Random Thoughts

[Red-Handed Jill]

I really lucked out with those two baby owls peeking out at me - it was too good a picture not to take.

Today during my walk, I saw a man blunder his way too near the nest, completely oblivious. Mama owl chattered loudly at him and gave him the what-for with some deep knee bends. The guy jumped about a foot and slinked away as fast as he could. I could not stop laughing and mentally gave that fierce little owl a high-five.

Here's a video I took last year of those deep knee bends I keep mentioning:

Deep knee bends

[Red Cat Jenny]

LOL awww those owls are precious!

On gas prices... I am sending my gas reciepts to the Campaign donations address with a note "I WAS going to donate $120.00....but I had to get to work this week"

Feel free to join me in that. It would make a statement.

[Red-Handed Jill]

Jack and I were talking about how we performed the "Mariner's Revenge" song (originally by the Decemberists.) We've been trying to work out the percussion, but after seeing a few videos of their performances, Jack decided to surprise me with one of these:

New toy!

[Red Cat Jenny]

way cool....

You need a pair of converse to match that

[Hester]

Wicked floor tom, Jill!

Looking forward to hearing your Decemberists cover (and seeing you in your matching Converse).

My current dilemma is that my hard drive is completely full! I need to add a terabyte of memory so that I can continue running certain hoggish programs that shall remain nameless (such as Windows Movie Maker).

Oh yes, vidding is addictive!

[Hester]

I'll see Jill's owl, and raise her a loon:

http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n12/hes...80416202626.flv

[Red Cat Jenny]

How about a

Silly dog.....lol

[Red Cat Jenny]

According to CNN..40% of people who will vote this year still do not know who they will vote for.

[Red-Handed Jill]

I had a rather ludicrous encounter during my trip to the Boston area. On my second day of teaching, on the way to the class I stopped at a local Dunkin Donuts for a flatbread sandwich. Rather than deal with the wacky traffic on this main street I figured I'd park across the street in the empty shopping center lot (none of the stores had opened yet, so it wasn't as if my ten-minute use of one parking space was doing any harm...)

I made the mistake of parking in a section that apparently was the sole property of the Visiting Nurse Association. A couple of women were unlocking the door to the office when I parked my car. As soon as I got out, they opened the door and yelled, "are you a member of VNA?" Puzzled, I said no I wasn't. Then they screeched at me, "They'll tow you! They'll TOW you!!" With the amount of venom with which these two women said this, one would think that I had been desecrating their building rather than having mistakenly parked in their section of a large parking lot. I was really taken aback by this over-reaction to the situation.

And I wondered who's this mysterious "they" - I knew better, that these two women would make sure my car was towed, but they were too cowardly to say so.

For a split section I played with the idea of appealing to the better angels of their nature but on further reflection realised that there weren't any and it would be a futile attempt.

These women work at an organization that supports compassionate care nurses. And yet, their reaction to an honest mistake went way beyond what the situation merited. Half of me was amused but after my previous adventures in the Boston area I really did not need to be screeched at by a couple of harpies.

[Ransom]

Honestly, Jill, after reading both your posts concerning your adventure in Boston, maybe you should send the Mayor a little synopsis of your trip, and how "friendly" the Bostonians were to a guest. I mean, is this the kind of reception they want to give someone coming in from another state? Especially when you were there to teach a class.

Word of mouth is the best advertisement, and bad word of mouth has a ten-fold effect over the good. I have been told that back east, in big cities, it's a different world, even from LA and SF, but sheesh, this is one of the US's most historical cities! They must have tons of tourists. You'd think they would have learned to be a little more polite.

[Red-Handed Jill]

They are apparently very aware of these issues. I think they truly don't like having visitors to the area. The traffic is a nightmare and rather than perhaps investing in some decent mass transit they'd rather take the short view and discourage any traffic from visitors. Most of their problems are self-created but they won't do anything about them because they are too entrenched in the old way of doing things to change.

Also, there's a bit of "I don't care if how they handle this in that new-fangled West is better - WE'RE too good to use those ideas" sensibility. So they aren't going to change, even if it makes things easier for them.

And it really was only those two harpies who were nasty. The other folks I encountered were terrific.

One thing they could do that would really help is teach locals how to merge. No one knows how to freakin' merge in that area - c'mon, it's not rocket science, people!

[Raphael Misson]

According to CNN..40% of people who will vote this year still do not know who they will vote for.

That's because we have yet another "lesser of two weevils" vote. Personally I'm voting for Patrick Hand, myself. (Write in. Let's see 'em figure out who that is. Vintage goggles for everyone!)

[Red-Handed Jill]

Honestly, Jill, after reading both your posts concerning your adventure in Boston, maybe you should send the Mayor a little synopsis of your trip, and how "friendly" the Bostonians were to a guest. I mean, is this the kind of reception they want to give someone coming in from another state? Especially when you were there to teach a class.

Word of mouth is the best advertisement, and bad word of mouth has a ten-fold effect over the good. I have been told that back east, in big cities, it's a different world, even from LA and SF, but sheesh, this is one of the US's most historical cities! They must have tons of tourists. You'd think they would have learned to be a little more polite.

