Saturday I snuck away up to a sakery in Berkeley for a surprise party for Patrick's. Which turned out to be amazingly successful. The look on Patrick's face was one of abject shock, confusion, disbelief and of having been hit with a frying pan. Mo did a fantastic job of organizing it all on the sly over the course of a couple of months, and much amusement and merriment was had by all. Oh, and great sake!
(And having been the recipient once of an equally successful surprise party I can totally relate to the frying pan look!)
Alas, the following is not a surprise: ExxonMobil has spent over the past few years around 16 million in a tobacco-company style FUD campaign, giving it to various front groups and the scientists who are members of about 9 to 12 of these groups at the same time. Their aim is delay and stagnation, under the guise of 'sound science.' As I said, not a surprise.
Bloodstone continued apace on Sunday, the party making their way through the heart of the Duregar's realm. Also did some studying, some Kung Fu/Tai Chi, and other weekendy stuff. Much niftyness at work this week that I now return to attend to!
"Like any giant company suddenly "embracing" the green initiative, [the company's] rationale for all of this, of course, has absolutely zero to do with any sort of deep concern for the planet (though it does make for good PR), nothing at all about actual humanitarian beliefs or honest emotion or spiritual reverence, and has absolutely everything to do with the corporation's rabid manifesto: cost-cutting and profit."
Being green can save you gobs of $. Shock. Awe.
(If there's one thing I find somewhat amusing and confusing is the constant vitriol that states better environmental policies = instant economic meltdown. FOX news and the Drudge Report spent a good chunk of time doing just that the other day. Given that there is usually these 10 year periods+ for targets and reductions and removals and all that -- ok, natch, companies often do @#$! for that time then complain 1 year before the deadline that it's too much hardship and they'll drop into a hole in the earth and they will go bankrupt and the country will die and baby Jesus will cry, but ignoring that for a moment -- what ever happened to their capitalist and entrepreneurial spirit? That the market will produce solutions, that it will create wealth, that it will empower and generate? With less disasters to pay for and clean up, less illness and all other good stuff to boot?)
http://www.ibiblio.org/Dave/Dr-Fun/df200605/df20060508.jpg
Been a while since I posted a rant.
So, just days ago, in the 2006 Farm Subsidy bill passed through the USA congress contains language that strips much of the meaning from the label of "Organic" on foods. Now, I'll be the first to acknowledge that the USDA's standards for "Organic" were, already, on the whole, kinda lax. But this new bill eviscerates anything that could resemble rational meanings of the word.
For one, certain artificial ingredients may now be used, quite freely, and still receive a USDA label of organic.
Two, it would also now be permissible to treat young dairy cows with antibiotics and raise them on genetically engineered feed up to the point when they are converted to organic production.
Three, and perhaps the most laughable (if it weren't sad) is that so-called 'emergency decrees' would allow non-organic ingredients to be substituted for organic ingredients without any warning to the public.
What does Organic even mean anymore under these new regulations? I say frikkin' nothing. Organic is sought by those who want it, for reasons of purity and with expectations of how things are grown and raised.
Really, who benefits? Consumers don't have to buy organic if they don't want to. They, and many indeed, just don't. What this amendment does is protect the large food conglomerates. By relaxing the (already lax) purity rules, the food giants already in the quasi-organic business could make greater profits with lesser investment. Their trade lobby, the cutely named Organic Trade Association, of course says "this will allow the continued growth of organic foods!" which I contend is like me saying "these new fire testing standards will allow the continued growth of the fire-proof construction industry, making more homes fire-resistant!" when the new regulations allow me to label paper as fire-resistant.
This, of course, does nothing to help small farmers. Quite the opposite - those who are struggling to adhere to their purity of organic-ness will be hurt as petro-chem and agrobiz produce/etc prices them out of the market, all because of a label without backing.
