Don't eat too much candy, or this could happen to you:

Thanks again to ExtremePumpkins.com

Check out all the winners of the Extreme Pumpkin Carving Contest

Posted at 07:24 AM in Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Stop Traffic Light Photo tickets . . . (anyone have any experience with this product? Does it work?)

Photo Fog is a spray that makes your license plate super reflective. The flash of a photo radar or red light camera is reflected back to the camera. The result of this is an over-exposed picture, with an unreadable license plate number.

Photo Fog is proven to be effective against the flash of photo radar, red light cameras, and speed cameras. However, Photo Fog only works when the flash is being used by the cameras. Because of this limitation, it is only recommended in areas where the Super Protector license plate cover can not be used.

 http://www.buyradardetectors.com/Products/OnTrack/Photo-Fog-Large.aspx

Posted at 06:49 AM in Science | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack

Smoke from wildfires in southern California drifts over the Pacific Ocean on Sunday in this image via NASA's Aqua satellite. NASA Photo via Associated Press

Deadly walls of flame -- 'It's almost like a war' / DISASTER TOLL: 16 dead, thousands homeless, 16000 homes destroyed.

Just insane . . .

Photo courtesy SFGate.com

Posted at 07:01 AM in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack

Another terrific pic, courtesy of ExtremePumpkins.com:

Check out all the winners of the Extreme Pumpkin Carving Contest
http://www.extremepumpkins.com/conwinbrear2.html

Posted at 06:10 AM in Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The argument that the Iraq invasion was a response to terrorism is based upon a false premise: Namely, that September 11th is what led to the decision to effect a regime change.

The Project for the New American Century suggests that the Iraq invasion plans were in the works since 1997. Here's an excerpt:

"In June 1997, a group of self-proclaimed foreign-policy experts drafted a statement of principles aimed at making a case that the United States should use its position as the world's only superpower to shape the events of the 21st century, to ensure they are favorable to America's principles and interests. The statement maintained that the United States has a vital role to play in advancing the cause of peace and security throughout the world and that the use of military power and bold global leadership will be essential elements of this plan. The goal was to make America as great a nation in the 21st century as it had been in the 20th century.

These principles, and the group of men who espoused them, became known as the Project for the New American Century. The 25 original signatories of the statement included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber.

On the surface, these principles seem a reasonable definition for the role that a superpower should take to provide the global leadership expected by our friends and allies. But as the group became more active in their pronouncements, their motives became highly questionable . . ."

Why American business should care
by Ronald Bosrock, Published October 27, 2003
http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/4172267.html

Posted at 06:00 AM in Current Affairs, Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

. . . isn't it possible that your radar gun is miscalibrated?"

I got my 1st speeding ticket in nearly 10 years last month, and my date for traffic court is tonite -- that's when I came across this picture.

The great irony of this is that it was in Mrs. Effluvia's station wagon, and I was barely moving. In my car, I am frequently attempting to break the sound barrier (yes, most of those times it was me and not the Concorde you heard). It's almost embarrassing to get a speeding ticket in a PT Cruiser . . .

Posted at 02:33 PM in Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Gematriculator is a service that uses the infallible methods of Gematria developed by Mr. Ivan Panin to determine how good or evil a web site or a text passage is:

Basically, Gematria is searching for different patterns through the text, such as the amount of words beginning with a vowel. If the amount of these matches is divisible by a certain number, such as 7 (which is said to be God's number), there is an incontestable argument that the Spirit of God is ever present in the text. Another important aspect in gematria are the numerical values of letters: A=1, B=2 ... I=9, J=10, K=20 and so on. The Gematriculator uses Finnish alphabet, in which Y is a vowel.

Experts consider the mathematical patterns in the text of the Holy Bible as God's watermark of authenticity. Thus, the Gematriculator provides only results that are absolutely correct.

Uh, sure. Try the Gematriculator here anyway. Its amusingly good fun

Posted at 01:06 PM in Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

The song I cannot get out of my head today is Sister Hazel's pop confection: "Change Your Mind"   

Don't say you weren't warned . . .

Posted at 04:46 PM in Music | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Giant Carnivorous Pumpkin, courtesy of ExtremePumpkins.com

Check out all the winners of the Extreme Pumpkin Carving Contest
http://www.extremepumpkins.com/conwinbrear2.html

Posted at 03:17 PM in Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

1984 Redux: Political double speak has reached monumental proportions. Orwell explained (and predicted) that the motivation behind those who bastardize the language is to eliminate debate -- mostly about policy issues and apportionment of power. The old boy had a point.

Which brings me to my weekend peeve: Whenever Oil increases in price, you will hear it described as a “Tax.” This nonsense is spouted on Bloomberg, CNBC, CNN, Fox -- essentially anywhere the chattering headshold court. Here’s the typical thoughtless sound byte:

“With each dollar increase in the cost of a barrel of Oil, we lose almost 6 billion dollars of GDP. Price increases in Oil act as a Tax on the economy.”

There is no doubt that increased energy costs are a drag on the economy. The greater percentage of their finite resources consumers spend of gasoline and home heating oil, the less discretionary dollars they have to spend on other things. As oil prices rise, dollars which could be better spent elsewhere in the economy become unavailable. Rising energy prices are an expense, a cost, a drag on the economy.

That’s not my beef . . . It’s the disingenuous labelling the increase “a tax” which is so, well, Orwellian.

Why? We have organized ourselves in a society to collectively do what we could not accomplish as individuals. We form governments to administer these tasks, including the collection of (horror!) Taxes.

