I named her Stella
Posts
not the only one...
4 days ago
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Puppy needs a damn NAME!
UN NOMBRE! AHORA!
En serio, I'm dying over here. I've had my awesome, adorable, (kind of abitch brat) baby for nine days and she is still nameless. I'm starting to feel really guilty when people ask what her name is.
Help me. I'd love some thoughts/discussion. Not just a "Name her THIS!" ... maybe if there is some method behind the inclination?
So, the following is a list of ones that I am fond of. (Some more than others.)
...but what do YOU think???
En serio, I'm dying over here. I've had my awesome, adorable, (kind of a
Help me. I'd love some thoughts/discussion. Not just a "Name her THIS!" ... maybe if there is some method behind the inclination?
So, the following is a list of ones that I am fond of. (Some more than others.)
...but what do YOU think???
- Bella (Bellatrix)
CarlyEvieGabbyGemmaGinnyIsaIzzie- Joanie (Miss Joan Holloway)
- Lana (Lana Kane)
LolaLucyMayaMiaMona- Ramona (Ramona Flowers)
- Sasha
- Sophia (Sophia Loren)
Winnie
More pics:
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Monday, April 05, 2010
The Regime
I'm really trying to get back into shape... I am. The whole working 8 hours a day thing just gets in the way sometimes. As does coaching AFTER the 8 hour workday, twice a week. And going out of town on the weekends for tournaments.
Sometimes my desire for sleep overcomes my working out.
But I really am just SICK of looking at a pair of jeans I bought in Spain and fit into a year ago, but can no longer do so. I think I'm finally starting to appreciate just how skinny I was.
I mean... I've never been skinny. Ever. But, damn, being a size 6 was awesome.
And it shall be so again.
Here was the second half of my run today. (The first half was accidentally separated, but at least it saved.)
WANT.
We'll see what happens in six weeks, if I can keep up my motivation.
Somebody needs to start bribing me... or threatening me. That last one used to work pretty well in my competitive sporting career.
Sometimes my desire for sleep overcomes my working out.
But I really am just SICK of looking at a pair of jeans I bought in Spain and fit into a year ago, but can no longer do so. I think I'm finally starting to appreciate just how skinny I was.
I mean... I've never been skinny. Ever. But, damn, being a size 6 was awesome.
And it shall be so again.
Here was the second half of my run today. (The first half was accidentally separated, but at least it saved.)
This Cardio Trainer program on Artoo is pretty baller. Tracks my GPS signal... tells me where I went and how long and even how the elevation changes.
I'm sort of in love with it.
Another thing I started was this 100 Push-Ups program: http://hundredpushups.com/index.html
Basically it's a six week program that gets you to the point of being able to do 100 push ups consecutively. Probably is going to start kicking my ass, but damn it, I want my Michelle Obama arms, OK? I mean, look at them!
WANT.
We'll see what happens in six weeks, if I can keep up my motivation.
Somebody needs to start bribing me... or threatening me. That last one used to work pretty well in my competitive sporting career.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
I imagine the Sergio Curse saxophone riff playing in the background...
Click for amazing animation...
Friday, March 26, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
I wish I had written it down...
...because I totally called the whole point behind Jacob vs. The Man in Black (aka: UnLocke) in LOST.
No idea what I'm talking about? Yeah, you know, JOIN THE CLUB.
But enjoy this Videogum screencap. I love Gabe Delahaye in a very real way.
So the way Jacob explains it is that the island is basically a cork on a bottle of nightmare wine, and if the island weren’t there, then all the evil wine would get out.
No idea what I'm talking about? Yeah, you know, JOIN THE CLUB.
But enjoy this Videogum screencap. I love Gabe Delahaye in a very real way.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Do you like having cops???
Because, that's socialism. Government provided law enforcement.
You know what else are socialist?
So, this health care bill. Has anyone actually read it? Like, cover to cover? How about just looked at some bullet points? Yes? No? Well I'm going to do the latter right now:
Brief highlights of the HR Bill:
The bill will require all citizens obtain "minimal essential coverage" for themselves and dependents.
If an individual elects not to do so, they will be required to pay an escalating fine up to $2,085.
Besides expanding coverage, such a mandate will, in theory, increase the number of healthy, young and otherwise uninsured individuals into the health care market.
Because young people are typically less expensive to cover, insurance companies could recover the profits lost from no longer being able to discriminate based on preexisting conditions.
The bill also offers subsidies to low-income households to purchase health insurance.