Actually, I sent an email to the director of the VNA (Visiting Nurses Association.) I figure it's a pretty safe bet that I was not the only person to have ever gotten the "harpy treatment" from those two so I figured that perhaps someone higher up should remind them that they are representatives of a compassionate care association and should not show the VNA in such a bad light. Typically, I am amused when people act that bizarrely but their reaction was so far out of reality I felt compelled to do something. And considering who they represented I thought someone should know and curb that sort of behavior before it creates any real ill will towards the VNA.

[Red Cat Jenny]

According to CNN..40% of people who will vote this year still do not know who they will vote for.

That's because we have yet another "lesser of two weevils" vote. Personally I'm voting for Patrick Hand, myself. (Write in. Let's see 'em figure out who that is. Vintage goggles for everyone!)

Well last night Lou Dobbs gave the results of a new poll showing the two *ahem * "choices" being split 44% to 44%.

I shall feel guilty voting either way.

But it is said it's bad not to vote which I concur with normally,

It's a right we fought for and not voting lets people less savory take control.

but is it better than voting for either of two people you have no good convictions about?

I'm still thinking this quandry through.

I vote for a third and fourth choice.

Where are the John Adams? The FDR's, the Teddy Roosevelts, the General Washingtons? Are we devoid of such men (or women) of substance forevermore?

[Dutchman]

I'm stuck at work. out of boredom I call the folks and Jack Tarrr answers. after looking at the phone to make sure I dialed the right number, it seems the crew decided to bag a boat work day and go play. they ended up at the folks swimming, sailing, kayaking, and EATING MY CRABCAKES!!!!!!!!! for dinner. buggers.

[Raphael Misson]

but is it better than voting for either of two people you have no good convictions about?

I'm still thinking this quandry through.

I vote for a third and fourth choice.

Where are the John Adams? The FDR's, the Teddy Roosevelts, the General Washingtons? Are we devoid of such men (or women) of substance forevermore?

I looked into the whole third party concept at one point. It basically doesn't work in our country very well. About 40% of the voting population purchase Brand X without fail, 40% go with Brand Y (or 'Brandy') and 20% decide the election. Some statistics place it closer to 45%, which may be why 5% is considered a landslide.

When a viable third party candidate comes along, it's often due to a schizm resulting from dissatisfaction over the current selection of Brand X or Y. Then X's or Y's 40% break rank which usually assures the success of the opposing candidate. (See Ross Perot for a case study.) This is true unless the third party candidate is middle-of-the-road enough to sway at least half or more of the dedicated 40% (unlikely) and enough of the 20% to make up the missing difference. However, this produces another middling, lackluster candidate and we're back where we started. So, until the perception of the two 40% groups change or something astonishing happens, we're sort of stuck with the current setup.

Now (going out on a psychological limb here), it seems to me that the sort of person that votes early and often would tend to be more traditional and not inclined towards change. (This I think true for both Brand X and Brandy.) So these crucial blocks of reliable voters are not going to embrace any massive changes in the system. My thought is that the best way for a 3rd party candidate to get his horse a good position in the race would be to appeal to the typically non-voting, non-traditionalists. If you look closely at the two major candidates, you'll find they are really quite traditional in what they're spouting about lately - in fact each of them seems to have tempered their more non-traditional "primary views" in an effort to gather up their traditional 40%ers. However, my whole proposition is predicated upon the non-voting masses being lured into the fray by some stirring message. (Also unlikely.)

As for great presidents, I once read that the country can only handle one great president a generation. In between, you get mediocre examples of the specie. If I recall it correctly, the writer said this was actually for the best as a great president was great because they caused (usually needed) upheaval and change. (I don't know if that's true or not, but I liked the sound of it so here I am repeating it.) Most people are actually afraid of change as a general precept (campaign slogans notwithstanding) and so it must either occur during a time of chaos or the perceived brass knuckles of change must be hidden in the silk glove of politics-as-usual.

Politics is a rather curious example of psychology.

[Red Cat Jenny]

aye..and that was interesting..thanks

I rather meant another choice of either party..

although a lot of people have swung independent from both sides this year... I can't say I blame them..or haven't considered it.

However, as you state...the current two party concept works..if not this years model..or last..or .err well.. you know...

The concept of a great president only once a generation or so is rather facinating...

I would guess it would take a generation usually for things to get bad enough to require greatness or great effort to step up to the plate...There is some merit there.

Barring a large unforseen circumstance that is.

Plus I guess someone great would at least last a generation..thereby eradicating the need for another just then...

Then there's the thought that if there were many..would just one seem truly great?

Or would the norm be different due to the abundance of more capable and stoic characters?

hmm...

fodder for the long drive to work and back..

As for my thoughts...

I have been enjoying the History Channel Series on The Revolution which I recently bought.

You know...there are some very interesting similarities....

But then I've been saying that was coming for some time

You just never know..

[Raphael Misson]

However, as you state...the current two party concept works..if not this years model.

