November 30, 2007
Well, I'm here to tell you that my devoted tech team (namely, the husband) is not working on the problem. Why is he not working on it, you, my devoted Cake Eater readers---all five of you---ask, in a petulant, toe-tapping manner? Well, because we've had a hard time sussing out just what the hell is going on over at Munuviana, and rather than figure out just what that evil mastermind, Pixy, is up to, we're going to move the blog to a different host. Honestly, I think this is the easier thing to do in this situation, for everyone involved. Things have changed a great deal in my three years on moo knew and it's just not the easiest and most effective way to blog anymore.
Now, I don't want anyone to think I'm knocking moo knew. It's been great while it's lasted, but it's time to take control of my destiny, and move where I have a bit more control over things.
I'll keep blogging here in the meantime, but expect big things in the days and weeks to come. Like archives from the very beginning of the Cake Eater era! A new layout! And some added functionality, too, because the husband is, ultimately, a geek and he likes toys. All in all, I think it will be good.
The only question that remains is, will you, my devoted Cake Eater readers, follow me over to the new Cake Eater pad?
I sincerely hope so.
Posted by: Kathy at
01:05 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.
Some bits and bobs (that I have painstakingly typed out for you, my devoted Cake Eater readers, because Cigar Aficionado doesn't put its articles up online and that ixsne's the cut and paste option.) that might interest you:
{...}"He makes you want to do the best you possibly can and encourages you by example. If he ever chose to run for office, well, he has the charisma, the knowledge---and I'm talking global knowledge---and the wit to make things happen. We joke about our votes canceling each other's out, [and} his take on global affairs and politics are a lot different than mine," Brandman says, smiling, "but over the years as we've discussed things and debated them, Tom's caused me to look at things differently---not necessarily to vote differently!---but to see things from a different perspective. He's broadened my own awareness of things, broadened my perspective, and that's a good thing."Selleck groans out loud when Brandman's comment "if he ever chose to run for politics..." is passed by him for a response and it's obvious that it's opened up a can of worms that he's simultaneously eager and loath to talk about. Selleck's political leanings have been commented on by the media---both accurately and not, says Selleck---constantly over the last decade or so and, frankly, he's a little tired of the whole thing.
"I'm not politically active; I'm politically minded," Selleck's insisted in recent years, and if a review of the actor's political donations over the last decade or so turns up a number of campaign contributions to Republican candidates, so, he points out, do donations to Democratic candidates. He's not ashamed of his conservative leanings in an industry that's heavily liberal, he says, but he's also tired---really, really tired---of being characterized as something he's not, and includes being, exclusively behind Republican support issues or thinking himself of running for office.
"I'm a Libertarian at heart, although it's not practical, [and] I'm a Conservative---little 'L', little 'C'---and I've been a registered independent well over a decade," says Selleck. "I don't fit into the box that [people] want to put me in."
{...}"Look, I've had a couple times people make a phone [call] saying...'we want you to run for governor,' And I said, "Why? Do you know how I'd govern or do you just think I'm famous enough to get elected? I'm not interested. I'm an actor.' It's vaguely flattering, but that being said---I mean, it's come up endlessly in every [film press] junket I've ever been on. You know, I finally had to say, 'Look, I don't want to talk about politics. I'm not running for office. I'm flattered you think I'm worthy, I guess that's implied in your question, but I'm an actor. That doesn't mean I'm not interested in politics, the subject, or that I don't vote, but...I'm an actor!"
If there's one political---or politically correct/incorrect---subject that Selleck doesn't mind discussing openly, it's that of ever-increasing bans on personal behavior, including smoking.
"It's not good to smoke a lot. It's not. But when people move from convincing to mandates, it's just not my deal. And I don't think that is what a free society is about. Government has a function in education but not [in] propagandizing, and that is not a simple world. That world is messier. That world allows for human failure and that world allows for messy solutions, which we ought to get really comfortable with if we want to stay free. It's real simple to practically abolish speeding if you apply the death penalty to it.