Subsidies would be allocated on a sliding scale – individuals with higher incomes qualifying for less help.
The bill creates "exchanges" that would allow individuals unable to obtain insurance through their employers a competitive marketplace to purchase affordable health coverage.
Taking effect immediately, children will be able to stay on their parents’ insurance plan until age 26, and businesses with less than 100 employees will be eligible for tax credits of up to 50 percent of insurance premiums.
Businesses with fewer than 50 employees will not be required to offer health insurance.
However, a firm that does not offer health insurance but employs more than 50 people will most likely be required to offer health insurance to all employees or pay a substantial penalty of $2,500 per worker.
Also, the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that "enacting both pieces of legislation—H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal—would produce a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion over the 2010–2019 period as result of changes in direct spending and revenues. That figure comprises $124 billion in net reductions deriving from the health care and revenue provisions and $19 billion in net reductions deriving from the education provisions. CBO has not completed an estimate of the potential impact of the legislation on discretionary spending, which would be subject to future appropriation action."
Curious.
You know what isn't curious though?
Associating universal health care with communism... especially since the following countries (non of which are communists or absolute monarchies) have universal health care. Some for long periods of time (such as our neighbors to the north, which have had a universal health care system since the 1960s.) For a list of countries by their system of government, go HERE.
Argentina, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.
You know what else are socialist?
- Military
- Firefighters
- Medicare
- Medicaid
- Social security
- Healthcare (via emergency room, for people who can't pay)
- Public libraries
- Public schools
- Government college grants, scholarships, and loans
- Roads (except toll roads)
- The FDA
- The EPA
- Sewage treatment
- FEMA
- Parks
- Zoning laws
- Airport security
So, this health care bill. Has anyone actually read it? Like, cover to cover? How about just looked at some bullet points? Yes? No? Well I'm going to do the latter right now:
Brief highlights of the HR Bill:
The bill will require all citizens obtain "minimal essential coverage" for themselves and dependents.
- We do this for car insurance. We have, up until now, put the insuring of a vehicle above our own health. Yeah, that makes total sense.
If an individual elects not to do so, they will be required to pay an escalating fine up to $2,085.
- OK, one of the things that people have complained about in regards to the health bill is that they don't want to be paying for the low lives who refuse to work and feel entitled to everything as they suck of the teet that is welfare and so forth. This part of the bill sort of proves that won't be happening, yes? As it stands, I don't know how realistic this is. It certainly can't help the economy in the short term, that's for certain.
Besides expanding coverage, such a mandate will, in theory, increase the number of healthy, young and otherwise uninsured individuals into the health care market.
- I can't argue with that logic. Eventually it will increase good health.
Because young people are typically less expensive to cover, insurance companies could recover the profits lost from no longer being able to discriminate based on preexisting conditions.
- Also sounds like pretty basic logic. I don't know the actual stats and numbers this is based on though. As an aside, why were we EVER OK with with insurance companies being able to discriminate based on preexisting conditions?
The bill also offers subsidies to low-income households to purchase health insurance.
- This has everything to do with my personal convictions about helping those less fortunate than myself, but I wouldn't mind seeing what the qualifications are for this. Do you need to make under $20,000 a year? What?
Subsidies would be allocated on a sliding scale – individuals with higher incomes qualifying for less help.
- Ohhhhhhh. See? I spoke too soon. Yeah, I support this theory, I really do. I mean, trust me, nothing pissed me off more than when I walked into an apartment complex with my cousin (who makes minimum wage) and they told me that based on MY salary (>30k a year) we didn't qualify to live there because they're apart of affordable housing and we made TOO MUCH money. But, I have no doubt that some single mother without a college education making less money than I has probably benefited from this system in someway and I just do not have a problem with that.
The bill creates "exchanges" that would allow individuals unable to obtain insurance through their employers a competitive marketplace to purchase affordable health coverage.
- That... that kinda sounds like capitalism. Marketplace? Competitive? Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong. And shouldn't I have that right, anyway? The ability to tell my employers coverage to "screw off" if I can find a better deal elsewhere?
Taking effect immediately, children will be able to stay on their parents’ insurance plan until age 26, and businesses with less than 100 employees will be eligible for tax credits of up to 50 percent of insurance premiums.
- Well, I'm already allowed to stay on my mother's plan until I'm 25, but the fact that they're making this steady across the board is pretty nice. And tax credits to small businesses sounds groovy.
Businesses with fewer than 50 employees will not be required to offer health insurance.