This turns out to be a good thing. Your taxes are what pays for teachers’ salaries, so your kids can get an education. Taxes build the schools, buy the books, fund the H.S. sports teams.

When oil prices go up, none of that revenue finds its way to schools. So pray tell me, how is it a tax?

Here’s another place where your tax dollars go: Police, Firefighters, EMTs. Have we already forgotten the valor of those who died trying to rescue others on September 11th? These were municipal employees; Their salaries were paid with tax dollars. So were their uniforms, police cruisers, walkie talkies, firetrucks, ladders, axes, oxygen masks, waterhoses. EMT’s use ambulances, emergency medical supplies and training -- all taxpayer supported.

When OPEC cuts production so oil prices go up . . . that money never finds its way to cops, EMTs, and firemen; It goes to the Saudis, who fund the Madras religous hate schools, which indoctrinated the terrorists who (tuition funded via Oil revenues) trained at flight schools where they learned to fly the planes that eventually took down the Twin Towers.

We haven’t even started discussing the roads those ambulances travel on, the bridges and tunnels the National Guard protects, or the harbors the Coast Guard patrols.

I find it especially galling to hear higher oil prices called a “Tax” during War time. This obnoxious denigration of tax dollars is a backhanded slap at society. It is offensive to anyone who thinks about it.

The Kevlar protecting the heart and lungs of every U.S. Military personnel in the Gulf was paid for by taxes. Each Abrams M1 tank, every F-117 stealth fighter, M16 rifle and tomahawk cruise missile is funded with tax dollars -- not higher oil prices. There are five aircraft carrier battle groups in the Gulf region; Each carrier group houses 10,000 men, has 3000 aircraft. Guess how they were paid for?

The next time you hear some Minister of Propaganda spouting this nonsense, challenge them on it. Ask them how much of this “tax” pays for teachers or cops or firefighters or soldiers in the armed forces. Force them to confront their own “Newspeak.”

Some of them aren’t even aware of what they are saying; These are the idiot Parrots with limited intellectual bandwidth. They exist in large numbers, and are dangerous when they repeat the meme.

Politely correct these people before they spread.

Much more insidious are the bastards who are fully cognizant of their word play. They need to be publicly humiliated for their linguistical crimes.

Freedom costs money. So do schools, roads, water supplies, and everything else a modern civilization requires. It behooves you to understand what does -- and does not -- pay for them.

Posted at 11:49 AM in Finance, Media | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBack

Counterleak: That is Alton Frye's idea to resolve the "who outed Ambassador Wilson's wife, former CIA covert operative Valerie Plame" issue. (Frye is the presidential senior fellow and counselor at the Council on Foreign Relations).

In a NYT op-ed piece, "Let Someone Else Do the Talking, Frye notes that there are 2 kinds of leaks:

"leaks elicited by a reporter while investigating a story often serve the public interest — and merit the journalist's protecting the identity of that source. Leaks initiated by self-serving antagonists in the political process — and calculated to exploit journalists as convenient mouthpieces — rarely serve the public interest and deserve less protection."

Once we've created this philosophical dichotomy, argues Frye, it becomes easier to resolve the present problem, as "Most journalists are properly wary of the second type of leak, and often decline to publish them. That was true, it appears, for some members of the news media who received calls regarding Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife, an undercover C.I.A. officer."

There are several problems with that approach. "Self-serving antagonists in the political process" often release information that incidentally serves the public interest. Of course guys like Karl Rove have a political agenda, and are calculatingly "exploiting journalists as convenient mouthpieces." But what they reveal sometimes has value.

Frye believes the reason journos don't reveal their sources is to ensure future access:

"Yet journalists are dissuaded from naming sources of all kinds by both ethical considerations and pragmatic concerns over future access. This creates a situation in which a devious leaker is shielded by the journalist's ethical restraint — and derives de facto constitutional shelter under the reporter's First Amendment privilege.

Is there a cure for this problem? Yes: call it counterleaking. To protect against such manipulative behavior — and to discipline those who practice it — reporters could themselves assume the status of confidential sources and share those names with other journalists."

I suspect Mr. Frye -- whom I've never read previously -- has spent too much time in Washington D.C. Divulging your sources under the cloak of plausible deniability is still, well, divulging your sources. Having a convenient lie handy to cover your ass doesn't make you any less of a liar, assuming you promised to guard the leaker's identity. (Perhaps Mr. Frye is ready to start consulting for Wall Street). As absurd as this idea may sound, some people prefer to maintain their integrity and keep their word just because it’s the right thing to do.

There may, however, be a hierarchy of competing ethics: When getting leaked info, a Journo must make a judgment call as to whether the leak content is newsworthy. What else influences that decision? I suspect that the more politically overt the motivation of the leaker, the higher level of "newsworthiness" the leaked data must contain in order to be published. Indeed, as we've seen in the present case, an obviously political leak with zero public interest content was not put into play by the 6 "legitimate" reporters who received the information. They made that political motivation/public interest analysis and decided on balance against publishing. The only columnist who used it was a well-known partisan hack with his own agenda.

So I find it unlikely that the 6 legit reporters would sua sponte follow Frye's advice to leak the information to other journos. Yet when we look at the entire process surrounding this leak from a strategic perspective, an interesting dilemma arises: What circumstances might pre-empt the confidentiality promise, and prompt the reporters to reveal their sources?

Consider this hypothetical: Let's take a random Senior Administration person (O.k., we'll use Karl Rove). Assume Rove testifies to a Senate committee about an unrelated matter. One of the Senators asks Rove a question about the Plame affair while he is under oath. Rove can either tell the truth, tell a lie, give an ambiguous noncommittal answer, or simply refuse to answer.