"Look," Selleck continues, "we don't stay free with what we're doing now. There's just no end to it [and] it's a question of what responsibilities we give up. My concept of society, which I tell kids as often as possible, is what they should be most grateful for in a free society is the first to fail. Which sounds kind of weird. But if you don't have the right to fail and you're protected from failure, you can't truly succeed. You're then stuck in this great gray middle where you're giving up responsibility for the perceived benefits that come from government, [and] that's a very slippery slope. Do you remember when the seat belt law came into being, and how every politician in the country would say: 'It's a law but it's really [just] a guideline and officer would never pull somebody over for not wearing a seatbelt?'
"Then you start, if you live long enough, to see the slippery slope and an erosion. That doesn't mean people shouldn't wear seat belts. It doesn't mean cars shouldn't come with seat belts, [but] you end up with this 'nanny state' and people don't see the correlation between that and all aspects of life. You can find a 'good reason' to prescribe anything.
"I think free society is supposed to be messier than that. Solutions to social problems have to be. I'm not on a crusade, it's just the way I think, and I don't know, I think we need, in the words of the most politically incorrect [laughs] character I can think of, Jack Nicholson [in A Few Good Men}, 'You need me on that wall.'"
I like a man with a brain and a love of liberty. And dimples.
Can't forget the dimples.
Posted by: Kathy at
12:42 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 732 words, total size 6 kb.
Because that's the way Lippy rolls.
Posted by: Kathy at
11:55 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
In a related aside, for my birthday, I received a very cool gift: The Making of the Finest Hour. This is a marvelous book for anyone who wants an insight into the way dear old Winston's mind worked. Facsimiles of the first and final draft of that marvelous speech are published in the book, and they're not just any old facsimiles---they're facsimiles of Winston's drafts. With corrections and additions in his very own handwriting. Also included is a CD recording of the BBC radio broadcast, when Winston delivered the speech to the House of Commons on June 18, 1940.
Despite the fact I've had the book for almost a month, I haven't delved too deeply into it just yet, mostly, because I still haven't the brain power to give it the attention it deserves, yet I have been savoring it, picking it up, reading a bit, and then putting it back in its place on the dining room table. I'm sure the husband thinks I haven't read it at all yet, because it doesn't look like it's moved at all, but tisn't true. It's just one of those books you take your time to work through, even when you don't have chemo brain. The reasoning behind some of his revisions is obvious; on others, however, they really make you wonder at how brilliant the man was, at how he knew he could achieve policy goals with a rework of a single sentence. Edward R. Murrow commented at the time, "He mobilized the English language and sent it into battle," and it's absolutely true. Which is particularly amazing when you keep in mind what was going on at the time in terms of Dunkirk and the Battle of Britain, and that Churchill probably had very little time on his hands for speech editing. He used everything he had at his disposal, and if that included the language, so be it.
This book has the Cake Eater Seal of Approval. If you've got a Winston-admirer on your holiday shopping list, this is the perfect gift for them.
Posted by: Kathy at
10:35 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 367 words, total size 2 kb.
November 29, 2007
If the title line didn't tip you off, and are wondering what the link is about, well, Denver is my nephew.
UPDATE: The Cake Eater Father informs me that Denver almost aced one of his college entrance exams, as well as being a football star. Last I heard, he was taking both the ACT and the SAT, so I don't know which one it was, and I'm not likely to find out because I'm not going to bother emailing my sister, Denver's mom, as she has a spotty record at replying. But, still, impressive, no? Particularly when you keep in mind the kid has had major surgery in the past six months to correct a serious pulmonary problem.
Methinks the boy is headed for college scholarship land.
Posted by: Kathy at
03:50 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 134 words, total size 1 kb.
Just another example of why Martini Boy is the gold standard of blogging.
Posted by: Kathy at
12:45 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.
November 28, 2007
CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Wednesday CNN may have been instigating his murder when the U.S. TV network showed a photograph of him with a label underneath that read "Who killed him?"The caption appeared to be a production mistake -- confusing a Chavez news item with one on the death of a football star. The anchor said "take the image down" when he realized.