- Huh. Interesting. I actually have no concept of whether or not this is good or bad or neither. I assume this will help the small business save money? It might also screw over their employees in a very real way if they can't get insurance through that competitive marketplace.
However, a firm that does not offer health insurance but employs more than 50 people will most likely be required to offer health insurance to all employees or pay a substantial penalty of $2,500 per worker.
- Ah ha.
Also, the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that "enacting both pieces of legislation—H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal—would produce a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion over the 2010–2019 period as result of changes in direct spending and revenues. That figure comprises $124 billion in net reductions deriving from the health care and revenue provisions and $19 billion in net reductions deriving from the education provisions. CBO has not completed an estimate of the potential impact of the legislation on discretionary spending, which would be subject to future appropriation action."
Curious.
You know what isn't curious though?
Associating universal health care with communism... especially since the following countries (non of which are communists or absolute monarchies) have universal health care. Some for long periods of time (such as our neighbors to the north, which have had a universal health care system since the 1960s.) For a list of countries by their system of government, go HERE.
Argentina, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.
COMMUNISTS. All of you.
Apparently.
According to people on Facebook who have no real concept of what either socialism or communism is.
Seriously, until Sunday, the United States was the only industrialized country that had no universal health care system.
Apparently.
According to people on Facebook who have no real concept of what either socialism or communism is.
Seriously, until Sunday, the United States was the only industrialized country that had no universal health care system.
Why doesn't that embarrass us?
Monday, March 22, 2010
Moderately Moderate
Politics really frustrate me.
I mean, they have to frustrate everyone, right? The word itself when used in a context outside of its own realm is dealt in the negative. "Oh, my office/work/place of employment is all politics."
Not a good thing.
So, I guess saying that politics frustrate you should probably be something that everyone understands.
I suppose the thing that frustrates me the most is the "Black and White" atmosphere that comes with American politics. I really would relish a More-Than-Two-Major-Political-Parties type of setting. I can admit, with no remorse or embarrassment, that I do tend to lean more on the side of a liberal idealogical view, but I sure as hell don't sell my complete beliefs over to one party or the other. I think they both have some valid points to offer and that Republicans and Democrats make the most sense when they actually work together and learn how to compromise.
I was just thinking today, while running through Twitter and Facebook, how much all of the incessant bitching about anything the Democrats or the President does just really, really gets under my skin.
And I don't even think it's because I tend to lean toward that side of the fence more than I lean towards the other, or because I voted for the guy (though I'm not stupid... I know that's part of it.)
Mostly I think it's my constant need for... everybody to just... get along.
As if that can be possible. Ever. Even people that I've known who have agreed with me on every idealogical level have managed to piss me off. In fact, sometimes they do more than people I have almost nothing in common with.
I suppose it just hit me today that, during President Bush's 8 years, I got pretty pissed when all anybody ever did was criticize the guy... even if he did something good or appropriate. Even if he was just trying to respond reasonably to the shitty hand he got dealt.
I mean, don't get me wrong... I think a lot of things that came from his presidency suck. War against a country that had nothing to do with September 11th? I mean, hey, Saddam was a son of a bitch. A mass murderer and a terrible excuse for a human being. Good riddance, twat.
But, why not finish up in Afghanistan? At the time maybe Iraq seemed like a good move. But in retrospect?
And when we first started pointing the finger Saddam's way, claiming he had weapons of mass destruction and heinous anti-American plans, the United Nations was like, "OK guys. We get it. You're pissed about the whole terrorists-infiltrating-your-own-system-and-using-passenger-airplanes-as-weapons thing. We get it. Before you just jump into the Middle East and show everyone who's boss, let us send some peace keepers in there and if they find anything... well, sucks to be them, right?" So that's what they did. And they didn't find anything.
And we essentially gave them the middle finger and went in anyway.
This entitlement factor that we, as Americans, have... thinking we're better than everyone and, despite valid intelligence against certain actions, going into places and doing whatever the hell we want?
I dunno... it smacks of asshole. That's all I'm saying.
And No Child Left Behind? Don't even get me started. Explain to me how you help anything—ANYTHING—by cutting funding to schools who under-perform? What douche-lord logic is that?! (Thanks for that one, Milo)
"Oh hey, public schools. Your asinine standardized test scores suck. We're going to make you better buy taking away MORE of your funding."
Perfect.
(On a related note... I think standardized testing in general, as a a tool to ascertain a child's learning progress, is perhaps the dumbest thing modern man has ever come up with. It's either that or The Bachelor... I'm undecided.)