What happens if Rove lies under oath to the Senate?

That’s where things get interesting: The six journalists who received the original "tip" outing Valerie Plame have now become the de facto arbiters of all the leakers' public honesty. They are now a 6 man Truth Squad. The 6 journalists who know if Rove is lying or not would have to weigh which obligation is higher: Protecting the promise of confidentiality to a source, or reporting a newsworthy event. That event would create a competition of duties.

I believe that the reporters -- one of only 6 in the world -- who knew that Karl Rove committed perjury would have no choice but to publish that information. Thus, all future promises of confidentiality now come with a caveat: If you reveal data to me, but then lie publicly about it, my promise of confidentiality will disappear.

I imagine that the Plame leakers find themselves stuck in an interesting dilemma: Without any additional activity on their part, the Truth Squad will in all likelihood honor their confidentiality agreement and protect the sources; However, any public statements by the leakers or their surrogates is now subject to a high level of scrutiny by the Truth Squad.

Very interesting dilemma . . .

Posted at 03:30 PM in Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

It has been taboo for more than 500 years. But from fcuk to Four Weddings and a Funeral, the f-word has become so commonplace it now seems acceptable in everyday conversation. Is it no longer obscene? And if it isn't, what is? Guardian reporter Jonathan Margolis investigates:

"The first time I heard the word fuck, I was seven. My 12-year-old brother asked me if I wanted to know the worst word in the world. He whispered it to me and, although he wasn't quite sure what it meant, we both loved the idea of a word so rude that it could barely be uttered."

-Jonathan Margolis, Expletive deleted,
The Guardian, November 21, 2002

Why do I get the feeling that in terms of maturity, our culture is still in its teenage years versus the Brits?

Posted at 03:59 PM in Media | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

This does not bode well for continued public support for the war effort.

Sources:
Military Fatalities Data
http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/details.aspx

Military Fatalities Chart
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/USfatalities.html

Posted at 07:44 PM in War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Following are excerpts from Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's speech on Thursday at the Organization of the Islamic Conference in Putrajaya, Malaysia:

"We are up against a people who think. They survived 2,000 years of pogroms not by hitting back but by thinking. They invented socialism, communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so that they can enjoy equal rights with others. With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power . . ."

How on earth can you ever fight "people who think?" Here's a clue -- STOP BLOWING YOURSELVES UP AND KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN.

I'm not saying that Israel is flawless in all their actions -- they deserve plenty of criticism for some of their less informed decisions. But please, get a damned clue, will ya?

Posted at 04:06 PM in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

S&P 500 31 Day chart highlights the 2 failed attempts near approx. 1,050 (red arrows) and the breaking of a minor trend line (green line).

31 Day S&P Chart

Source: RedTech Research

As long as prices stay below 1,050, the market has a bearish tone as this level is a more significant overhead supply zone as the above chart highlights.

Random Items
Templeton feeling bearish
Overcapacity Stalls New Jobs
Big Banks & Enron: Partners in Crime
Gilder's Telecom Revolution Is Coming -- Eventually
Old Lessons for Modern Economic Policy? (The Austrian Theory)

Quote: "Some people skate to the puck. I skate to where the puck is going to be."
-Wayne Gretzky

Posted at 01:00 PM in Finance | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Wow! That's some move in a few short months -- most of it in the past few weeks. Thanks to everyone who visited, and I hope y'all come back agin!

Posted at 08:35 AM in Weblogs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Dug up from the local graveyard, the economy lies on a slab in the basement of the mad scientist, Dr. BushNGreenspan. Poking and prodding at the lifeless hulk sprawled out upon the lab table, but all the usual tricks failed to work. He replaced all the body parts with enlarged versions (including the Shwanstooker). He reversed the polarity. He even tried deficit spending . . . all to no avail. The dead body would not get off the cold slab.

Dr. BushNGreenspan sighed as recalled the most recent mishap. His trusted lieutenant, Herr Vogel Cheneywitz, was supposed to come back with the brain labeled “Early Stages Recovery.” At the brain depository, Herr Cheneywitz grabbed the wrong brain. He brought back one labeled “Post Bubble/Excess Capacity.” Even though Cheneywitz tore off the label before returning to the lab, BushNGreenspan suspected something was amiss.

A storm approached, and that gave the Doctor an idea. He fixed a copper cable to the lightening rod on the roof of the castle. The line ran down to a transformer which would step up the voltage. Desperate times called for desperate measures. The mad doctor jammed the copper cable into the nether regions of the beast, and waited for the next Fed meeting.

Finally, lightning struck! The room lit up white as the energy raced downt he copper into the machinary terminating in the beast.

BushNGreenspan called out to his assistant, Snowgor, “Throw the 1st Switch!”

Never before seen levels of electricity flowed into the hulking corpse. Nothing happened.

“Throw the 2nd Switch!”

More and yet more amperage poured into the lifeless body of the creature. And still no moment, no animus.

“THROW THE 3rd SWITCH!”

“ No, not the 3rd switch, master!”

“YES, THE 3rd SWITCH -- THROW IT NOW!!”

Gigajoules of of juice flowed into decaying behemoth.

And then, it stirred. Slowly, the creature lumbered off the table. At first, he twitched this way and that. As more and more amperage poured into his body, he began to dance, to jump, to move about.

And yet, something was not right. He walked, but awkwardly. He was alive, but still hooked up to the electrical stimulus. The big question: When the madman pull the cable out of the monster, will he be reanimated? Is it alive, or was it merely twitching dumbly to the powerful surge of electrical stimulus?