But Chavez called for a probe in an interview on state television, where he repeatedly reviewed a tape of the broadcast, questioning why the unconnected photograph and wording were left on screen for several seconds.
"I want the state prosecutor to look into bringing a suit against CNN for instigating murder in Venezuela," he said. "... undoubtedly it is part of the psychological warfare."{...}
Yawn. God this is getting old.
Hey, Lippy McLipster, shut up already and be patient. We'll murder you when we're good and ready...and not a second before.
And we'd hardly let CNN do our advance work, ya dig?
Posted by: Kathy at
04:54 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.
China and India should be spared the full burden of fighting climate change, the United Nations said on Tuesday in an agenda-setting report published just days ahead of an intergovernmental conference to agree to a successor to the Kyoto protocols.The report of the UN Development Programme recommends that countries such as China and India should be required to reduce their emissions by only 20 per cent by 2050, while the rich industrialised countries shoulder a cut of 80 per cent.
The report will provide ammunition for developing countries wishing to avoid adopting stringent targets on emissions. China, India and others have argued that rich countries should carry more responsibility for the climate because most of the stock of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere came from the growth of their industry. {...}
Did you get that? China and India would only have to reduce emissions by 20%, whereas the rest of the developed world should have to reduce their emissions by 80%. You know, because climate change is the result of our industrial growth, not theirs.
Saving India for another time, let's keep in mind that this is the same China with whom both the US and EU have trade deficits, not surpluses. The same China that's hosting the Olympic Games next summer and is doing so, partly, to show off how "developed" their country has become over the past twenty years or so. This is the same China that has a freakin' moon program. This is same China that is currently set to pass the US as the worst polluter in 2010. And, most importantly, this is the same China that's currently ruining my niece's Christmas whimsies because most of the toys on the shelves are produced there and her mother won't let her have any because of safety concerns.
Leaving aside the fact that man-made climate change has yet to be conclusively proven, why on earth is this country getting a pass? China's not developing. It's developed. If they've got a freakin' space program that should be a big fat honking clue that they're not hurting for cash. They can go on and on about how they're not to blame for this supposed round of climate change, but what will their excuse be for the next great environmental disaster to befall the world? Because at the rate they're sucking up natural resources, and the slip-shod manner they're using to do so, whatever comes down the pike will be their fault.
What will they say to get themselves off the hook then?
Posted by: Kathy at
11:32 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.
Yes, Eric, Boulder does have a lot of hippies.
Posted by: Kathy at
10:56 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.
November 27, 2007
The full story is here
{...}Mr Massey tells the officer he does not understand why he has been stopped or what he is being charged with, at which point the officer orders Massey to get out of the car. The officer then puts down his clipboard and immediately takes out his Taser and points it at Mr Massey without any provocation whatsoever, yelling "Turn around and put your hands behind your back" as Massey attempts to point out the speed limit sign and engage the officer in conversation.A shocked Massey asks "what the hell is wrong with you?" and backs away, turning around as the officer had demanded, at which point the officer unleashes 50,000 volts from the Taser into Massey's body, sending him screaming to the ground instantly and causing his wife to jump out of the car and yell hysterically for help.
Lying face down on the ground a shell shocked, Mr Massey says "officer I don't know what you are doing, I don't know why you are doing what you are doing" to which the officer replies "I am placing you under arrest because you did not obey my instruction."
Mr Massey then once again asks the officer several times why he was stopped and what he is being charged with. He then asks for his rights to be read and points out that the officer cannot arrest him without doing this. Instead of reading Massey his rights the officer then addresses another patrolman who arrives on the scene sardonically commenting "Ohhh he took a ride with the Taser" to which the other officer answers "painful isn't it".{...}
Ultimately, this comes down to what you think your rights are and what the cops think your rights are---and the two are never going to meet. You might want to understand that when you get pulled over. Save your arguments for court, because when the police are armed, well, they're going to win every time. Is it sad that that's the situation, particularly when the police are funded with your hard-earned tax dollars? Yeah. It is. But it's the truth of the situation. You can either accept the situation as it stands, and perhaps save yourself from receiving 50,000 volts, or you can argue about your constitutional rights and get zapped. Your choice. Realize one thing: the police aren't your friend. Nor are they under any obligation to help you understand your alleged crime or rights, despite what Law and Order might portray on tee vee. You'll have to work with your legislative bodies to get that changed, because arguing with a police officer about it isn't going to do anything.