In the end, I say this again points to my quasi-mantra: READ THE LABEL. Because something has zero cholesterol many products had 'heart healthy' icons on them, yet were loaded with saturated or trans-fats. Like the cute names given to these very pieces of legislation, or the slogans certain politicians like to stand in front of when they give speeches, icons, labels and names are often worthless and no indication of product quality or content.
If you do care about eating organic, I offer the following: READ the label, see what's actually in there. RESEARCH the little icons, see which ones bear truthful meaning (fortunately for us in California the California Organic Program and the Organic Products Act still adheres to standards and is identifiable). And plain out REFUSE to buy things that don't meet your desires and expectations.
Your politician's ear isn't a bad thing either.
From Cornell University: a study of root-shaking importance.
EPA To Drop 'E,' 'P' From Name
WASHINGTON, DC—Days after unveiling new power-plant pollution regulations that rely on an industry-favored market-trading approach to cutting mercury emissions, EPA Acting Administrator Stephen Johnson announced that the agency will remove the "E" and "P" from its name. "We're not really 'environmental' anymore, and we certainly aren't 'protecting' anything," Johnson said. "'The Agency' is a name that reflects our current agenda and encapsulates our new function as a government-funded body devoted to handling documents, scheduling meetings, and fielding phone calls." The change comes on the heels of the Department of Health and Human Services' January decision to shorten its name to the Department of Services.
As detailed earlier, last year was supposed to be the perfect tripple play of the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels and my beloved Snowbirds.
That, of course, didn't happen at all. In fact, I didn't get a single perfect out, due to mechanical and weather issues that threw wrenches into everything.
This year? The Snowbirds's schedule hardly even brings them close to my current neck of the woods. Phooey!
So, it's been five years that I have resided in a state that is the true heart of the car culture. Prone to observation as I am, I've made an interesting discovery over that time about the ubiquitous speedy drivers. One that is a bit counter-intuitive.
Of the drivers who go really fast (tm), the percentage is about as follows:
10% are sports cars -- amazingly, the type of car one might expect to drive like super crazy usually isn't. And in this area of the suddenly-rich (and suddenly-poor, but that's another story) there are a good number of sports cars as well. Maybe it's the easy money aspect that causes this (ie, I got it because I can, not because I want to), but strangely the sports car owners tend not to drive like mad. Most, in fact, seem to drive perfectly reasonable, if not even mundane. That having been said, the 10% that do tend go all out tend to REALLY go all out, being truly crazy insane. And about 50% of those are Mustang drivers. The rest of the crazies are asstards who drive on mountain roads and run down cyclists.
40% are SUVs -- "Grosse Corvette, petite quéquette" personified. Getting into your SUV isn't compensation enough. You have to drive like an idiot and make sure the M1A2 Abrams main battle tank get better gas milage than you. I can't possibly imagine how much these guys are burning, stomping on the accelerator, and squealing about, and driving superfast on the freeways. You can almost see the air pressure building up in front of them, forming a giant vector arrow. And then, they go weaving in and out of traffic, their roll-over-prone selves tipping left and right. Is it the vehicle that makes them drive like that -- is it the person already and they're attracted to the vehicle -- a bit of both?
1% are rice-boys -- No surprise here, as their cars can't really go fast anyway. Especially not with 50% more weight.
49% are generic boxes -- Interestingly, it's the 5-year-old wrong-colour-door-usualmobiles that has the highest number. Granted, they probably populate a higher percentage of cars on the road overall, so maybe this shouldn't be a surprise (just by sheer number). Nonetheless, it still stands that while the sports cars and ricers are the ones most would think drive like idiots, it remains that the 'never notice them in a crowd' type of vehicles seem to be the one that perpetrates the most and often worst offences. So, with regard to the question above of whether vehicles influence their drivers or vice versa, this is one case where it's neither of those, but the driver all on their own.
So what does this all mean? Not sure I really have a point or any conclusions from just a single metric and observation.
Except maybe that the metrics used to determine insurance rates are wrong -- heh.
GST Fee for cross-border shipment via FedEx ground: 11ish bucks.
Fedex Service Fees: 25 bucks.