Will it collapse back once again when the juice is cut off?

I fear we are living in a “Frankenstein Economy.” That, IMHO, is the big question with the present economy. Can we defeat the normal business cycle? Can we take a dead piece of inanimate tissue, and by applying historical levels of tax cuts, interst rate cuts, increase monetary supply, devalue the currency, and any other trick you can think of, to defeat the usual refractory period?

Are we seeing the beginnings of a new cycle, or are we witnessing temporary effects of historical levels of stimulus? If its the latter, what sort of problems might this engender when we slump back onto the slab?

We hope the economy is getting better on a self sustaining basis; We fear it merely been “reanimated” due to the incredible levels of stimulus we’ve applied over the past few years (most especially, since the Iraq war started). The recent data points to a recovery that may be showing early signs of decay. The next 60 days will be crucial . . .

UPDATE
For an informative (and more serious) sequel to this piece, see the "Frankenstein Economy."

Posted at 09:35 PM in Film, Finance, Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

I was reviewing some docs on OpenSecrets -- the excellent online guide to money raising in American politics. I came across their older analysis of the corporate winners of the rebuild Iraq contest.

Of all the possible "real" reasons for invading Iraq we discussed in "Not-So-Hidden Agenda: Strategic and Economic Assessments of U.S. led Invasion in the Middle East (A Pre War Analysis, March 19, 2003), we never considered the possibility of enormous politcal largesse / corporate giveaway. Oh well, chalk up my lack of venal cynicism to naivete.

The OpenSecrets analysis -- Rebuilding Iraq -- The Contractors -- is a fascinating study, and worth reviewing. Here's an excerpt:

Even before the war in Iraq began March 20, the Bush administration was considering plans to help rebuild the country after fighting ceased. According to news reports in early March, the U.S. Agency for International Development secretly asked six U.S. companies to submit bids for a $900 million government contract to repair and reconstruct water systems, roads, bridges, schools and hospitals in Iraq.

The six companies analyzed -- Bechtel Group Inc., Fluor Corp., Halliburton Co. subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root, Louis Berger Group Inc., Parsons Corp. and Washington Group International Inc. -- contributed a combined $3.6 million in individual, PAC and soft money donations between 1999 and 2002, the Center reported on its news site, CapitalEye.org. Sixty-six percent of that total went to Republicans.

The bidding process has been criticized for including only a handful of companies, some with substantial political clout and none of which is based outside the United States. USAID officials said the recent invitations to bid on reconstruction contracts went to U.S. corporations for security reasons, and that foreign companies may compete for subcontracting work, Bloomberg News reports.

As the winners of this and other contracts to rebuild Iraq are announced, we will post their campaign contributions -- large or small -- below. (Figures represent total contributions made between 1999 and 2002, and include PAC, soft money and individual contributions to federal candidates, party committees and leadership PACs.^)

The full article (Rebuilding Iraq -- The Contractors) has a breakdown of each of the companies (not including subcontractors) by contribution percentage to each political party, dollar contribtutions to President Bush, a blurb about the company amd a description of the specifics of the contract. Fascinating reading.

The six companies are: Bechtel Group Inc., Halliburton Co., DynCorp, Stevedoring Services of America, Abt Associates Inc., SkyLink Air and Logistic Support (USA) Inc., International Resources Group, Research Triangle Institute, and Creative Associates International Inc.

Posted at 08:19 AM in Politics, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

This is a brilliantly executed piece of political commentary -- devastingly effective in making its point. All the text is verbatim comments from the Administration (or its spokepeople); All has been demonstrated to be totally false. Simply ingenious.

Harpers Magazine: The Revision Thing
All text is verbatim from senior Bush Administration officials and advisers.
(In places, tenses have been changed for clarity)

Once again, we were defending both ourselves and the safety and survival of civilization itself. September 11 signaled the arrival of an entirely different era. We faced perils we had never thought about, perils we had never seen before. For decades, terrorists had waged war against this country. Now, under the leadership of President Bush, America would wage war against them. It was a struggle between good and it was a struggle between evil.

It was absolutely clear that the number-one threat facing America was from Saddam Hussein. We know that Iraq and Al Qaeda had high-level contacts that went back a decade. We learned that Iraq had trained Al Qaeda members in bomb making and deadly gases. The regime had long standing and continuing ties to terrorist organizations. Iraq and Al Qaeda had discussed safe-haven opportunities in Iraq. Iraqi officials denied accusations of ties with Al Qaeda. These denials simply were not credible. You couldn't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talked about the war on terror . . .

You can see the rest of it at Harper's Magazine

Hat tip to LinkFilter

Posted at 08:35 PM in Media, War/Defense | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

This page cannot get laid.

Posted at 08:20 PM in Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Yankees lost the 7th game of the ACLS. At least, that's what the print edition of today's NY Post had in it. The editors of the Post, exhibiting their usual disdain for factual accuracy, published that and worse in todays paper:

10/17 2:06P (DJ) DJ MARKET TALK: Wasn't Dewey A Sox Fan?

2:06 (Dow Jones) EXTRA!! EXTRA!! "Despite holding a 3-2 lead in games over the Boston Red Sox, the Yankees couldn't get the job done at home," reports an editorial in News Corp.'s (NWS) New York Post Friday. "Their season ended last night in the seventh game of the American League Championship Series." The Post's editors must have given up and gone to bed before the eighth inning when the trailing Yankees tied the game and then went on to win with a homer in the 11th.

