http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/05/09/myanmar/index.html
I'm always kind of fascinated when I see this kind of stuff out of countries like Burma. (I say Burma because officially the governing body of the URJB (United Repuplic of Julie B) does not recognize the military junta that operates under the name Myanmar. I had a referendum on it.) At what point do they get pissed off enough as a group to overthrow their government? Where is the tipping point?
Every country must have a set point at which they boil. For the US, it's obviously pretty low. We overthrew a regime that we considered repressive, basically because we didn't heart our representation in parliament. Okay, yeah, good stuff came out of it. You know democracy and whatever. But what initially burned our forefathers' collective butts was that they didn't have enough say over how their tax dollars were spent. But for the most part, as far as despotic rulers go, King George was bit of a pussycat. Compare and contrast: King George v. Pol Pot. In that light, Georgie-boy was a sweetheart. The French had it far worse, and it took more than a decade for them to jump in on the revolution bandwagon. And they had been starving.
Granted, our founding fathers appear to be a little hot headed in the context of history (in a good way). So, what does it take for Burma, and other countries that have watched racial purification, people jailed for political speech and leaders that would rather watch you starve than jeopardize their hold? I think, at long last, the US has learned that you can't bring change to other countries. Hell, in Iraq, we threw a revolution and nobody came. So what is the impetus that instigates change in Burma? What makes them say, the chance that I may die is better than this?
Friday, May 9, 2008
Bad advice
http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/five-things-you-should-never-buy-as-a-mothers-day-gift-167260/
This is, without a doubt, the most wrong-headed article ever put on Yahoo. Worse than salmon and yams for lunch. I can't believe that they'd pass this off as advice. I don't know who this woman is, but I can assure you, that she is not qualified to speak for all Mommies.
First off in the wrongness - a KitchenAid mixer with the caption "a definite no". What are you insane? I know many, many women who'd kill for a new KitchenAid stand mixer. Especially since they started coming out with the cool colors (have you seen them? Wicked cool). And also pictured as a no, the Dyson. There are a lot of Moms who'd cut the other kids out of the will if you showed up with one of those on Mother's Day.
Second in the wrongness stakes, assuming that every Mom is the same. Not every Mom is June Cleaver. Some are Annie Romanos. Some are Claire Huxtables. Some are, lord love 'em, Roseanne Connors. And you can't buy them all the same gift. My Mom is a one of a kind. One anniversary, my Dad bought her a fishing boat. And she loved it. And if your Mom is the type who never buys anything new for herself, and has been wearing the same nightie since the Reagan Administration, a brand new granny gown might be the most thoughtful thing you could give her.
So here's my advice, to replace this nonsense from Yahoo, think about who your Mom actually is. Don't give some generic, one-size-fits-all gift. Prove that you know she's a real person and not just some incubator unit that popped you out in a laboratory. And if you guess a little wrong, it's not a big deal. With Mom, it's actually true. The thought counts for a lot.
Though Yahoo is probably right about the lotions. Most Moms have all of that stuff they need. Let's ease up on that one this year.
This is, without a doubt, the most wrong-headed article ever put on Yahoo. Worse than salmon and yams for lunch. I can't believe that they'd pass this off as advice. I don't know who this woman is, but I can assure you, that she is not qualified to speak for all Mommies.
First off in the wrongness - a KitchenAid mixer with the caption "a definite no". What are you insane? I know many, many women who'd kill for a new KitchenAid stand mixer. Especially since they started coming out with the cool colors (have you seen them? Wicked cool). And also pictured as a no, the Dyson. There are a lot of Moms who'd cut the other kids out of the will if you showed up with one of those on Mother's Day.
Second in the wrongness stakes, assuming that every Mom is the same. Not every Mom is June Cleaver. Some are Annie Romanos. Some are Claire Huxtables. Some are, lord love 'em, Roseanne Connors. And you can't buy them all the same gift. My Mom is a one of a kind. One anniversary, my Dad bought her a fishing boat. And she loved it. And if your Mom is the type who never buys anything new for herself, and has been wearing the same nightie since the Reagan Administration, a brand new granny gown might be the most thoughtful thing you could give her.
So here's my advice, to replace this nonsense from Yahoo, think about who your Mom actually is. Don't give some generic, one-size-fits-all gift. Prove that you know she's a real person and not just some incubator unit that popped you out in a laboratory. And if you guess a little wrong, it's not a big deal. With Mom, it's actually true. The thought counts for a lot.
Though Yahoo is probably right about the lotions. Most Moms have all of that stuff they need. Let's ease up on that one this year.
How to tell if you're smoking too much pot
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080509/ap_on_re_us/corpse_abuse_charges;_ylt=Ak7...
Does this sound like a good idea? Yes?
You smoke too much pot.
[whoops! sorry. forgot to double post this one, so it's a little out of order. so muc to remember.]
Does this sound like a good idea? Yes?
You smoke too much pot.
[whoops! sorry. forgot to double post this one, so it's a little out of order. so muc to remember.]
