Saturday, February 28, 2009
And as for the "apology", I owe it to my (few) readers. I've been burned out lately, and have had nothing of notable worth about which to blog. Hopefully I will get things back on track soon.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
I did stupid things in it. I nearly died in it after falling asleep at the wheel while driving home on the freeway. [You can see the damage on the front-right fender; that was me hitting side brush]. I had the back window broken with a baseball bat. Thank you roving gang of high school punks. I had a CB radio installed. See the antenna on the roof? I think my friends and I were able to contact maybe one or two people in four years worth of random bantering on the airwaves. My friend thought it would be a good idea to kick out the right-side tail light...as a joke. Ha...ha.
If it were not for this car, my life may have turned out differently. I'm not sure how I would have made it to school and work everyday. I lived in Kent and went to school in Burien (13 miles between the two). After I moved to Seattle for college, I no longer needed the car. I parked it behind my grandparents' apartment building in case I needed it for something; I never did. So it goes that I had it marked for pickup and removal, and I hope it enjoyed its time with me as much as I did with it.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
This gentleman was confused by my selfless gesture. He was adamant about me being entitled to be rung up next. "You've been waiting here longer," he said. After repeatedly assuring him that it was fine, he went ahead of me. He asked me what my name was, and he told me that his name was Joe Mclean. He also noted that he was 90 years old and had never been given the nice treatment I gave him. He thanked me again and went on his way. I couldn't help but feel better knowing that I made a 90 year old man's day by means of a simple selfless gesture.
Joe Mclean, you're the man.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
- 6:00 a.m. spin class.
- Maple and brown sugar oatmeal for breakfast.
- A cup of herbal, caffeine free, tea.
- A granny smith apple for a mid-morning snack.
- A cheap (10 for $10) microwave meal for lunch.
- A nutri-grain bar for mid-afternoon snack.
- Dinner is...not yet defined. Something healthy.
- Hours of sleep.
Also, drink nearly 120 fl.oz. of water for the entire day. But stay away from Vitamin Water. Instead, drink regular water or Smart Water.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
- A pair of (brightly colored) high top sneakers.
- A pair of skinny jeans.
- A t-shirt (preferably v-neck)
- A cardigan, or a zip-up hoodie will suffice.
- A backwards baseball cap is optional.
- Long, emo-ish, hair. (extra points for highlights).
Friday, February 13, 2009
“I didn’t think about how we would afford it. I don’t really get pocket money. My dad sometimes gives me £10.”I cringe. I cringe at the thought of how much stupidity and irrationality are consuming the world. Read about this joyous event here.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Anyways, as I was walking home from downtown I noticed that the missing smoke shop is returning to its new location on Pike and Boylston (a mere single block away from its previous location). That means that whenever I'm feeling lazy, and have to make a tobacco run, I can make the five minute venture over to Pike and Boylston. Good times indeed.
Also, I was called a "punk f*ggot" after refusing to let someone use my cell phone; I was also conversing on the phone when this happened.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
"A person is guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a child if,by act or omission, he knowingly causes or encourages a child to commit or otherwise contributes to a child's commission of a delinquent act."Okay, now let's say this code refers to an adult purchasing alcohol for a minor. That would make the adult guilty, right? Using straightforward logic would tell us 'yes'. However, let's look at what the definition of a delinquent act is, according to SMC 12A.18.010:
"Delinquent act" means an act committed by a child which would be designated a crime if committed by an adult."Now let me ask you this: if you are 21 years of age or older (in Washington state, at least), is it a crime to consume alcohol? Answer: no. Henceforth, we are presented with the logical flaw. The adult could not be guilty of providing the minor with alcohol, on the grounds that the very act itself is not delinquent. Arguments and refutations can be posted in Comments.
Of course, you can just go over to SMC 12A.24.100 and make me eat my own words:
A. It is unlawful for any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years to possess, consume or otherwise acquire liquor.
B. Subsection A of this section shall not apply to:
1. Liquor given or permitted to be given to a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years by a parent or guardian and consumed in the presence of the parent or guardian;
2. Liquor given for medicinal purposes to a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years by a parent, guardian, physician or dentist;
3. Liquor given to a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years when such liquor is being used in connection with religious services and the amount consumed is the minimal amount necessary for the religious service.
C. It is unlawful for any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years to purchase or attempt to purchase liquor. A person between the ages of eighteen (18) and twenty (20) years, inclusive, who violates this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ninety (90) days or by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) or by both such imprisonment and fine; provided, however, that a minimum fine of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250) shall be imposed and any sentence requiring community service shall require not fewer than twenty-five (25) hours of such service.
You can even get matching sets!