Source: Dow Jones Market Talk

Posted at 07:15 PM in Humor, Media | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Incredible reaction from Buzzflash -- after the briefest of mentions, as of midnight Thursday, nearly 5,000 visitors came to see "Bush to Cheney: Buh-Bye ?"

Statistics and Referrers for essays & effluvia
Average per day: 96.36
Today: 4483
In the last hour: 6
This week: 4790

Just amazing.

Posted at 06:29 AM in Weblogs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

This one is way under the radar, and, but for serendipity, I would never had caught it.

On the way hone tonite, Kitty, a fellow sufferer of the LIRR, showed me this little tidbit in (of all places) Liz Smith's gossip column in Long Island Newsday. Smith is a catty old biddy who's usually more interested in what celeb was out with who else's wife, whether this or that famous person has had more or less plastic surgery than Cher, and which of the Fab5 on Queer Eye for Straight Guy is not really gay; That's right -- she actually "in-ed" somebody.

Y'all know, the really important stuff.

But Liz surprises and amuses in today's Newsday, waxing eloquent (for Liz at least) on matters of great import to the body polity:

"IF I WRITE here that Team Bush reportedly commissioned private polls indicating that Dick Cheney is a drag on the GOP ticket and that the Halliburton connection doesn't help either, I suppose many of you will just chalk it up to my "liberal media bias." But no. I'm not the one who said this. It comes from The American Conservative, a magazine put out by Pat Buchanan and Taki Theodoracopoulos. (These guys say they started their mag to "save the right wing of the Republican Party.")

Taki and Pat firmly believe Cheney has to go, writing: "Key House Democrats have already called for the resignations of [Donald] Rumsfeld and [Paul] Wolfowitz and are right to do so. But President Bush needs a more thorough housecleaning if his administration is to right itself."

Why not Condoleezza Rice? Here's their answer? "Rice only makes sense if you believe the administration's foreign policy has been effective, but she is, to say the least, no Henry Kissinger."

And that's what conservatives are saying. Wow!"

-Liz Smith, Newsday, Oct 15, 2003
A Beauty Adds Brawn
http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/news/ny-lizsmith3495481oct15,0,1377623.column

By the by, I've been all over The American Conservative magazine on line -- to verify that the gossip columnist is correct (no luck). I either have to buy Buchanan's rag, or hope they post more material on-line soon.

Idiotically worthless disclosure: I delivered papers for Newsay when I was 12. Now some formerly terribly ineffective hedge fund manager turned political pundit won't carp if I talk about baseball. (Jackass).

Posted at 08:54 PM in Media, Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

In my travels, i came across a very neat piece of artwork -- which I drag to the destop, when the phone rings, and then the dog is barking and the wife wants me to take him for a walk . . . And I forget to label who's work this is or where I got it.

That was 4 days ago.

If any one recognizes this, please clue me in . . .

Posted at 11:36 PM in Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack

The Unsexy List: 50 Genital retracting people places and things. (If it becomes premium content, you can still see it via Google's cache.

A very amusing list from the editors of Nerve. 50 items which are not at all arousing -- but may have at one time been, or still currently are, erroneously thought of as sexy.

Here's a few that tickled me:

11. Drinks with "sexy" names. Bar patrons who order a "screaming orgasm," "sex on the beach," "blow job," or "long slow screw against the wall" are 77% less likely to get laid than the ones drinking beer. Wonder why.

17. Valium. It gained fame as the drug that kept Donna Reed fem-bots from having nervous breakdowns and burning the roast. Except you're not cute like Donna Reed. You're just slurring your speech. Stop it.

28. Smoking fetishes. Blowing smoke rings is a neat trick. So is the "French inhale." As for people who jerk off while thinking about this, in the same way that foot fetishists graduate to shoe fetishism, do cig pervs end up worshipping emphysema?

33. Lower-back tattooes. Lately, it seems that if there's no faux-Celtic design between your low-rise jeans and your baby tee, something's missing. Recently, we've been seeing girls with their names in thug font in that place. Must save a lot of awkwardness.

47. Teenagers. The aspirational age of our society is about sixteen. But a smoking-in-the-girls-room, fucking-in-the-backseat sixteen. Not a bra-strap-snapping, zit-popping, handing-in-math-homework-late sixteen. Market your lite beer however you want to market your lite beer, but know this: real teenagers are kind of gross.

Go check out the full fifty.

UPDATE: Its been moved to the premium part of nerve.com, so go check out Google's cache.

Posted at 07:23 PM in Humor, Media, Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Saturday night, TiVo grabs a copy of SNL, which starts with a dead on parody of Chris Matthew's by Darrell Hammond.

Matthew's guests on Hardball are Karl Rove, and the Shrill Blond Harpy, both of whom appear via satellite.

Early exchange in which the Harpy calls Matthews a traitor for having the temerity to question the President's veracity. Mathews barks back:

"Zip it; I can smell your soul rotting from here.”

During the wrap up, the Harpy makes known her availability to do the show again. Matthews ripostes:

“Good Lord, I would call you a media whore, but I feel that would be offensive to whores"

SNL still has the ability to occasionally surprise with its nasty hard hitting political humor. Surprisingly funny stuff . . .

Posted at 10:04 PM in Humor, Media, Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Out and about today, shopping for floor tile and kitchen appliances. Leaves are starting to turn, so we take the long and winding back route home from Appliance store. On the way, mid-afternoon, starting to get a bit noshie. We're heading West on Jericho Turnpike, when we see a big sign on the other side of the street -- Texas Bar-B-Que .