But seriously, this entire idea of treating American politics like a Lakers-Celtics game... it's pathetic.
This is not Star Wars, guys. Republicans are not the Empire and Democrats are not the Rebel Alliance, or vise-versa. And besides, Admiral Ackbar is a moderate (clearly) and when has he EVER been wrong?
Hmmm. And the theme of comparing whoever you disagree with as Hitler? Like, "Obama is such a good speaker... just like Hitler." Or WORSE, the Antichrist? The ANTICHRIST.
Seriously?
I mean, they have to frustrate everyone, right? The word itself when used in a context outside of its own realm is dealt in the negative. "Oh, my office/work/place of employment is all politics."
Not a good thing.
So, I guess saying that politics frustrate you should probably be something that everyone understands.
I suppose the thing that frustrates me the most is the "Black and White" atmosphere that comes with American politics. I really would relish a More-Than-Two-Major-Political-Parties type of setting. I can admit, with no remorse or embarrassment, that I do tend to lean more on the side of a liberal idealogical view, but I sure as hell don't sell my complete beliefs over to one party or the other. I think they both have some valid points to offer and that Republicans and Democrats make the most sense when they actually work together and learn how to compromise.
I was just thinking today, while running through Twitter and Facebook, how much all of the incessant bitching about anything the Democrats or the President does just really, really gets under my skin.
And I don't even think it's because I tend to lean toward that side of the fence more than I lean towards the other, or because I voted for the guy (though I'm not stupid... I know that's part of it.)
Mostly I think it's my constant need for... everybody to just... get along.
As if that can be possible. Ever. Even people that I've known who have agreed with me on every idealogical level have managed to piss me off. In fact, sometimes they do more than people I have almost nothing in common with.
I suppose it just hit me today that, during President Bush's 8 years, I got pretty pissed when all anybody ever did was criticize the guy... even if he did something good or appropriate. Even if he was just trying to respond reasonably to the shitty hand he got dealt.
I mean, don't get me wrong... I think a lot of things that came from his presidency suck. War against a country that had nothing to do with September 11th? I mean, hey, Saddam was a son of a bitch. A mass murderer and a terrible excuse for a human being. Good riddance, twat.
But, why not finish up in Afghanistan? At the time maybe Iraq seemed like a good move. But in retrospect?
And when we first started pointing the finger Saddam's way, claiming he had weapons of mass destruction and heinous anti-American plans, the United Nations was like, "OK guys. We get it. You're pissed about the whole terrorists-infiltrating-your-own-system-and-using-passenger-airplanes-as-weapons thing. We get it. Before you just jump into the Middle East and show everyone who's boss, let us send some peace keepers in there and if they find anything... well, sucks to be them, right?" So that's what they did. And they didn't find anything.
And we essentially gave them the middle finger and went in anyway.
This entitlement factor that we, as Americans, have... thinking we're better than everyone and, despite valid intelligence against certain actions, going into places and doing whatever the hell we want?
I dunno... it smacks of asshole. That's all I'm saying.
And No Child Left Behind? Don't even get me started. Explain to me how you help anything—ANYTHING—by cutting funding to schools who under-perform? What douche-lord logic is that?! (Thanks for that one, Milo)
"Oh hey, public schools. Your asinine standardized test scores suck. We're going to make you better buy taking away MORE of your funding."
Perfect.
(On a related note... I think standardized testing in general, as a a tool to ascertain a child's learning progress, is perhaps the dumbest thing modern man has ever come up with. It's either that or The Bachelor... I'm undecided.)
But seriously, this entire idea of treating American politics like a Lakers-Celtics game... it's pathetic.
This is not Star Wars, guys. Republicans are not the Empire and Democrats are not the Rebel Alliance, or vise-versa. And besides, Admiral Ackbar is a moderate (clearly) and when has he EVER been wrong?
Hmmm. And the theme of comparing whoever you disagree with as Hitler? Like, "Obama is such a good speaker... just like Hitler." Or WORSE, the Antichrist? The ANTICHRIST.
Seriously?
Bullshit.
Mr. Stewart, you know what I'm talkin' about.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| A Relatively Closer Look - Hitler Reference | ||||
| ||||
Monday, March 08, 2010
Oh right. Hi there.
Hey blog! Long time, no see.
I decided randomly, today, that I need to start blogging again. I was reading some of my posts from a few years back and man... I was just one wide-open book wasn't I?
I think that's part of the reason I haven't enjoyed this anymore. I feel like I need to constantly censor myself or perhaps my feelings on matters have become too dark and twisty? Well...