Lest you think I have it in for the police, know that I don't. I can understand the defensive posture police take to protect themselves. They have to deal with an awful lot of horrible individuals who have absolutely no respect for them or the law and they would be negligent if they did anything but take a defensive posture, but this is beyond the pale. It's obvious that the guy wasn't going to harm anyone. His sole crime is that he was a bit mouthy and didn't do precisely what the officer thought he should do, but that shouldn't have earned him a jolt from a taser. Every situation varies and the police should have enough common sense to recognize this. The cop had no common sense and when things didn't go exactly as he would have liked them to, he resorted to brute force. He was Eric Cartman, demanding that the man "Respect his authoritah!" It's just that simple. This could have been resolved easily enough, without anyone going to jail or being tasered, if the cop had just bothered to listen. He didn't. And now he's, apparently, brought a multi-million dollar lawsuit down on his department.
The police are making their own job harder with stunts like this. I doubt they realize that, though.
{hat tip: Martini Boy}
Posted by: Kathy at
10:22 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 688 words, total size 4 kb.
Ahem
STOP SPAMMING ME WITH YOUR DAMN JUNK E-MAILS!
If I'd wanted to be on your list, I would have signed up for it. That I'm on a blogroll with a number of conservative bloggers who happen to live in the state of Minnesota does not mean I want e-mails from you people, detailing your beautifully coiffed candidate's positions. It's that simple. Furthermore, that you want me to help manage your e-mail list pisses me off. I never subscribed to your list in the first place, hence I shouldn't have to unsubscribe, ya dig?
Now, knock it off or I'll start mocking you. I might even have some fun with Mitt and his hair in photoshop. So, if you'd like to prevent that eventuality, you know what you have to do, eh? Consider yourselves warned.
When are you e-campaigners going to learn, eh?
Posted by: Kathy at
12:34 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.
November 26, 2007
The Savoy Sale, to be conducted by Bonhams, will feature stylish items of furniture with impeccable provenance at affordable prices. The furniture to be sold, which includes lighting, mirrors, works of art, and silver plate, will all be offered at “no reserve”, which means that items could go for as little as £20. However, some of the more important furnishings are expected to fetch in excess of £15,000.Bonhams’ Director of The Savoy Sale, Harvey Cammell, says: “The auction presents everyone around the world with a “once-in-a-lifetime” opportunity to acquire an extraordinary range of iconic items from one of the most famous hotels in the world.”
The three-day sale is expected to fetch in excess of £1 million. The majority of lots consist of furnishings from 215 bedrooms and suites, including the famous Monet Suite, as well as The Royal Opera House Suite and The Richard Harris Suite, in which the famous actor lived for a while. In addition, selected items from The Savoy Hotel’s public areas including The Lobby, The Upper Thames Foyer, The Thames Foyer, The Beaufort Room, The River Restaurant, The Manhattan and Parlour Bars and The Abraham Lincoln Room will be auctioned.{...}
They've shut the hotel down for the next year to rehab it. Given the current state of design style and taste that's happening in London right now, God only knows what it will look like when it's done. If you fancy yourself a preserver of style and taste and all things decorous, you might want to pop by and pick some stuff up.
Besides, there aren't any reserves. You could, conceivably, get something on the cheap. Which is more than I can say about actually paying to stay at the Savoy, which is anything but.
Posted by: Kathy at
04:38 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 328 words, total size 2 kb.
I know. You were missing me, right? You could barely get through the day without me and my incredibly wise and informative posts, right? You're breathing a sigh of relief that I'm back at the keyboard this fine and chilly Monday morning, right?