A quick (and dangerous!) u-turn, we pull into the dirt patch that serves as a parking lot. It's just a shack really, with picnic tables outside. Speak to the owner for a few minutes -- he's a native Long Islander, lived in Texas for 20 years, just moved back up. Makes his own sauces, smokes his meats 24 hours, dry rub.

Gives us a taste of the brisket, pulled pork, the baked beans. Delicious!

I order a brisket sandwich -- which is utterly scrumptious, Mrs. effluvia has a few ribs.

"Omigod, these could possibly be the best ribs I've ever tasted," Mrs. effluvia declares. I taste one -- F@#$% Killer! Big too, looks like a rack will feed 3 - 4.

Different than the previously discussed Hickory's Wood Flame Grill, which is also good. Papa Rick's is somehow, I don't know -- homier, more authentic? It literally is a stand on the side of the road, next to a wood carver (the guy who makes those 6 foot bears out of logs).

Poppa Ricks (not Papa as originally written)
Texas Bar-B-Que (also known as "Poppa Rick's Fine Foods"
1130 Jericho Turnpike, Woodbury
631-692-6928

Directions: Jericho Turnpike and Avery Road (just East of the end of Plainview Road) in Woodbury, 1/4 mile West of Sun Ming, near the Nassau/Suffolk border)

(I'll update the info here later this week -- he was out of everything --menus, cards, etc.)

UPDATE: Since we last visitied Poppa Ricks, they got a good review from the Long Island Press.

Here's an excerpt from Chris Twarowski's take:

"Poppa Rick's Fine Foods is an eatery unlike any other on Long Island. Situated beside a nursery and horse farm next to a woodcarving shop just over the county line in Suffolk, drivers cruising down Jericho Turnpike in Woodbury might think the establishment a mere roadside yard sale, or the site of a mobile-home accident, were it not for an old white pickup truck parked in front, with a red and white sign proclaiming, "Texas Style BBQ & Much More."

Make no mistake, fellow quality food hunters and thrill-seekers, Poppa Rick's serves up some of the most flavorful, delectable Texas- and Southern-style slow-cooked barbeque this side of the Mason-Dixon: beef brisket, pulled pork, BBQ meatloaf, beans, ribs, hot sausage, corn, soup, gumbo and chili. And that's not all—Poppa Rick's also serves chicken Francaise, marinated steak and grilled Portobello mushrooms. The prices are reasonable, the place is family run, and everything's homemade.

"The secret to what we do isn't really a secret," explains owner and chef Rick Anselmi, who traveled back and forth to Texas and Louisiana from New York countless times over the course of 20 years as an antiques dealer and comes from a long line of restaurateurs. He founded the place out of his personal love for Southern barbeque and to help save the farm from extinction, by partnering with the owners and splitting the profits from the kitchen. "All I'm doing is Old-World food. I'm just a Northern cook cooking Southern stuff."

Posted at 06:02 PM in Food and Drink | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Everyday on the train to work, I pass thru Albertson, an unassuming suburban town 40 minutes outside of Manhattan.

One day, just outside of the Albertson train platform, a decrepit firetruck appeared. Then another, and another, and pretty soon, an entire graveyard of old Hook and Ladders and other firefighting equiptment had formed.

I finally got over there last week and took a few digital snapshots. I'd really like to get into the fenced area, and get some close ups of the equipment, dashboards, etc. Have a look around!

Firetruck Graveyard

Posted at 09:19 AM in Art & Design | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Drunk's eye on the Queer Guys A Queer Eye drinking game!
(A very funny twist on a classic college activity)

1 drink:
If the word "jujj" is used.
If Carson grabs for the victims crotch
If Kyan is throwing out bath products
If you see Thom painting a room in double time
If Carson talks about being horny or getting it on with someone
If Carson uses the word "couture"
If anyone walks as if on the catwalk
If Ted is with any tubular meat product
If Jai gives a tip for a social/romantic situation
If you see the Fab 5 license plate
If during the show the Fab 5 insults the victim
If the Fab 5 use a pet name for a female in the victim's life

2 drinks:
If Kyan pulls aside the victim to talk about their bathroom products
If there is an illegal substance reference either verbally or physically
If the victim gets something waxed
If the Fab 5 and the victim are all together outside of the victims home
If the victim thanks any of the Fab 5 before the show & tell "after" period
If a charity/non profit organization is plugged by the Fab 5
If the toast "Cheers Queers" is used.
If a member of the Fab 5 comments on something in the underwear of the victims
If the Fab 5 make a movie reference, directly or indirectly
If any member of the Fab 5 attempt to wear the victim's girl friend's clothing

3 drinks:
If two of the Fab 5 kiss on the lips
If the victim is seen in just their underwear
If a sexual act (oral too) is simulated
If one of the Fab 5 jumps in bed with the victim
If the victim puts themselves together exactly as the Fab 5 laid out for him

4 drinks:
If one of the Fab 5 kisses the victim on the lips
If "straight ahead" is not used to lead into a commercial break
If the Fab 5's SUV is not the form of transportation used to get around in
If Blair does something that is actually helpful

Finish The Bottle:
If the victim decides to become gay
If the victim shows up drunk in his underwear & kneepads at the batcave

Full set of rules, recipes, etc,. at neverseeme.com

Hat tip to Idly.org: doing nothing, slowly

Posted at 01:40 AM in Humor, Media | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Follow up to "Nexis debunks Novak's tale":

Josh Marshall over at Talking Points Memo notes the following regarding Novak's (mis)use of the phrase "CIA Operative":

Following up on my reader’s suggestion I did a Nexis search to see all the times Novak used the phrases “CIA operative” or “agency operative.” This was a quick search. But I came up with six examples. And in each case Novak used the phrase to refer to someone working in a clandestine capacity. Here they are …

On December 3rd 2001: Novak reported on the surprise and even outrage among CIA veterans that Mike Spann’s identity had been revealed even in death. Spann was the agent killed at the uprising at Mazar-i-Sharif Thus Novak: “Exposure of CIA operative Johnny (Mike) Spann's identity as the first American killed in Afghanistan is viewed by surprised intelligence insiders as an effort by Director George Tenet to boost the embattled CIA's prestige.”