WTF, over 200% markup for a computerized, automated billing proceedure? Asses.
BTW: Package was crushed, and the computer case inside damaged. Don't use FedEx ground. I'd stick with the regular postal service.
(taken from http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2005/11.html)
In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
...
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased… It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim.”
Surprised? Not entirely, but still astounding that one of the top "news" sources (anyone remember when Fox was just some segment on other TV stations?) has admitted to lying (fair and balanced what?), has been given court permission to do so, that almost no one has covered this story... and that even if the USA public knew, would they care? They don't seem to care about other more glaring and consequential distrortions...
(More)
It's kind of funny. On the nights I feel as though I didn't do enough, I end up quite sore... on the nights I think I'll end up sore, due to work or not stretching out afterwords, I end up not sore. Hmmm. Tuesday's class had me not leading and the class didn't feel all that strenuous (though probably working areas I haven't worked in a while) and good for working on some problem areas. But when I got home I decided to wail on the bag for about 20 mins pretty much non-stop. That did it. Back, shoulders, arms, legs = sore. Which means I should do it more often, those muscles obviously need to be worked out more. Now that my shoulder only hurts during excercise, I'll be able to work that in more.
There are interesting differences between gaming groups in their approach to the game/campaign. Some groups I've been with, when something weird happens, take it in context as 'wow, that's powerful magic' or 'yeeps, that was weird, what was that?' Others take it from a slightly different perspective: 'WTF?' 'what spell could possibly have done that?' It seems to be group dynamics at work -- I don't think I know of any group where some of the players did A, while others did B, and I'm pretty sure my take on situations are coloured how the rest of the table speaks about it.
How come is it that some of the most vocal proponents of 'the oil companies are ripping us off' are the same most vocal proponents of 'free market or death!' ? Also, even if ANWR was opened to so-called exploration 3 years ago, a) nothing would be coming out of the ground yet so no price break b) the amount that would come out when it did is so miniscule (2% daily output of the world) as to impact prices by about 1c per gallon, if even. Production != solution, dimwits.
TJ's got their Soba noodles back! Too bad they're Wheat Flour first, then Buckwheat -- dagnabbit. Speaking of asian foods, I should go hunting for a nice shallow-pot tea set again. The kwoon actually sells one, maybe I should see if it suits me...
Why the smeg do companies want you to register at their site to download a frikken manual? Provide me the link to the file already, dammit! Is there a reason you desperately need my email address? Do you really think I'm going to believe that it's going to remain private et al?
Rant Alert. But it deals with food, so it has to be good!
This one will probably elicit some strong reactions, but its something I have to get off my chest, if only that it is shoved into my face way to often these days.
This could be a long one.
As a disclaimer, I'll start off by saying that I'm sure those who know me will scoff at any views I might have regarding weight loss, but I will counter that by staying having researched the opposite has garnered me plenty of information that guides my thoughts. I'll also say that this rant deals with those who are not suffering from a medical condition that may throw the balance completely off kilter. Oh, and, of course, I'm not a doctor. Those having been said, I'm going to dive right in...
I'm getting admittedly very sick of hearing more and more proclaim "Carbs are Evil! Burn them! Cast their heretic nature into the flames! Repent!" Why am I having enough? Because I think it's a great deal of bunk, at least as far as they (being those so-called professionals) are taking it. Carbs are NOT evil. They, specifically, are not the cause of all ills. Yes, people who go onto Atkins/Low-Carb diets often lose weight. But the question is: Why?
I'll let you in on a little secret: Because they've reduced their caloric intake. Yes the very same information that has been proclaimed for years as the key to weight loss. When Calories In < Calories Burned, one loses weight. But, you ask, how can they reduce their caloric intake if they're eating protein/fat, which has more calories per gram than does carbos? Easy, for two main reasons:
1 - Eating meat/et al fills one up faster than eating bread or potatoes or what have you. Feeling full faster equals eating less overall. Plus, the feeling of fullness lasts longer.