Heh. {wink, wink, nudge, nudge}
Whilst you were gorging yourself on turkey and all the assorted side dishes, the husband and I were doing the same. Only in Texas, where the husband's family now resides. His sister and her family moved there about a year and a half ago, and his parents followed her shortly thereafter. Grandparents and Grandkiddies have been reunited and all is well in the Ft. Worth suburbs. We got around to visiting them over the holiday ("It's about time, too!" according to my mother-in-law, who sometimes forgets that airways and highways go in both directions and are not, in fact, one way.) and had a good time seeing everyone and getting caught up while eating way entirely too much food.
Two eventful things happened whilst we were in Tejas. First off, it appears we had to travel to Texas to get our first taste of snow. Yes, that's right. It snowed. In Texas. On Thanksgiving day. The kids were ecstatic and soaked completely by the time darkness fell. Second, my brother-in-law works as a computer enginerd for Lockheed Martin, and he was kind enough to take us on a tour of the manufacturing facilities for the building he works in. This building is one of five or six---and they're each well over a mile long, but, as the brother-in-law informed us, weren't quite big enough to get this particular bomber out the door without having to maneuver the wings in a diagonal fashion.
It was very cool to see how they put the planes together and how they have the manufacturing processes organized. In my brother-in-law's building we got to see F-16 wings being put together, the mid-section of an F-22 Raptor being readied for shipping to another Lockheed plant in Georgia and, wonder of wonders and EASILY the coolest thing of the day, an F-35 being wired up. I should also mention this was the very first F-35 with STOVL capabilities that was being constructed, right in front of our very eyes.
Which was suh-weet, my devoted Cake Eater readers.
The brother-in-law was disappointed that the engines weren't out on display, too. They had been the week before, but no longer. We weren't disappointed at all because what we got to see was impressive enough in itself. Apparently, in the next couple of weeks it will be finished. Everyone who was working on wiring it up was "The A Team" according to the brother-in-law, because it was the first. They've been working around the clock, evidently, to get it ready for its first flight. Supposedly, in a few years they're going to produce one F-35 a day at this facility. While that was hard to imagine, I suppose they'll manage to get it done. If nothing else, it was an interesting experience in seeing my tax dollars at work. The sheer number of people and material they need to put one of these things together---and keep in mind this is with automated processes that are much more efficient than those of years past---is astonishing.
So, if you know someone who works at Lockheed and can get you in the door, my devoted Cake Eater readers, I would highly recommend the experience. It was very, very cool to see the end result of the Joint Strike Fighter competition.
Posted by: Kathy at
10:22 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 616 words, total size 4 kb.
November 20, 2007
I say, "Let 'em."
We, meaning the US, didn't let them satisfy their teenage lust to date Che Guevara back in the 70's in the name of the Domino Theory. We generally don't worry about communists anymore because, ahem, we know socialism doesn't work.
Because they have failed to learn this lesson, when their doomed relationship with the corpse of Che fails, and they come crying to us, to help their economies out, we should let them rot.
I will fully admit that I might be a bit harsh in my evaluation, but screw it. I'm sick of that fat fuck Chavez and all those who are so easily duped into believing what he says. He wants them to be poor. They readily follow him. They should get what they so patently want.
I mean, honestly, who are we to impose our imperialist vision on these people?
Posted by: Kathy at
09:44 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.
November 19, 2007
...been an awfully good girl, Santa Baby...
Posted by: Kathy at
09:30 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Kathy at
12:03 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.
So, I ask you, my devoted Cake Eater readers, is bad credit a dealbreaker these days?
Seriously. I want to know.
Call me naive if you must, but when I got married, I took the "for better or worse" part rather seriously. Maybe I'm being a little too inclusive for modern tastes, but that would seem to mean that you took everything, whether or not it made for a catchy commerical or even a pleasant little bitch and moan festival. You seemingly loved this person you were marrying; you realized they were human and probably had made some mistakes in their life, but you were willing to take on said mistakes. Because you're human, too, and probably had made some mistakes yourself.