Screw. That. (Officially.)
So today I went over to the Barnes & Nobel website to see if they're going to list the next ebook in the Star Wars series I'm reading that comes out tomorrow. My wondrous mother bought me a Nook for Christmas and it has been... I don't even know if I can really express how I feel about Maggie.
Maggie, my Nook, has become something that I enjoy more than most human beings. When combined with an elliptical machine it is a freaking thing of beauty. It was like a technological device God specifically made for me.
Anyway, so, I'm looking for an ebook on the B&N website... the last 4 SW books I bought were $10, compared to the list price of $27 for the hardcover. (As an aside, why is anyone making hardcovers anymore? Durable, and nicer, and whatever... that's like, what? Fifteen trees??? Go make something useful for a third-world country or some shit.)
Today I find out that this EBOOK ("...an electronic version of a printed book which can be read on a personal computer or hand-held device designed specifically for this purpose.") was $17.00.
The price listed to buy the Hardcover version of said book via the B&N website? $16.
What... what are you ASSHATS at Barnes & Nobel thinking? Can you justify that discrepancy? Because I would just ADORE to hear it.
Are you honestly going to sit there and expect me to believe that a 3 MB text file of words costs a dollar more than a hardcover novel? No. No it does not.
You created an ebook reader, one good enough to competitively rival the Kindle, and now that people are buying your ebooks you are losing money, aren't you?
I understand the list price for this hardcover is actually $27.00, but you are giving online orders a better discount than the ebook... and I'm willing to bet that if I went into an actual store tomorrow it would cost the same as your online price.
Why do you think I bought your $260 ebook reader? I bought it for A) convenience and B) cheaper cost of books. You are destroying both of these previous perks I had desired for MANY A YEAR... and I want you to die.
If you think this is helping you monetarily in any way, shape, or form—you are mistaken—because what you are actually doing is encouraging people with Nooks or Kindles or a computer or a smartphone, to pirate these books.
So, thank you, Barnes & Nobel, for your encouragement of piracy! You kids over there are just making it so much easier for anyone and everyone to justify breaking the eighth commandment.
I decided randomly, today, that I need to start blogging again. I was reading some of my posts from a few years back and man... I was just one wide-open book wasn't I?
I think that's part of the reason I haven't enjoyed this anymore. I feel like I need to constantly censor myself or perhaps my feelings on matters have become too dark and twisty? Well...
Screw. That. (Officially.)
So today I went over to the Barnes & Nobel website to see if they're going to list the next ebook in the Star Wars series I'm reading that comes out tomorrow. My wondrous mother bought me a Nook for Christmas and it has been... I don't even know if I can really express how I feel about Maggie.
Maggie, my Nook, has become something that I enjoy more than most human beings. When combined with an elliptical machine it is a freaking thing of beauty. It was like a technological device God specifically made for me.
Anyway, so, I'm looking for an ebook on the B&N website... the last 4 SW books I bought were $10, compared to the list price of $27 for the hardcover. (As an aside, why is anyone making hardcovers anymore? Durable, and nicer, and whatever... that's like, what? Fifteen trees??? Go make something useful for a third-world country or some shit.)
Today I find out that this EBOOK ("...an electronic version of a printed book which can be read on a personal computer or hand-held device designed specifically for this purpose.") was $17.00.
The price listed to buy the Hardcover version of said book via the B&N website? $16.
What... what are you ASSHATS at Barnes & Nobel thinking? Can you justify that discrepancy? Because I would just ADORE to hear it.
Are you honestly going to sit there and expect me to believe that a 3 MB text file of words costs a dollar more than a hardcover novel? No. No it does not.
You created an ebook reader, one good enough to competitively rival the Kindle, and now that people are buying your ebooks you are losing money, aren't you?
I understand the list price for this hardcover is actually $27.00, but you are giving online orders a better discount than the ebook... and I'm willing to bet that if I went into an actual store tomorrow it would cost the same as your online price.
Why do you think I bought your $260 ebook reader? I bought it for A) convenience and B) cheaper cost of books. You are destroying both of these previous perks I had desired for MANY A YEAR... and I want you to die.
If you think this is helping you monetarily in any way, shape, or form—you are mistaken—because what you are actually doing is encouraging people with Nooks or Kindles or a computer or a smartphone, to pirate these books.
So, thank you, Barnes & Nobel, for your encouragement of piracy! You kids over there are just making it so much easier for anyone and everyone to justify breaking the eighth commandment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)