So now the HRC campaign is up in arms about MSNBC commentator, David Shuster's, quit that the Clinton campaign had "pimped out" 27-year old Chelsea by having her place phone calls to celebrities and Democratic Party "superdelegates" on her mother's behalf. If the Clintonites are going to bring Chelsea into the world of politics, they have to accept the unpleasantness that comes with the territory. When Chelsea was a teenager, the comments about her looks were definitely out-of-bounds. But now, if they're gonna have her play in the muck, they have to expect her to get dirty. And, really, to say that someone involved with Presidential politics is being "pimped out" is hardly the worst thing that can be said about them, no?
Jesus and Satan were having an on-going argument about who was better on the computer. They had been going at it for days, and frankly God was tired of hearing all the bickering. Finally fed up, God said, "THAT'S IT! I have had enough. I am going to set up a test that will run for two hours, and from those results, I will judge who does the better job." So Satan and Jesus sat down at the keyboards and typed away. They moused. They faxed. They e-mailed. They e-mailed with attachments. They downloaded. They did spreadsheets! They wrote reports. They created labels and cards. They created charts and graphs. They did some genealogy reports. They did every job known to man. Jesus worked with heavenly efficiency and Satan was faster than hell. Then, ten minutes before their time was up, lightning suddenly flashed across the sky, thunder rolled, rain poured, and, of course, the power went off.Satan stared at his blank screen and screamed every curse word known in the underworld. Jesus just sighed. Finally the electricity came back on, and each of them restarted their computers. Satan started searching frantically, screaming: "It's gone! It's all GONE! "I lost everything when the power went out!" Meanwhile, Jesus quietly started printing out all of his files from the past two hours of work. Satan observed this and became irate. "Wait!" he screamed. "That's not fair! He cheated! How come he still has all his work and I don't have any?" God just shrugged and said, JESUS SAVES
Kerry and I are looking at baby-carriers like the Baby Bjorn ® Active carrier for little Kaiser when he's born. We had originally planned to go with the Active model but Kerry saw a review for the ERGObaby® carrier (which comes in a Hawaiian print pattern). So she sent me the link and I took a look (since the plan is for me to wear the contraption, anyways. I went to the ERGO site and checked out the customer reviews/testimonials and most were the type of positive "greatest carrier ever" blather that one would expect from a manufacturer's testimonial link. However, I also came across one obnoxious missive wherein the writer whines that there aren't enough instances of ethnic diversity displayed on the site. The company responded by weakly acknowledging that the images don't reflect the company's commitment to diversity but that the models are "local acquaintances". Bah. WHO CARES?!?!It just ridiculous how now even the models on a baby-carrier site are now subject to quota profiling. I doubt if this whiny P.C. nazi hadn't pointed it out, that anyone would have given a whit about who is modeling the carriers. Now the site has a dark skinned woman of ambiguous ethnic orgins carrying a tow headed, alabaster skinned kid making it look more or less like a possible kidnapping scene. Just silly. Baby Bjorn®, on the other hand, makes no bones about its Scandanavian origins. The children and parents on their site - even the Chinese language version - all look like they were plucked directly out Stockholm (or Minnesota). We're not going to base our ultimate decision on which carrier to choose on the manufacturer's response to wing-nut criticism of the appearance of a lack of diversity but it just annoyed me for some reason. Yes, I know the old adage that "perception is reality" but the reality is that some squeaky wheels just need to be ignored.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.The fifth would pay $1.The sixth would pay $3.The seventh would pay $7.The eighth would pay $12.The ninth would pay $18.The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until on e day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20."Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "But he got $10!""Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man . "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I did!" "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!""Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.Professor of Economics, University of Georgia For those who understand, no explanation is needed.For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible
So now the HRC campaign is up in arms about MSNBC commentator, David Shuster's, quit that the Clinton campaign had "pimped out" 27-year old Chelsea by having her place phone calls to celebrities and Democratic Party "superdelegates" on her mother's behalf. If the Clintonites are going to bring Chelsea into the world of politics, they have to accept the unpleasantness that comes with the territory. When Chelsea was a teenager, the comments about her looks were definitely out-of-bounds. But now, if they're gonna have her play in the muck, they have to expect her to get dirty. 