The Obama administration has vowed to take a diplomatic approach to greatly improving the United States' relation with Iran. The New York Times reports that
"Mr. Ahmadinejad promised that if the United States was truly serious about changing the countries’ relations, then Iran was ready to respond in kind. 'It is clear that change should be fundamental, not tactical, and our people welcome real changes,” he said. “Our nation is ready to hold talks based on mutual respect and in a fair atmosphere.' "Of course, I see this happening: Iran will want the right to develop nuclear technologies for energy use only. The U.S. will not feel comfortable with this, given President Ahmadinejad's statements regarding the "wiping of Israel off the map". Either side will have to make a major concession in order for a stable relationship to exist; the U.S. has faith in Iran's pledge to seek peaceful nuclear technology -or- Iran will have to abandon its nuclear pursuits.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Apparently the word Crackoon already exists. After googling the word, UrbanDictionary.com was the first entry. Here is that definition:
"a [crackhead] who digs through garbage and has dark bags under their eyes. much like a racoon."My definition came in at #11.
Homocoon [hO-mO-koon] n. - A homosexual raccoon. This is an old term that some friends and I coined maybe a year or so ago. We now introduce it to the public. Use it as you will.
From the MSNBC article:
They’re going to watch these kids very carefully for eating problems, growing [problems], and then seizures, jaundice, heart problems, lung problems, blindness, developmental delays — there’s a laundry list of things. Long term, because some of these children will be physically or mentally challenged, there’s a looming price tag out here. The hospital bill alone will run $1.5 to $3 million. Forget about getting to college; just to get through special-needs stuff — it’s going to have to come from somewhere, either the taxpayers of California or her family or her church or the hospital. But she can’t do it alone.TV networks and publishing houses that jump on the opportunity to throw millions of dollars at this women are deplorable. In no way is this woman entitled to taxpayers' money, as well as other "free" means of subsistence. She needs to give these children over for adoption. There is no other way to ensure that these children won't grow up living a worse life than the one she had as an only child. Ms. Suleman, you are wrong in thinking that you're going to give these children great lives. You are going to raise these children in the worst possible way, and it's absolutely appalling that you would even think of exploiting these children for monetary gain or endorsement.
Like I said, the American dream has hit a new low. Only in America could one get the notion of free entitlement due to deliberate circumstance.
Here is the MSNBC article/interview.
Watch this video, and tell me if even though it's a joke, Nancy Pelosi (Krisin Wiig) is right.
My bus, ST 522, picks me up at 6th and Pike around 8:05am. My coworker just happened to be waiting for the same bus at the time. We chatted and waited for quite a while. We waited until nearly 8:45am for not one, but two buses to never show. I suggested that we hop on to the Metro 49 to the University District, and then connect with the Metro 372 to our point of destination. So we did. We enjoyed a nice scenic and sunny bus ride to the University District. Then we waited for about 15 minutes for the Metro 372, and made it to work just five minutes short of 10:00am. What an exciting morning! Then all hell broke loose. The end.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Why is it crap? Although it goes with the character, the story is told in broken English. You tell me if you can stand reading a 200+ page book that reads like this:
Story of me. Passport man bald. Fat. No look good. I break his neck real fast. Double swift kick.
Of course, those are not direct from the book, but they are similar.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Dear Scott,If anyone knows who or where Scott is, please alert him to these facts immediately. I fear that Scott and Julia are no more, and all because this absolutely eloquent letter never made it into his hands. Does anyone have any thoughts or comments about this letter? Do you think Scott should take Julia back? Should Julia accept her mistake and move on with her life? I'd like to know what people think on this. Please let me know via comments on this post.
It kills me that in recent days I have caused doubt in both our minds about the stability of our relationship. You definitely don't deserve this after some five years of standing devoted by my side. I have harmed you, and I'm sorry even though I know apologies are fruitless in easing your pain
I need you to know that I love you sincerely and that I believe we will grow old together. This disruption in our relationship will be seen down the road as a rough time, but it will be evidence of the strength of our love. "If we could make it through that," we'll say, "then we can make it through anything." I believe this, ultimately, despite how irreparable the damage seems right now. Like I said before - sometimes the relationship needs
theto be torn apart, as in remodeling a building, in order to make it better. I truly feel that good will come out of this. Life is hard and love is so difficult, but you can't give up. If you are persistent (it's like practicing piano) you will find gratification and fulfillment.
We will stay together and get stronger with time. I will support you and you can trust me. You (us) are #1 to me. I'll love you always.
Obama nominates pro-p*rn, pro-abortion lawyer for the number 2 position in the office of the Attorney General.You'll notice that they need to double-check their communications for errors before they send them out to the masses. "Phone calls need now."
Phone calls need now!
February 4, 2009
Your phone calls are urgently needed now! President Obama has nominated David Ogden to be the second person in command in the U.S. office of the Attorney General! Odgen must be confirmed by the Senate.