Hanging out
There are lots of ways you can divide up the world. Dog people and cat people. Introverts and extroverts. Drinkers and teetotallers. Early birds and night owls. Inies and Outies. Currently, the division that I'm finding hardest to navigate is the one between the "the more the merrier" people and the "who's coming?" people.
Because when it comes to organizing a get together that's the dangerous question - "who's coming?" Because it will almost always be followed by "I'm not coming if they're coming." Sigh. Oy.
Personally, I'm a "the more the merrier" type. Which is kind of strange given that I'm also an introvert. But I find that there's very few people who can ruin a gathering for me. Sure, there are some people who aren't optimal. Gloomy people who never jolly up, even for $1 wells and half-price appetizers. Conversation dominators, who won't let anybody else get a word in edgewise, lengthwise or with a battering ram. Wallflowers who want to spend the night staring at the wall. Sure, you could let them ruin the night. Personally, I see it like a living game of Tetris. Put the Conversation Dominator next to the Wallflower. The CD gets to yak all night, and Wallie doesn't have to say a word. Which they like! But never put Wallie next to the Gloomeister. Because, guaranteed, they will hate each other like fire.
And what's the worst that could happen? You get a dozen sad sacks sitting at a table together. So what? Maybe you spend the night crying in your beer. That can be fun too. Or you end up listening to somebody you don't like very much yammer on all night. Maybe you'll learn something about them that will make you finally understand, and maybe even like, them. It could happen. Or not. But then, nobody's ever died from hanging out with somebody they didn't like. Well, maybe Claus Von Stauffenberg. But that's kind of a special case.
In fact, I'm thinking now's a good time to plan a shindig. Hmm. The wheels are turning. Everybody come. The more the merrier.
Because when it comes to organizing a get together that's the dangerous question - "who's coming?" Because it will almost always be followed by "I'm not coming if they're coming." Sigh. Oy.
Personally, I'm a "the more the merrier" type. Which is kind of strange given that I'm also an introvert. But I find that there's very few people who can ruin a gathering for me. Sure, there are some people who aren't optimal. Gloomy people who never jolly up, even for $1 wells and half-price appetizers. Conversation dominators, who won't let anybody else get a word in edgewise, lengthwise or with a battering ram. Wallflowers who want to spend the night staring at the wall. Sure, you could let them ruin the night. Personally, I see it like a living game of Tetris. Put the Conversation Dominator next to the Wallflower. The CD gets to yak all night, and Wallie doesn't have to say a word. Which they like! But never put Wallie next to the Gloomeister. Because, guaranteed, they will hate each other like fire.
And what's the worst that could happen? You get a dozen sad sacks sitting at a table together. So what? Maybe you spend the night crying in your beer. That can be fun too. Or you end up listening to somebody you don't like very much yammer on all night. Maybe you'll learn something about them that will make you finally understand, and maybe even like, them. It could happen. Or not. But then, nobody's ever died from hanging out with somebody they didn't like. Well, maybe Claus Von Stauffenberg. But that's kind of a special case.
In fact, I'm thinking now's a good time to plan a shindig. Hmm. The wheels are turning. Everybody come. The more the merrier.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
What's for lunch?
http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/health/does-your-lunch-need-a-lift-161418/
So, I see the link - "What you should really eat for lunch". Good topic. Inquiring minds want to know. Click.
Who are these people? Grilled salmon and a sweet potatoe for lunch? Are you kidding me? I don't even know how that would work. Aside from the issue that it's pricey, how do you heat salmon in the lunch room without making everyone for 3 floors hate you deeply? Or was I supposed to throw it on the hibachi that I keep on top of the filing cabinet and grill it right there? And a sweet potato? Who has a sweet potato in their lunch bag? Yes, indeed, they are yummy, but they aren't exactly a side dish for the gal on the go.
The other options are more feasible, strictly speaking. It would be within the realm of possibility to do a dark, leafy salad with steak for garnish. But considering that I'm between personal chefs (good help is so hard to find), unless I start dating Danny Boome (and seriously, Danny, call me) and he starts packing my lunches for me, I consider it a major achievement that I'm able to throw a frozen dinner and a piece of fruit into my lunch box. Martha Stewart ain't got nuttin' on me.
So, I see the link - "What you should really eat for lunch". Good topic. Inquiring minds want to know. Click.
Who are these people? Grilled salmon and a sweet potatoe for lunch? Are you kidding me? I don't even know how that would work. Aside from the issue that it's pricey, how do you heat salmon in the lunch room without making everyone for 3 floors hate you deeply? Or was I supposed to throw it on the hibachi that I keep on top of the filing cabinet and grill it right there? And a sweet potato? Who has a sweet potato in their lunch bag? Yes, indeed, they are yummy, but they aren't exactly a side dish for the gal on the go.
The other options are more feasible, strictly speaking. It would be within the realm of possibility to do a dark, leafy salad with steak for garnish. But considering that I'm between personal chefs (good help is so hard to find), unless I start dating Danny Boome (and seriously, Danny, call me) and he starts packing my lunches for me, I consider it a major achievement that I'm able to throw a frozen dinner and a piece of fruit into my lunch box. Martha Stewart ain't got nuttin' on me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
