August 31, 2005
In March of 2001, just two days after EPA Administrator Christie Todd WhitmanÂ’s strong statement affirming BushÂ’s CO2 promise former RNC Chief Barbour responded with an urgent memo to the White House.Barbour, who had served as RNC Chair and Bush campaign strategist, was now representing the presidentÂ’s major donors from the fossil fuel industry who had enlisted him to map a Bush energy policy that would be friendly to their interests. His credentials ensured the new administrationÂ’s attention.
The document, titled “Bush-Cheney Energy Policy & CO2,” was addressed to Vice President Cheney, whose energy task force was then gearing up, and to several high-ranking officials with strong connections to energy and automotive concerns keenly interested in the carbon dioxide issue, including Energy Secretary
Spencer Abraham, Interior Secretary Gale Norton, Commerce Secretary Don Evans, White House chief of staff Andy Card and legislative liaison Nick Calio. Barbour pointedly omitted the names of Whitman and Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, both of whom were on record supporting CO2 caps. Barbour’s memo chided these administration insiders for trying to address global warming which Barbour dismissed as a radical fringe issue.“A moment of truth is arriving,” Barbour wrote, “in the form of a decision whether this Administration’s policy will be to regulate and/or tax CO2 as a pollutant. The question is whether environmental policy still prevails over energy policy with Bush-Cheney, as it did with Clinton-Gore.” He derided the idea of regulating CO2 as “eco-extremism,” and chided them for allowing environmental concerns to “trump good energy policy, which the country has lacked for eight years.”
{...}On March 13, Bush reversed his previous position, announcing he would not back a CO2 restriction using the language and rationale provided by Barbour. Echoing Barbour’s memo, Bush said he opposed mandatory CO2 caps, due to “the incomplete state of scientific knowledge” about global climate change.
Well, the science is clear. This month, a study published in the journal Nature by a renowned MIT climatologist linked the increasing prevalence of destructive hurricanes to human-induced global warming.
{...}In 1998, Republican icon Pat Robertson warned that hurricanes were likely to hit communities that offended God. Perhaps it was BarbourÂ’s memo that caused Katrina, at the last moment, to spare New Orleans and save its worst flailings for the Mississippi coast.
{my emphasis}
Niiiiiiiiiice, Bobby.
Note that this was published on Monday evening. No one had any idea of how bad the damage was, or how many people had been killed in Katrina's wake. No one had any idea about any of this, but Junior, who was safe in New York, just assumed that since the hurricane had passed over, this would be a good time to start banging the climate change gong. That Katrina could have been prevented if only Bush hadn't listened to Barbour and had decided to push Kyoto. Which is complete and utter bullshit and Junior knows it, too. If you want to blame anyone for not pushing Kyoto, blame your good buddy Bubba Clinton, who never submitted the Kyoto Treaty to the Senate for ratification. If only Clinton had pushed Kyoto through, well, why that would have been a few years earlier and that would have given us more time to prevent these horrible hurricanes!
Never mind that good ol' Junior decided to publish this little treatise before the bodies were even cold. Or even until we knew how many bodies there were to be buried---which, I might add, we still don't know. It's all about scoring cheap political points in the wake of one of the largest natural disasters to befall our country. Way to go, Junior. Way to be just another spoiled rotten, Kennedy bastard who assumes the world should listen to you because of your pedigree.
I sincerely hope that Junior is ashamed of himself. But I doubt he is. He's a Kennedy, after all: that family has absolutely no shame whatsoever.
I think it's genetic.
Posted by: Kathy at
10:17 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 688 words, total size 5 kb.
August 25, 2005
Leaving aside my wondering what this rebuke would have sounded like if it came from this guy's mouth (new season starts September 13th! WooT!), I will admit to being of two minds on this one. I sympathize with the doctor. He was just telling the truth, and there's certainly no shame in that. However, I also emphathize with the obese woman: in an effort to get her to change her wicked ways, the doctor apparently laid out the worst case scenario and, in the process, insulted her. While I can understand why he did it, it doesn't change the fact that, to a certain extent, obesity is the result of a personal choice. (I'm sorry, but I'm not buying that everyone who is morbidly obese in this country is the victim of a thyroid problem. Sorry, but that's just not going to fly.) This woman is making a personal choice to be fat. And I defend that choice. If she wants to do something about it, fine, but if she doesn't, she shouldn't be insulted by her doctor in an effort to scare her into doing something. It's her choice. But, when it comes right down to it, in America, you are not allowed personal choice when that choice is deemed bad for you by the powers that be.