2 - They eat less junk. Less candies, less sodas, less spoonfuls of sugar on the morning breakfast cereal, etc, etc. Also, with it harder to get 'no carb' snacks easily, they eat less overall. (Amusingly and interestingly, one can note that while giving up the sweets/snacks has always been professed somehow people will actually do that on this diet)
Put those two together, and one ends up eating less calories overall. Combine that with a good exercise program (c'mon, eating right isn't the only thing one needs to do, seriously) and good gains can be had.
But its NOT the absence of carbs per se. In fact, if you look at the Low Carb diets and compare that to my own food/eating page, you'll see that many of the precepts are pretty much the same. Lots of added sugar and too too much refined or superstarchy, bad. Eat a proper amount of (low-glycemic) carbs as part of a good balance, exercise, and you'll start shedding the pounds. Eat an Atkins meat/fat-only diet, and you'll likely have serious kidney problems as well as a wonderful amount of nutritional deficiencies. Or even gain weight.
Certainly, eating the popular meat and potatoes (rapid starch with fatty) be it steak and potato or burger and fries does impact the body in how it processes and stores the food and fat. What does this mean? Don't do it every day. Balance.
WHY, then, are these diets, and this new mantra, so popular? Simple.
1 - Because its new. Remember oat bran a while ago? While this one has some longevity compared to earlier diets, the new 'miracle diet' always gets press and advertising.
2 - Biggest reason: it provides a scapegoat. "Oh, it's not my fault, it's those naughty carbs."
Right. Eating too much of _anything_ is not the way to go; think about it, there is probably a pretty good reason why we are omnivores. The old adage of eating a balanced diet is right on; fast food, snacks and sodas is not a balanced diet. Neither is nothing but filet mignon or wheat grass.
The most important thing is self-involvement. Take an opportunity to learn from and about your body. Pay attention to it. Read information, make decisions, and pay attention to what is happening. Pay attention to what you are, or are not, doing. If you have a goal, realize that all goals take time, and work towards it. Remember that everyone's body is different (and that there are 3 main body types/metabolic). That is the key (or keys) to success.
And remember that rapid change usually means rapid change back once you 'go off it' - slow change with permanent lifestyle changes equals long-term.
If a low-carb (note I do not say Atkins, for that extreme way leads to ills) diet is an acceptable way for one to structure themselves around to achieve some results, well, more power to them.
But don't say nor think the blanket statement of carbs = evil.
One of the downsides to being a senior student is I rarely ever get any "well done" or "nice!" comments while doing line drills/etc (anymore). -grump-
The broohaha continues over the 1/2 second boobage exposure during the halftime show of the superbowl (refereed to as a "Wardrobe Malfunction"). Boobies = ohmyfuckinggod. War, death and dismemberment = whatever. Commercials for beating up the elderly, dogs biting crotch, misogyny, etc = ok. Boobage = bad.
Anyone else find it fucking ironic that 50% of the adds were for fucking ERRECTILE ENHANCEMENT and BIG TRUCKS/CARS? But mustn't show boobies! Boobies bad! My PENIS ENHANCING TRUCK = GOOD! 4 hour + errections = EXCELLENT!
(actually, they did finally say "errections lasting over 4 hours, while rare, require immediate medical attention." Ha.)
Fuck Fortis Inc, fuck every single one of their executives, their executive's wives, and their children. Fuck every single one of the shareholders who favoured this. Fuck those shareholder's wives, those shareholder's children. Fuck every single engineer working on this project. Fuck those engineer's wives, fuck those engineer's children. Fuck them all.
Would you like me to tell you how I really feel? There is a reason this category is called Rants.
Amnesty International has decried the execution of convicted felons who were minors at the time of the crime, calling upon China, Congo, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the USA to end the practise.
Texas was the USA state fingered for executing the most minors. Asked for comment, Texan leaders stated: "Foreign countries [ed note: Amnesty International is not a country] should stay out of our domestic affairs and policies."
Bush Jr, current USA president, is from Texas. The lines of irony and aiya are pretty easy to draw from there.