I didn't say it works...in many ways it doesn't work very well at all. I just said that's how we're currently stuck operating. Any government is only going to make some of the people happy all of the time - if you think about it, it's a precarious balancing act in most countries just to keep one form governing for an extended period. There are an infinite number of ways to govern the masses (including not governing them) and ours is one of them. (I'd personally like to see a whole lot less governing and whole lot more giving responsibility to the governed - it makes for an intrinsically stronger and free-thinking population. But again, it's a balancing act. It also allows them to make stupid decisions. (Which I also think is a good thing provided no one steps in to save them from learning from their mistakes. But I digress.))

While we're on interesting political cycles; I've also read that the US has about a 40 year cycle back and forth between conservatism and liberalism. The voters get sick of the inherent corporate and/or military excesses created by conservatism and vote in liberals and then get sick of the sometimes stultifying controls on business and freedom imposed by liberals in the name of fairness and vote conservatives back in. Back and forth, back and forth. If my previous post is right, it's that 20% in the middle doing all that. (I believe we're actually heading back towards liberalism at present.)

If the psychology of politics interests you, here's a fascinating program you can download from Radio Australia on the Political Brain:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/stor...007/2089172.htm

I think you can still get it on mp3 from their site.

The concept of a great president  only once a generation or so is rather facinating...

Isn't it just? I wish I could remember where I read that. It was quite awhile ago. If I were making a recent list, it'd go like this (and some will no doubt disagree. Recency makes it hard to discern the impact of some presidents.):

Reagan

JFK

FDR

Teddy

Lincoln

Each of them significantly impacted the direction of the government in their time. (Assuming "change" is the operative concept here.) Looking at it, it seems extend longer than a generation by my list. (My dad studies presidents - he's reading a book on each of them, working backwards. If I think of it, I'll ask him who he thinks the most influential presidents were.)

Then there's the thought that if there were many..would just one seem truly great?

Or would the norm be different due to the abundance of more capable and stoic characters?

Absolutely. I just read a fascinating book that talked about the psychological impact (both good and bad) of comparison called Predictably Irrational - The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions by Dan Ariely. He explains that we rely heavily on comparisons to make judgments, even though this is not always valid.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

BACK TO CLASS TOMORROW!!!

I had the "opportunity" to work last week with my last employer. He was waaaay behind on a job remodeling a truck-stop and needed an experienced electrician to work with the gas pumps and other tricky areas of the project. Whenever I get frustrated with school and think I should give up and go back to work in construction, I will only have to stop and remember last week! GEEEZ! what a cluster f**k it still is! And it has gotten even worse in the three years since my injury/surgery. He was asking me if I would be willing to come back part-time and i said HEEEELLL no!

Bo

[Salty]

random thought, which occurs first the babe or the first day of classes?

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

random thought, which occurs first the babe or the first day of classes?

What if.... they run concurrently???

Bo

[callenish gunner]

i guess she'll be taking notes and timing contractions at the same time!!!

she is a rather determined young lass!!!! either way i'll be the designated driver ...so the toasting will take place at home!!!

[Salty]

random thought, which occurs first the babe or the first day of classes?

What if.... they run concurrently???

Bo

ach well,

tis the old pyrates addage...one day at a time.

shall wait and see, mates

[Blackbead]

Talking about voting in America's political system is sort of like talking about the pacifist's response to Hitler invading Poland. By then it's too late. The only way to take action and make a change is to get involved early and work within the system to try and put someone in the nomination process that you respect, admire and believe in. Unfortunately, in our polarized environment, which is more about winning than it is about coming up with something that is good for the Country, it is less and less likely that you will get the chance to vote for someone that you truly get excited about voting for. Maybe that is the final definition of a "great" president - someone that a majority of the Country actually gets excited about voting for and someone who can galvanize the huge mass of the middle class who sits in the middle and watches the parade pass by without getting out and marching. There's one for you - who was the last candidate, in ANY election, that you were excited about voing for?

[Raphael Misson]

Good points. There are always some people who are excited about a candidate, though. I think the more mainstream your inclinations are, the more you will appreciate the proffered candidates in a large election.

Still, it's a real balancing act to get the nomination for the national election in America. Even though we tend towards certain broad political views as a nation, there a a hundred minor issues that a candidate must take some view on - and whatever view they take will tick half the electorate off. (Things like the death penalty, environment, abortion and gun control come to mind.) So unless the candidate's stars all happen to align with yours, there will be something to carp about.

And then there's the odd 'likability' factor. This again supports avoiding the extremes. Check out that link to Radio Australia that I cite above for some interesting research on how importantly that plays into an election.

In a way, I'd like to see a bunch of serious candidates. It would significantly dampen the effectiveness of outside money on the campaign. Unfortunately, it's also too many choices for most people (me included) and would require far too much research to determine which brand of politician you want. (They've done many studies about how our brains make choices and found that most people start confusing the selections when asked to discern more than 5 - 7 things. this is probably because our minds can hold about that many in short term memory. And you sure don't want the facts about politicians sitting in your long term memory. )