How do I know this? Well, I'm newly minted ex-smoker, and I can tell you from experience that there was no end the many doctors and dentists I visit wouldn't go to in an effort to get me to quit. There were lectures from my gynecologist, telling me that I was increasing my chances for cervical cancer, colon cancer, ovarian cancer, breast cancer, heart disease and, of course, lung cancer. I'm not even going to go into the dire threats exhorted that I shouldn't even THINK about getting pregnant while I was smoking. The stupid pap smear and breast exam took less time than all the lecturing did. I was told by the same gynecologist that I had to exercise twice as much as a normal person would to keep healthy. Walking five miles a day, apparently, wasn't enough if you're a smoker. I should have been running ten miles a day. I've been told by my opthamologist that I'll be an excellent candidate for cataract surgery in forty some odd years. Clever, no? Then we have the dental hygienist: she, quite literally, bitched aloud about the fact she had to spend more time cleaning the back of my teeth than she would a non-smoker.
The husband has had to deal with the same sort of thing from the same dental hygienist. You see, the poor husband has had SO many bad experiences with dentists and orthodontists that he hates going as much as I do. The man, quite literally, had braces and one of those medieval spreader thingys attached to the roof of his mouth for much of his adolescence. The minute he got all that crap off, his teeth started working their way back to their original spots. (They didn't pull any extra teeth before he had his braces put on.) It did absolutely no good whatsoever, so he has good reason to doubt it when a dentist tells him something. Our dentist, who is good and who we like, nonetheless would like the husband to have his fully grown-in wisdom teeth removed. Why? Because he has too many teeth, a small jaw, and the hygienists can't get all the way back to clean them properly. Did you get that? They want him to undergo an oral surgery procedure that would cost us about two grand (we don't have dental insurance---and even if we did, it probably wouldn't be covered.) because it would make their lives easier. They've never suggested an alternative to surgery. They've never told him, hey, get some Plax or Listerine to keep that cleaned out. They did give him a special little toothbrush and he's used it faithfully, but it apparently doesn't work well enough for their tastes, because they keep on harping about it every time he goes in there. It wouldn't do the husband any good, either, as far as how his teeth look. There's not much benefit for him to have his wisdom teeth removed. Yet, consistently, they harp on about it, even though the husband has, quite bluntly, told them it's not going to happen. They've even come in to hassle me about having his wisdom teeth removed when I've been in the office at the same time. I assume they were working under the assumption that I would start guilting him into it, which isn't going to happen.
Therein lies the main issue, I believe: if you refuse to do things your health care providers would have you do, you're making more work for them, aren't you? They have to keep treating you over and over again for the same thing. They would prefer to stop the problem at the source. I could understand where it would be frustrating to have to treat people who, you deemed in all your infinite wisdom, were being stupid about their health. Furthermore, to have to treat the same things over and over again, well, that would just get boring, wouldn't it? Problem is if you lived your life according to all the studies that are released every day of the week, well, your life wouldn't be very much fun, would it? Not to mention when that information is contradictory. I would assume that every disease is preventable, and with the right amount of information scientists will ultimately come to the conclusion that you'll never get sick if you never bother being born.
I have to say, as one who's been where the fat lady is, I still find this all terribly amusing. I suppose that's bad of me, but it's kind of nice to be proven correct. Years ago, when I managed the coffee shop, my customers would, when they found out I smoked, tell me that they wished I would quit. That smoking was very bad for me. Some of them would leave it at that, and I would thank them for their concern, but there were others who would go further in their pontifications and would say that smoking should be banned entirely because it was a public health menace. That everyone had to pay for smokers behavior, whether it be through health insurance costs or their belief they could catch cancer through secondhand smoke, hence the majority opinion should rule. Ok, I said to them, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But, I added as I handed them their cup of joe, don't be surprised when they come after you for drinking coffee. Because we all know caffeine is bad for you. It leads to all sorts of health problems, and when they don't have the smokers to beat into submission anymore, well, they'll need a new target. It's the same, I said, if you're obese. Or if you drink adult beverages. Or if you do any number of things that the people in charge think are bad for you. Public health crusades, I told them, aren't so much about the specific actions individuals choose to make: that's irrelevant. Public health crusades are more about removing your ability to make choices the crusaders disagree with. They want to tell you how to live your life. Those choices could extend to any sort of behavior that causes health problems; smoking was simply the tip of the iceberg. Some of them could wrap their minds around this concept and it frightened them. Some of them couldn't see what the hell I was talking about because they believed the hype.
So, I will admit, I find this amusing. They came for me, a smoker, and people said nothing. Now they're going to come for them and they find it alarming. And insulting. Imagine if it was a smoker who had filed the complaint. Would anyone care? I can tell you from experience that they wouldn't give a rat's ass if a smoker was insulted by the lengths their doctor would go to to get them to quit. Believe me, I've heard worse than what this woman heard from her doctor. But no one cares about the smokers. Soon people won't care about obesity, either. Then they won't care about the caffeine drinkers. It will keep going on and on until life is just one big joyless, choice-free experience.