Oh for the love of... BushCo is now arguing against a new WHO report that suggests we eat healthier. While their claim of wanting more focus on "balancing diet with physical activity" is, I guess, commendable, calling the report faulty science is too much. Wouldn't want to piss off those cheeseburgerfires agrobiz types.
Look. Eating stuff that's "bad for you" isn't going to kill you unless that is all you eat. With most people hardly excercising, kaiboshing anything that is trying to promote people eat better food most of the time is plain dumb, because otherwise "bad food" is all people will eat.
Sometimes, its better off not knowing.
I ran into a (former) co-worker, from my previous employment. Turns out ... a) the company which had seemed relatively stingy (even so far as one of the upper upps saying how much money we'd (they'd) made in a year where the employee's had found conditions more and more strict) suddenly began giving stock to the high-placed employees (of which I think I would have been part of)... b) the company was later bought by a larger company... c) those stock notes suddenly became Real Money (tm). I lost/missed out.
How much? Well, while this guy was already making good cash in salary, and later went on to contract for insanely good compensation, he was able to take a 4 month climbing vacation. Then get his commercial fixed-wing license. And get his rotor-wing license (@ $24,000+). And now he's moving to BC to be a 'copter pilot, climb, etc, at a young age.
What have I accomplished?
I've been thinking of posting all about my extreme dislike of Leaf Blowers. Never mind how this could lead me into a long discussion about the absolute obsession bay area people seem to have about keeping nary a leaf from showing anywhere, leading to virtual armies of gardener-worker-types running around with their backpack-powered leaf blowers on a never-ending basis... -breath- Needless to say, I think its a bit insane and extreme. But, since that seems as ingrained into the psyche of the people living here as is the culture of the automobile, and as such it is unlikely to change anytime soon, my bigger rant has to do with the whole leaf blower experience and why I hate them so: flying particles of high-velocity eye-shredding death while you try to bike down the road (ever tried riding with your eyes closed because you just got them full of crap?) and, worse in my eye (no pun intended), the way these things are powered.
Imagine being awakened by the most noxious smell ever devised. Or riding through not only a cloud of particles, but also thick blue smoke of burning oil and gasoline. That is the way these things work, powered by two-stroke engines where they have to burn oil because, well, that's just the way they work. It is estimated that all the two stroke engines in Cali emit about as much noxious gasses as the cars do. Yes, you read that right. And with the burning of oil and no exhaust control, I imagine what they're putting out in type not volume is actually worse.
So the good news is that California today won the right in court to impose stricter standards than are being introduced federally. As is the usual case, when a public agency goes 'we wish to protect people's lives and make the world a better place' the industry goes 'fuckyouwearerightandourproductsaresafeandyougoaway', decides they want to make as much money as possible, and they went to the federal government to impose a 'national standard' that, of course, they wrote and, of course, fell far short of what Cali wanted. Well, haha on them. Cali can now ask them to simply put catalytic converters on them. And I do believe they are also urging, if not forcing, the switch to 4-stroke engines which do not burn oil (hell, our lawn mower back home was a 4 stroke).
Of course, this will take years to implement fully. But there is hope to not wake up to a house full of fumagationofdeath, and with the equivalent of several million cars off the road in reduced pollution. Then all one has to do is dodge the flying debris.
Counterbalance: Speaking of industry and their 'fuck you/we jerk off to your money' attitude: this. No surprise, really. Just another thing to depress one's general sense of well being.
A gaggle scary and/or thought-provoking links.
In keeping with the food theme
How to influence people and policy while pretending not to
How the next election will be won (especially the first quote under the image and the first of the letters) Also read (and there is pretty simple instructions available on how the database can be changed with nothing but MS Access)
And to end on a somewhat humourous link
Read: this article, and think about it. 4g PER! 6g per for SCHOOLS! And the last line? The agricultural industry (as in the petrochem/agribusiness/big corporate) in the USA is nuts. And I don't mean delicious organically grown peppered cashews either.