Call your two senators and tell them to vote against the Ogden nomination. Odgen is no friend of the family.
In various cases, he has filed briefs opposing:
- As an attorney in private practice, David W. Ogden has filed briefs pushing for gays in the military.
- He has litigated numerous obscenity and pornography cases on behalf of clients like Playboy, Penthouse, the ACLU and the largest distributor of hardcore pornographic movies.
- parental notification before a minor's abortion
- spousal notification before an abortion
- the military's policy against public homosexuals serving in uniform
- the Children's Internet Protection Act and the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act.Take Action!
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.Read the rest of the (brief) article here.
"She must have heard us talking about her"Which is referencing this email:
Ooophs! Two Pygmy's - C. Palahniuk are in the mail today, got knocked out of my field of view, sorry I am late getting these to you.I've been waiting for this book for two weeks now.
ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.I was under the impression that law was intended to protect rights, not "eliminate" them. Now let's be sure to make this perfectly clear: this is not bigotry. Californians (52% of them) do not hate gay and lesbian couples. They probably even know a few gay people. They have no qualms with them. It's just that when [we] want to have the same right as them, they get upset. We can be as gay as we want to be. We just can't get married (in California). That crosses the line. How dare we try to earn a legal right that will not affect straight peoples' legal right. There's no way to convince me otherwise that this is purely religious (or cultural) bigotry.
Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.
Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
On March 5th, we will continue to fight for our rights. We will never stop fighting until we get what is equally deserved.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Calories: 1,250 (Calories from fat 730)
Total Fat: 81g or 125% of your daily value
Saturated Fat: 32g or 160% of your daily value
Trans Fat: 1g
Cholesterol: 100mg or 33% of your daily value
Sodium: 680mg or 28% of your daily value
Total Carbohydrates: 108g or 36% of your daily value
(1) Marriage is a civil contract between a male and a female who have each attained the age of eighteen years, and who are otherwise capable.
(2) Every marriage entered into in which either the husband or the wife has not attained the age of seventeen years is void except where this section has been waived by a superior court judge of the county in which one of the parties resides on a showing of necessity.
[1998 c 1 § 3; 1973 1st ex.s. c 154 § 26; 1970 ex.s. c 17 § 2; 1963 c 230 § 1; Code 1881 § 2380; 1866 p 81 § 1; 1854 p 404 §§ 1, 5; RRS § 8437.]
Notes:Finding -- 1998 c 1: "(1) In P.L. 104-199; 110 Stat. 219 , the Defense of Marriage Act, Congress granted authority to the individual states to either grant or deny recognition of same-sex marriages recognized as valid in another state. The Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage for purposes of federal law as a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that a state shall not be required to give effect to any public act or judicial proceeding of any other state respecting marriage between persons of the same sex if the state has determined that it will not recognize same-sex marriages.
(2) The legislature and the people of the state of Washington find that matters pertaining to marriage are matters reserved to the sovereign states and, therefore, such matters should be determined by the people within each individual state and not by the people or courts of a different state." [1998 c 1 § 1.]
Intent -- 1998 c 1: "(1) It is a compelling interest of the state of Washington to reaffirm its historical commitment to the institution of marriage as a union between a man and a woman as husband and wife and to protect that institution.
(2) The court in Singer v. Hara, 11 Wn. App. 247 (1974) held that the Washington state marriage statute does not allow marriage between persons of the same sex. It is the intent of the legislature by this act to codify the Singer opinion and to fully exercise the authority granted the individual states by Congress in P.L. 104-199; 110 Stat. 219 , the Defense of Marriage Act, to establish public policy against same-sex marriage in statutory law that clearly and definitively declares same-sex marriages will not be recognized in Washington, even if they are made legal in other states." [1998 c 1 § 2.]
It still amazes me that there is absolutely zero legal grounding for not allowing gay marriages in Washington State, and yet, it is still illegal. Why? To reaffirm a historical commitment? Wow. I can think of a few other historical commitments that didn't turn out so well.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Thanks to Seattle Represent.
On a similar note, today marks the first day of Iceland having a lesbian Prime Minister, Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir. She was chosen as Prime Minister by her party, the Social Democratic Alliance. Prior to her acceptance of the position, she was the Minister of Social Affairs and Social Security.
The new law, which passed by 84 votes to 41, will make marriage gender neutral.
The Scandinavian country already allows gay and lesbian couples to enter into civil partnerships, but LGBT rights groups had long complained the law does not go far enough.
In 2004 a similar law, which proposed to abolish the system of civil partnerships and replace it with one single gender neutral marriage law for all citizens, was rejected by the Norwegian parliament.