Have a great time in that world, kids. I'll be in the Republic of Kathyland by that point in time, drinking the wine and eating the brie the rest of the world has outlawed.
Posted by: Kathy at
12:42 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1503 words, total size 8 kb.
{Insert massive full body shudder here}
Just in case you were wondering, no, I'm not going. For many reasons.
The husband would, quite literally, rather die than spend any time at a fair. He played football in high school and in situations where he gets crowded by lumbering idiots who refuse to get out of the way, well, let's just say the urge to put his shoulders down and to push through whatever and whomever is blocking his way becomes overwhelming. Really and truly I'm doing everyone a favor by keeping him at home. You should be thanking me.
I, on the other hand, don't mind the crowds so much, but I can't stand food on a stick. I don't ride rides, either, as they generally make me nauseous. I have no use for ag exhibits, either, I'm afraid. But the main reason I won't go to the fair is because in all my years of living in the midwest, where fairs are common things, I have yet to actually go to a fair. Well, let me correct that. I've been to St. Margaret Mary's Parish fair in Omaha, because that was my church/school and it was expected, but, as far as fairs go I don't believe that counts. I've lived in three states: Nebraska, Iowa and Minnesota, and I've never been to a fair. In the midwest they call people like me "freaks of nature." I've never been to a county fair. I've never been to a state fair. I've got a perfect record and I plan on keeping it that way, thank you ever so bloody much.
So, ya'll have a good time at the fair. Don't eat a corndog for me. I wouldn't want you to do that to yourself.
Posted by: Kathy at
12:44 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 307 words, total size 2 kb.
August 22, 2005
If Alec Baldwin's a vegetarian, I'm the freakin' Queen of Sheeba.
Alec, no doubt, sneaks down to BK every day and wolfs down a few Whoppers. Quite simply put, you don't get that porky without fast food being involved. It just doesn't happen. Alec could get back to his The Hunt for Red October weight by eating broccoli every day, all day long. And the world of women would be happy, because God only knows Alec was hot when he was thin. He was a veritable Hottie McHotHot. Yet, despite his PETA advocacy, he hasn't lost one ounce. Hmmmm. That's suspicious.
Could it be, kids, that Alec is the beneficiary of a deal with Burger King wherein he stops denouncing them and he gets all the free Whoppers he can eat?
I speculate. You decide.
Posted by: Kathy at
06:04 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 160 words, total size 1 kb.
August 19, 2005
Hip-hop impresario and fashion designer Sean "P. Diddy" Combs wants to make it easier for fans to shower him with adoration -- so he's dropping the "P." from his stage name.From now on, it's just Diddy.
"We are entering into the age of Diddy. It's a new era," the rap star formerly known as Puffy and Puff Daddy told the syndicated TV show "Access Hollywood" this week.
In a recent round of interviews hyping his upcoming role as host of the MTV Video Music Awards on August 28, Combs, 35, has said he wanted to "simplify" his image and felt that the P. "was getting between me and my fans."
{My emphasis}
I think you can bust "Diddy" on pride, because he's just way entirely too proud. You're supposed to be humble, dude. You ain't humble. You could, conceivably, make a case for sloth, because it's suppposedly easier to say "Diddy" than it is to say Puff Daddy or P. Diddy. But I KNOW we've got Sean dead to rights on vanity...
...because he thinks people actually give a rat's ass about his nickname..
Posted by: Kathy at
11:05 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.
August 16, 2005
Then I watched while the Lamb broke open the first of seven seals, and I heard one of them four living creatures cry out in a voice like thunder, "Come forward."I looked and there was a white horse, and its rider had a bow. He was given a crown and he rode forth victorious to further his victories.
When he broke open the second seal, I eard the second living creature cry out, "Come forward." Another horse came out, a red one. Its rider was given power to take peace away from the earth, so that people would slaughter one another. And he was given a huge sword.
When he broke open the third seal, I heard the third living creature cry out, "Come forward." I looked, and there was a black horse, and its rider held a scale in its hand. I heard what seemed to be a voice in the midst of the four living creatures. It said, "A ration of wheat costs a day's pay, and three rations of barley cost a day's pay. But do not damage the olive oil or the wine."
When he broke open the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature cry out, "Come forward." I looked, and there was a pale green horse. Its rider was named Death, and Hades accompanied him. They were given authority over a quarter of the earth, to kill with sword, famine, plague, and by means of the beasts of the earth.
---Revelations 6:1-8
Yep. It's official. It's just about over with kids.