On November 1st, 2001: Novak described the Agency’s handling of the late Afghan resistance commander Abdul Haq. Thus Novak: “the CIA was keeping in close touch with Haq's friends but providing more criticism than help. The Afghan freedom fighter who was honored by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher during the war against the Soviets became "Hollywood Haq" to the CIA. He was described by the agency's operatives as ‘unruly and immature.’”

This is the most ambiguous reference. But I think it’s pretty clear here that Novak is referring to people in the field, i.e., operatives, not analysts back at Langley.

On September 23rd, 2001: Novak discussed the long decline of the CIA, particularly its human intelligence (HUMINT) and operational capacities. He made particular reference to the tenure of Stansfield Turner as DCI. Thus Novak: “Appalled by the CIA's operatives in Central America, he issued the now-famous order against hiring unsavory local agents. There went any serious effort at espionage.” Again, that ain’t a reference to analysts.

On July 5th, 1999:, Novak reviewed Bill Buckley’s new book on Joe McCarthy and in the course of that review he noted how Buckley had “honed his craft well in chronicling the fictional adventures of his CIA operative, Blackford Oakes.” Now, the Blackford Oakes spy novels are … well, spy novels. So this one’s pretty clear.

On September 22nd, 1997: Novak noted to the role of “Bob,” someone whom he referred to as an “undercover CIA agent” who got pulled into the Roger Tamraz phase of the campaign finance scandal. Later in the same column Novak referred to “Bob” as a “CIA operative.” Ergo, “undercover CIA agent” equals “CIA operative.”

On September 18th, 1997: Novak referred to this same “Bob” on CNN as an “an undercover CIA operative.”

I also did a quick search for Novak’s references to “CIA analyst” or “agency analyst” I found three --- each clearly referring to people who were in fact analysts. In an 1993 column, Novak used a precise phrasing to refer to "CIA briefer Brian Latell, a 30-year career officer." Again, no vague use of 'operative.' I don’t think this requires too much commentary, does it?

Clearly, Novak knows the meaning of the phrase 'CIA operative' and he uses it advisedly. In the last decade he’s never used the phrase to mean anything but clandestine agents.

Let’s cut the mumbo-jumbo: past evidence suggests that Novak only uses this phrase to refer to clandestine agents. In this case, when he has every reason to run away from that meaning of the phrase, he suddenly runs away from that meaning. Especially with all the other evidence at hand, that just defies credibility. Everything points to the conclusion that Novak did know. That would mean, necessarily, that his sources knew too. The ‘we didn’t know’ cover story just doesn’t wash. Novak's fellow reporters have never pressed him on this point. Maybe now would be a good time ...

The analysis of Novak's use of the phrase CIA Operative, along with the lack of any prior mention of Valerie Plame's name on Nexis or Factiva, demonstrates that Novak is a liar.

Posted at 06:29 PM in Media, Politics | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

O.K., by now, you should have figured out that the the link I posted to a CNN piece ("Fellatio may significantly decrease the risk of breast cancer in women") on oral sex was a goof. If the North Carolina State University URL (www4.ncsu.edu) didn't give it away, AND you failed to notice all of the doctors named in the article had penis-related names (Dr. Lechmepeter), then certainly, the recent announcement should have clued you in:

I'm sorry to inform everyone that the CNN parody article has been taken down due to threatened legal action. I may make an effort to edit the presentation of the article so as to not to "infringe" on the copyrights of CNN or the Associated Press. Thank you for your interest, hopefully you will be able to enjoy the story again soon!
-Brandon

Of course, the more tech savvy of you may have thought of checking out Google's cache of the page. Well, now that the joke's been blown (sorry), consider this REAL article in Forbes instead:

Is Sex Necessary?
http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/08/cz_af_1008health.html

Amongst the health benefits conferred by regular and enthusiastic sex were:

Improved sense of smell, Reduced risk of heart disease, Weight loss, overall fitness, Reduced depression, Pain-relief, Less-frequent colds and flu, Better bladder control, Better teeth, A happier prostate.

Worth the read . . .

Posted at 03:20 PM in Science | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

I just came across a wry and ironic term for losing one's job: Uninstalled

"You might think it's a subtle distinction, but please don't say I got 'fired'. Firing implies, to me at least, some cause. There was no cause in this - 'my position was eliminated' (whatever the stinking hell that means). As I was originally hired to build and run a Technology Practice, from scratch -- perhaps the most accurate description is that I've just been uninstalled.

It was a fairly clean uninstall too, but I kind of like the idea that I may have left a number of deeply-seated registry entries in place, that will continue to influence the behaviour of those I've left behind for the conceivable future :-)"

-Michael O'Connor Clarke
(former) Senior Vice President, Technology Practice group, Weber Shandwick (Canada)

The brutal corporate focus on revenues and profits, the hyper competitive landscape, and the dehumanizing manner in which human bio-code modules are installed and uninstalled will be the unfortunate legacy of the early 00's.

Good luck Mike, and thanks for the thought provoking term . . .