The new legislation will replace a 1993 law that gives gays the right to enter civil unions similar to marriage, but refuses them the right to church weddings or to be considered as adoptive parents.
As well as more equal partnership rights, it would expand the provision of parenting rights.
A stereotype joke:
A mathematician, an engineer and a chemist are at a conference. They are staying in adjoining rooms. One evening they are downstairs in the bar. The mathematician goes to bed first. The chemist goes next, followed a minute or two later by the engineer. The chemist notices that in the corridor outside their rooms a rubbish bin is ablaze. There is a bucket of water nearby. The chemist starts concocting a means of generating carbon dioxide in order to create a makeshift extinguisher but before he can do so the engineer arrives, dumps the water on the fire and puts it out. The next morning the chemist and engineer tell the mathematician about the fire. She admits she saw it. They ask her why she didn't put it out. She replies contemptuously "there was a fire and a bucket of water: a solution obviously existed."A mathematical limerick:
- A dozen, a gross, and a score
- Plus three times the square root of four
- Divided by seven
- Plus five times eleven
- Is nine squared and not a bit more
- Person 1: What's the integral of 1/cabin?
- Person 2: A natural log cabin.
- Person 1: No, a houseboat – you forgot to add the c!
The first part of this joke relies on the fact that the primitive (formed when finding the antiderivative) of the function 1/x is ln(x). The second part is then based on the fact that the antiderivative is actually a class of functions, requiring the inclusion of a constant of integration, usually denoted as C — something which many calculus students forget. Thus, the indefinite integral of 1/cabin is "ln(cabin) + c", or "A natural log cabin plus the sea", ie. "A houseboat".
The departure of the Bush administration and the arrival of the Obama administration has thrown me into a flux of being supportive of both Republican and Democratic party ideals. Of course, I've always considered myself a fiscal conservative and a social liberal; and I've also never associated myself with any political party. Why? George Washington told me not to do so, and he was right. Gays should have equal rights; taxes should not be given out (or back, in this upcoming stimulus package) to those who don't pay them; that government is best which governs least.
It would make sense, to me at least, that if there is a giant deficit hanging over our heads, we should be putting efforts into reducing that deficit. I have credit card debt. The monthly bills drain me of all my income. What should I be doing? Paying off those debts, and not adding to them. The stimulus package passed by the House this week is said to be 2/3 spending and 1/3 tax cuts. Granted, I will enjoy having more money in my pocket, but we cannot continue to cut taxes. The intent of cutting taxes is so people get so flash flooded with money, which results in an increase in consumer spending. I just got $500 for free (inaccurately so), and I've always wanted a new flat screen television. Let's illustrate this process:
- My employer makes money.
- I work, so I get a share of that money.
- A share of that money gets taken by the government.
- I use my money as a consumer; the government uses my money for its [own use].
[Note: I became distracted whence writing this post, and therefore, it must remain incomplete. I still find value in what it has to say, and so I am posting it as I left it.]
One of the duties to be performed at [my] bookstore is to call customers when an item they ordered arrives. When new employees start to make these calls, they may get flustered, not knowing exactly what to say. I thought it would be beneficial to all those future new employees if I wrote up a general 'script' to follow when calling customers. I hope it helps. (For this demonstration, 'C' will denote 'Customer', 'E' will denote 'Employee', and 'O' will denote 'Other'.)
[E] "Hi, can I please speak with (Insert Customer's Name)?"
[C] (in a rather jovial tone) "Why yes, let me go get (him/her/it)!"
[C] (cont., yelling, but away from the phone) "Mom!/Dad!/You!...phone for you!"
[O] (speaking to customer) "Who is it?"
[C] "I don't know."
[O] "Well find out!"
[C] (speaking to employee) "Who's calling please?"
[E] "This is (State Your Name) with [Business Name Omitted] in [City Omitted]."
[C] (yelling, but away from the phone) "It's (Employee's Name) with [Business Omitted]!"
[O] "Oh! Ask them if my book(s) came in yet!"
[C] "Did (his/her/its) book(s)/item(s) come in?"
[E] (in a pleasant tone) "Why, yes it/they did. And we'll hold..."
[C] (interrupting, and yelling away from the phone) "They have it/them!"
[O] "How long will they hold it?"
[C] "How long will you hold it for?"
[E] "We'll hold it for up to ten days, and you can pick it up at the cashier when you come in."
[C] "Okay, thanks, bye." (abrupt click...followed by dial tone).
Things I learned while making this:
- When not in possession of a meat pounder, a glade scented candle will suffice.
- When the sauce is thin and runny, take it off the stove (heat).
- With time and practice, I will be able to cook meals without using 80% of my cooking-ware.
Oh, and it's now February 2009. Where did the time go? Also, tomorrow is Groundhog's day. I'm hoping it's overcast in Pennsylvania.