NEW YORK -Kathie Lee Gifford will join anchor Pat O'Brien on "The Insider" next month as a special correspondent for the syndicated entertainment-magazine show.Beginning Sept. 12, Gifford will appear at least two days a week to cover "big name celebrity interviews and the Broadway beat," Paramount Domestic Television announced Monday. {...}
The Four Horses of the Apocalypse are upon us. Technically speaking they are known as War, Plague, Famine and Death, but they're more commonly---and respectively---known as Frank, Cody, Cassidy and Kathie Lee Gifford.
Make your peace with God now, kids. It's not going to last much longer.
Posted by: Kathy at
02:39 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 371 words, total size 2 kb.
Everything's fine, right? There are always stickers on bananas. Then I actually looked at it...
What the hell was the thought process here? Did some marketing punk think, "Hey, most kids have bananas with lunch, and statistics show that shoppers go through the produce aisle before they go to the freezer aisle, so we'll put the stickers on the bananas. This will remind people to go to the freezer aisle to pick up our uncrustables for the entire lunch experience."
What utter bullshit.
It should probably be a clue that when you're marketing your product by putting stickers on bananas that you've reached the peak selling potential of said product. If people aren't buying them now, a sticker on a banana surely isn't going to do the trick.
It's just a thought, but, perhaps the reason Uncrustables aren't selling well is because, ahem, unless you're him, most people would think it incredibly lazy to buy pre-made, frozen, peanut butter and jelly sandwiches that have the crusts cut off. Not to mention they're expensive. I looked them up on Simon Delivers. Four sandwiches for $2.99? Or you can get the 18 count for $12.99 What a freakin' waste of money! That's just the epitome of laziness. If you can't slap peanut butter and jelly on two pieces of bread and then cut off the crusts in the time it takes you to defrost one of those things, you have no mad sandwich making skillz. You're hopeless and you are entirely too susceptible to marketing campaigns.
Grow a spine and make your kid a sandwich that doesn't require defrosting.
Posted by: Kathy at
11:39 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 292 words, total size 2 kb.
August 04, 2005
A MAN cut the tail off his goldfish with a pair of scissors because he was "bored" after a day of drinking.Kenneth Grindlay, 20, launched the vicious attack on his pet goldfish - before tossing it back into its bowl for his horrified mother to find.
Grindlay, of Rosyth, Fife had started drinking after being left alone in the house for an afternoon and decided to cut off the family goldfish's tail with the scissors - left out for him by his mother to trim his beard - because he was "just bored".
He admitted carrying out the cruel attack at a court hearing yesterday but will not learn of his fate until detailed psychiatric reports are prepared.
Dunfermline Sheriff Court heard yesterday how Grindlay's mother Shona returned home to find the bloodied scissors he had used to maim the six-year-old fish out on the kitchen worktop.
She found the fish thrashing desperately around in its tank without its tail. She then called the police - who arranged for the mutilated pet to be taken to the vet.
The practice decided, however, that its injuries were so severe it had to be put out of its suffering. Grindlay pleaded guilty by letter to cruelty and ill-treating the fish and causing it unnecessary suffering at a hearing last month.
The hearing was told by depute fiscal Azrah Yousaf that the fish's injuries were among the worst that the vet had ever witnessed.
She said: "The police were called. When they arrived the fish was still alive but the police had noticed that it wasn't very active in the tank. The vet described it as one of the worst injuries they had ever seen."
When police arrived to interview Grindlay he told them: "I cut the fin off. I was a bit drunk. I was just bored."
He was later charged under the Protection of Animals Act of 1912 and referred to psychologists at Dunfermline's Queen Margaret Hospital. {...}
Yes, that's right. The guy was bored and drunk and cut the fin off his pet goldfish. He "launched a vicious attack" on his pet. He's having to undergo psychiatric evaluations because he did this. While this was not a nice thing to do and while I fully understand that harming one's pets or other small animals is a big alert that someone will become a serial killer, don't you think that perhaps, just perhaps this is a wee bit over the top? Particularly since it was a freakin' GOLDFISH that was maimed? A fish that, ahem, cannot feel pain.
What's the crime rate in Scotland again? Hmmmm. I wonder. Is there, possibly, anything the cops could be doing other than prosecuting people for cutting the tails off their goldfish? Hmmmmm? Could it be that the only reason they prosecuted this guy was because, ahem, he fessed up to his dirty deed?
It makes one wonder, doesn't it, what they'd do nowadays to all those people who used to participate in "how many goldfish can you swallow?" contests?
Posted by: Kathy at
09:55 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 546 words, total size 3 kb.
August 03, 2005
Between the husband and I, we've received some interesting variations on the Nigerian Oil Scam Spam in the past couple of days and I thought I'd share.
If you're at all interested, take the jump. more...
Posted by: Kathy at
01:18 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1515 words, total size 9 kb.
August 02, 2005
{Hat Tip: WitNit}
Posted by: Kathy at
11:55 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.
57 queries taking 0.0702 seconds, 158 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
