or liberation from Nazi suppression?
May 8, 1945 as the day the Germans were liberated from Nazi suppression?
Ummm. No, I don't think so. You don't get to spin the defeat of Nazi Germany that way. You just don't get to do that. Nope.
While I do not doubt there were many Germans who did not belong to the National Socialist/Nazi Party and who weren't wild about what they stood for and what they ultimately did, there were plenty of Germans who were pretty darned happy they were in charge of the country. They were the majority, party membership notwithstanding. There were people who did disagree. I do not doubt this one iota. It was, however, this minority which most Germans claimed to be a part of when the war ended. These claims were taken with a knowing nod after the war, in an effort to get beyond it, but are we honestly to believe that the Germans of today have actually bought into that lie? So much so that these so-called German Elites of today were actually thinking of spinning the defeat of Germany in WWII into a liberation?
Again. No. I don't think so. They don't get to do that.
The average, ordinary German of today is no more responsible for the War and what occurred during it than I am responsible for my government's policy in regards to the Native American population. The sins of the father should not be visited upon the son, I believe is how the saying goes.
That does not, however, mean that the sons get to spin the actions of their fathers into something that is virtually unrecognizable from the truth of the matter in attempt to make it look better.
You just don't get to do that.
Posted by: Kathy at
11:08 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 358 words, total size 2 kb.
We'll see if anyone answers them this time around.
Hmmmph.
- What two characters are each described at various times as the "only hope"?
- What type of vehicles were used to fly Attack Pattern Delta?
- Who summed up Vader's revelation that he was Luke's father as "unexpected" and "unfortunate"?
- What planet's moon were many ancient stone temples erected on?
- What creatures have two legs, curving horns and stubborn temperaments?
- Whose last words in The Empire Strikes Back are, "I promise"?
As always, either drop your answers in the email box or into the comments.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:32 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.
No winners in Day Eight of THE FIRST (AND LAST) CAKE EATER STAR WARS TRIVIA CONTEST.
Why, you ask, are there no winners?
Well, I'll tell ya. Because no one bothered to answer them.
Hmmmph. more...
Posted by: Kathy at
09:27 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 134 words, total size 1 kb.
Let's just say that she truly is demystifying things for the men in the audience.
I shall only add this bit of advice onto hers: learn it and live it!
And, yeah, I'm up at bat for this Friday. Get all your very important questions into the divassezatgmaildotcom mailbox by Thursday evening.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.
May 07, 2005
And I am positively sure she will kill me for this, but I can't quite help myself...
CONGRATULATIONS, GIRL!
She'll be billing $300 an hour at a law firm not anywhere near you soon!
Just so she has other targets on whom to vent her spleen at being congratulated, I'm going to be cheeky and say these good wishes are from all of us.
And by that I mean her and her and him and him and him and him. Oh, and just because I love to pick on them (and I know Sadie does, too) we'll throw these gentlemen in the mix too.
{insert ducking and running en masse here}
Posted by: Kathy at
11:28 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.
WOOOOHOOOOOOOOO! I'm so chuffed for our lil Sadiepops!Anyway, here are your Day Eight Questions for THE FIRST (AND LAST) CAKE EATER STAR WARS TRIVIA CONTEST
- Who, according to Vader, is "as clumsy as he is stupid"?
- What type of vessels escorted Darth Vader's shuttle in Return of the Jedi?
- What insurgent movement was formed in opposition to the Empire
- What city and what planet are shown celebrating just before the Imperial capitol is shown at the end of Return of the Jedi Special Edition?
- Who called Chewbacca a "hairy beast"?
- How many TIE's followed the Millenium Falcon into the second Death Star's reactor?
Have at 'em, kids.
Posted by: Kathy at
06:09 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 128 words, total size 1 kb.
59 queries taking 0.0716 seconds, 215 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