This commercial would seem to advocate checking your beloved's credit report before getting married. Because, you know, you wouldn't want to get married to them if they had---GASP!---bad credit. Because you know, there's nothing worse in this world than---GASP!---BAD CREDIT! And if your intended did have---GASP!---bad credit, well, then it would apparently be adequate grounds for dumping said intended.
And you could be a happy bachelor with a dog and a yard.
What say you, my devoted Cake Eater readers? Is bad credit a dealbreaker?
Posted by: Kathy at
11:17 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 220 words, total size 2 kb.
November 16, 2007
Seriously.
No residual cancer in my chest, abdomen or pelvis. Also, no new cancer in my chest, abdomen or pelvis.
It's all good, kids.
To paraphrase Dr. Academic, I'm as close to cured as I'm going to get.
Thanks for all of your support, my devoted Cake Eater readers. You're a bunch of rock stars.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I'm going to go and get stinkin' drunk.
Posted by: Kathy at
05:49 PM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.
Holy crap, am I ever tweaked about this.
Gah. I know I'm flipping out over nothing. I know I am, but, God help me, I can't quite keep myself from doing so. This is such a bad move. I know it, but, again, I can't help myself.
I woke up at five this morning, which I think we all know, my devoted Cake Eater readers, doesn't happen even when I want to wake up at five. I'm not a morning person. At all. Yet, this morning, I woke up while it was still dark and, better yet, was completely awake, instead of being groggy and crabby at being disturbed. This never happens. Just ask the husband. I got up, went to the little girls' room, had a drink of water, and then went back to bed. It was only through repeated rubbing of my back that the husband was able to lull me back to sleep. Sigh. He's such a good egg. I honestly don't know what I'd do without him.
Sigh.
I know this appointment is probably going to take less than fifteen minutes.
I know that this appointment won't start any where near the scheduled time. Dr. Academic will be running late, as always. And he will be in a hurry to give me the results, and when that's done, will do his absolute best to whoosh out of the exam room, because he's got his reputation as the human tornado to uphold.
I know it will probably be all good and that everything is fine, but...
...what if it isn't?
That's all I can think about. I can think positively as much as I'd like to, but thinking positively about this stuff has not gotten me very far in this whole fiasco. I've learned the hard way that thinking positively, and hoping for the best, will only lead me to rack and ruin. But keeping the negative stuff from being too negative, if you get what I'm saying, my devoted Cake Eater readers, is even harder, it seems. I'm having all sorts of visions of more cancer, more surgery, and more chemo. And it's all scaring the shit out of me, because I don't want ANY of those things to happen. Even though it's highly unlikely that they will, in the first place.
Sigh.
Like a drunk driver completing a sobriety test, I'm searching for the fine line in the middle, kids, and I'm having a hard time slapping my big fat feet down on it.
Keep your fingers crossed, my devoted Cake Eater readers, eh? Not just for everything to be fine, but so that I don't lose what's left of my already-addled mind between now and two.
Posted by: Kathy at
10:13 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 475 words, total size 3 kb.
{...}The 10-page indictment mainly consists of excerpts from Bonds' December 2003 testimony before a grand jury investigating the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, or BALCO. It cites 19 occasions in which Bonds allegedly lied under oath.{...}Defense attorney Mike Rains said he spoke briefly with Bonds but did not describe his reaction. At an evening news conference, he read a statement accusing federal prosecutors of "unethical misconduct" and declined to take questions.
"Every American should worry about a Justice Department that doesn't know if waterboarding is torture and can't tell the difference between prosecution on the one hand and persecution on the other," Rains said.
{my emphasis}
{insert rolling of eyes here}
While I wouldn't necessarily equate waterboarding with perjury and obstruction of justice charges over alleged steroid use, Bonds' lawyers apparently have no issues with doing so.
Talk about having a big head.
Oh, wait, Bonds does happen to have a big head. A really big head. And not just in the figurative sense, either.
It's ironic that steroids, which are generally used to treat inflammation, can cause such inflamed use of language.
Looks like Hank Aaron's home run record might be safe after all. One can only hope Major League Baseball feels the same way.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:49 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.
58 queries taking 0.1061 seconds, 221 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