Posted at 06:43 AM in Current Affairs, Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

From the R&D department of Limitepie.com, comes:

The Stock Message Board Random Generator.

Pointer courtesy of Maoxian

Posted at 08:22 PM in Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

CNN: Fellatio may significantly decrease the risk of breast cancer in women

Posted at 11:05 AM in Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

There's an interesting interview (here) with one of my favorite living directors, Ridley Scott.

Ridley directed many noteworthy films: Gladiator (2000), Thelma & Louise (1991), Alien (1979), are but a few of his more commercially successful endeavors.

I have a special place in my cinematic heart for his vision in Blade Runner (1982).

You want to see the original release, with Harrison Ford's film noir narration, and not (believe it or not) the director's cut.

(See the original -- not this one)

Posted at 05:45 PM in Design, Film, Media | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

I came across a classic bit of 'Net humor:

How To Unsubscribe

Posted at 12:01 PM in Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

A follow up on to my two previous Coupling posts -- Preview & Review:

I've been watching the U.S./U.K. episodes more or less back to back. On Thursday, I watched the NBC version live (without TiVo!) of the episode "Size Matters".

Sometime over the following few days, I watched the BBC vwrsion of "Size Matters." This will be my viewing pattern for the next few weeks.

Our comparo this week notes that missing from the US version was the sub-story regarding the psychic energy directed towards celebrities -- if enough people fantasize about celebrities during sex, the energy drives the celebs towards a tryst.

The Beeb version continues to be more charming, witty and personable, with much more likable characters. Perhaps its because I started on the UK version; Maybe its because the pacing is better on the longer, commercial free BBC versions.

Regardless, I'm stuck watching the U.S. version also. Why? Because the orginial writer and producer (Steven Moffat and Sue Vertue) are working on the US copy also; There's a promise of fresh material and new episodes on NBC.

We'll see how long I can keep this up.

Posted at 11:38 AM in Humor, Media | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Meet the Press: Those people who were expecting shrill histrionics in Robert Novak's back and forth with Tim Russert were disappointed. Novak came across ok, although there were a few long pauses and annoyed looks (a few microexpressions), but nothing overtly "gotcha!" He stated his case in a straightforward manner.

Since the July column came out, Novak has backpedalled a bit; Now, the leak has become an "Oh, and by the way" statement. Novak notes that in his original article, the Plame reference was buried in paragraph 6 of 10. Hence, it wasn't all that important, in his view. If you just watched Novak on "Meet the Press," your first inclination would probably be to believe him (hey, I'm gullible).

However, Novak's story fell apart (in my opinion) because he decided to get a little bit too cute with Russert: In the process of rationalizing his use of the word "operative," as a general phrase versus "covert agent," Novak said words (more or less) to the following effect: "If somebody did a Nexis search of my columns, they'd find an overuse of "operative" . . . to describe political hacks, etc."

Great suggestion . . . only too clever by half. Since we 're making suggestions for Nexis searches, I have one: Novak could have very easily done a Nexis (or a Google) search on "Valerie Plame," both with and without Ambassador Wilson's name. That would have made it eminently clear if she was operating under cover or not. (I used Factiva, the joint Reuters/Dow Jones archive, but Nexis will give you the same results. Try it: Search for "Valerie Plame" "prior to July 14, 2003," the date Novak's column outed Wilson's wife).

This leads to the conclusion that not only did Novak blow a covert operative's cover, he did so with a minimum amount of homework, and no due diligence. That Nexis search would have revealed that while Wilson has tons of press going back 10 years, Plame has none -- at least none prior to Novak's intelligence faux pas. (Google shows the same). So as much as this is the result of a leak from the administration, its also the result of lazy, poorly researched journalism.

This suggest to me that Novak merely ran with what he was given, no questions asked.

Novak said the CIA gave him a "weak" request not to out her. Had Novak done the Nexis search, he would surely have known he was dealing with, as he originally said, an operative. At the very least, he would have discovered he was revealing the name of a CIA employee who had never ever been mentioned in the press before. At the very least, it should have given him pause, and made him rethink whether to mention "Mrs. Wilson."

His statement that he wouldn't have published Plame's name if CIA Chief Tenet called him and asked him not too -- is both silly and full of hubris. Reporters (and hostiles posing as reporters) would start calling the CIA to get denials and requests not to publish certain names. Its ludicrous to suggest that the CIA should do any more than an ambigous no comment/don't publish statement.

My Conclusion? Novak's original story was in full cooperation with the leakers. He purposefully outed a CIA agent, knowing full well what he was doing. His subsequent revisions and rationalizations don't withstand scrutiny.

I conclude that Novak is a a lazy journalist, a partisan tool, and a liar. Why do I write such things? Because -- unlike Novak -- I do my homework.

He who lives by the Nexis, dies by the Nexis . . .

Posted at 02:00 PM in Media, Politics | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Ambassador Wilson on Meet the Press: He was Unflappable. The guy is the real deal, just a brutal witness; You could not have ordered a more difficult witness from central casting -- distinguished looking, straight forward, calm, collected, masterly command of facts; Is Ambassorial a word? If it is, then thi guy's picture in the dictionary next to it.

You gotta think the White House was not happy with his appearence.

He admitted a few interesting things: He said he got caught up in the moment when he suggested "Frog-marching Karl Rove out of the White House." He also said he had been offered a book deal, and he has an agent. No hemming or hawing -- striaght dope.

Next up: Robert Novack

Posted at 10:55 AM in Media, Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

We took "Maximus the wonder dog" to the vet. He gets his teeth cleaned, his claws trimmed, and his fur clipped.