I found this bobblehead of the President in a gift shop. I looked at the bottom, and was amused by the label. Just had to get a photo.
No, I didn’t buy it. However, it fit nicely.My Aussie Look
For many years, I’ve wanted an Australian leather hat. I first saw one around Cherokee, NC, probably 15 years ago. I found one that fit perfectly, but I didn’t want to spend that much on a hat. I’ve been looking for a good one ever since.
Today, on my birthday, we found a store with tons and tons of Aussie hats. Lots to choose from. And I fell in love with one in particular.
And bought it. No regrets this time.
It’s kangaroo leather–yes, a kangaroo died to satisfy my capitalistic consumption cravings–and it is very pliable. I wore it much of the day, and felt like I’d been wearing it all my life.
So I have a new friend. And a new look. Perhaps I’ll even adopt a Down Under accent.
The Lost Art of Giving Change
Here’s something which makes me amused, in a carnal sort of way.
When my order comes to, say, $5.23, and I give the checkout girl (or guy) a ten-dollar bill and a quarter, it freaks her out. She can’t figure how to give me change.
Doing math in your head, like cursive writing, is becoming a lost art.
In high school and college, I worked in a grocery store–Pixley Foodmart in Pixley, Calif. I’ve never seen checkout lines work as fast as ours did. We blazed along–and without scanners!
Our cashier machines told us the total amount, but not how much change to give. We had to do that in our heads.
We looked on a chart to determine the amount of tax. In weighing produce, another chart. A number didn’t magically appear on a screen for everyone to see. Only I, running the cash register, saw the amount I was plugging into the cash register.
One night 15 minutes before closing, I was the last cashier, I had a line of about 20 customers stretching toward the back of the store, and I had no pennies left. And I didn’t want to ask the office for a new roll of pennies. So I improvised.
I went through every customer, making sure the amount ended on a 5 or 0, so I didn’t need to use pennies. I just mentally adjusted the amount of tax I charged, or maybe the amount I used for produce. The final amount that appeared on the cash register was always divisible by nickels.
I did this all so fast that nobody suspected anything.
Let’s see TODAY’s youth pull that off!
The People We Count Don’t Have Caller ID
A comment on Morning Joe, this morning, made me laugh.
They were bashing the polls. Some showed Obama up by wide margins in certain places, and they didn’t believe them. Other polls showed Romney with a big national lead, and they didn’t believe that.
Finally, Lawrence O’Donnell put it in perspective.
He said pollsters always claim they are talking to registered voters, or likely voters. “But let’s be truthful about who they are polling. They are talking to the last people in America who are still taking unsolicited phone calls.”
Ha!
Who Knew Chinese Laborers Were So Sarcastic?
This Saturday Night Live skit, from last week (Oct 13, 2012) was hysterical. Has some real truth about the way Americans complain about petty things. Wait for the “diabetes” line. It busted me up.
(If you get this post by email, you’ll probably need to click on the title to view the video.)
The Easily Misled Masses
According to a Pew Forum survey, 17% of registered voters still believe President Obama is a Muslim (49% say he’s a Christian, 31% don’t know).
Back in 2008, just 16% of conservatives believed Obama was a Muslim. But today, a full 34% of conservatives believe he’s a Muslim.
Please allow me to begin banging my head against a cement wall. Where are they getting that?
What Little I Know
Sometimes I’m reminded of how little I know.
Each week, the New York Times Book Review includes an interview with some author, in which that author talks about what he’s reading now, favorite authors, over-rated books, etc. This week it was Jeffrey Eugenides, who is evidently a well-regarded author, but I’d never heard of him. Sadly, the same is true of many of the authors they choose. So as much as I consider myself well-read, I’m apparently not.
Eugenides is asked, “What’s the last truly great book you read?” (Most weeks, the author is asked that question.) He mentions “The Love of a Good Woman,” a collection of short stories by Alice Munro. He said, “There’s not one story in there that isn’t perfect. Each time I finished one, I just wanted to lie down on the floor and die. My life was complete.” He mentions Munro’s characterization, her storytelling, and her technical inventiveness.
I’ve read one or two Alice Munro books. They were fine. I know that if I read those short stories, I would probably be bored. I wouldn’t be seeing the things Eugenides sees. And I know a whole lot more of what to look for than most people.
Then Eugenides stuck in the knife. “Whenever I try to read a thriller or a detective novel, I get incredibly bored, both by the language and the narrative machinery.” Well, that’s mostly what I read, thank you–detective novels and thrillers. On the other hand, maybe in this case I’m the one who knows what to look for. He’s meddling in MY world.
But I don’t think that’s the case. Very doubtful, in fact.
Now, let’s expand this concept to include all the other things I know on only a surface level. Economics. Theology. Photoshop. What my wife is thinking and feeling. Foreign policy. Military strategy. Speaking technique. Pretty much everything, in fact.
Tonight–in a half hour, in fact–is the second presidential debate. Both candidates will say things that sound good and reasonable to me, but which, in fact, are outright lies or severe distortions. But I won’t recognize it. A pundit will come on afterwards and explain what I missed, and it will sound like an illuminating explanation. But that pundit will also be outright lying or severely distorting. And I won’t know recognize that, either.
And the next day, I will transport my ignorance to Facebook, where I will make statements that sound definitive, but which are based on lies and distortions I heard from the candidates–lies and distortions that still sound reasonable to me. And those Facebook statements will be further mangled by my own biases, which I will adamantly deny having.
What Really Happened in Benghazi
The Atlantic contains a riveting account of what really happened in Benghazi. It’s the verbatim briefing of a State Department official who talked to the various people involved. He sets the context, and then gives a blow-by-blow, and very detailed, account of the entire episode. You can also read the entire briefing, with Q&A from reporters.
The article gave me a whole different view of the event–and a much more believable, and certainly more credible, account than what we’ve heard. There were some heroic acts by our security personnel. A daring drive through Benghazi streets. Our security people were outnumbered, but they were not unarmed. And there was plenty of confusion. Ambassador Stevens simply got lost in the mayhem, and the repeated attempts by security personnel to find him failed. But he was probably already dead in the safe room.
Right-wing media groups have said that Ambassador Stevens was tortured and sodomized. That didn’t happen. The torture information came from the Libyan Free Press, a pro-Kadaffi group, and has been repeated by a Republican congressman from Arizona. Stevens actually died of smoke inhalation, as initially reported. This account makes that pretty clear.
I don’t know why the right-wing media accepts stuff like this so easily. They’ll tell you, “Here’s what the mainstream media won’t tell you.” But the reason the mainstream wasn’t reporting this is because IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. I’m dismayed that FoxNews considers a pro-Kadaffy website to be authoritative. At least the “lamestream” media has more discretion than that.
I have read and heard so much nonsense about this event.
As the State Department briefing shows, it was a very sudden attack by armed men. Al Qaeda? Maybe. The White House should have gotten its story straight–they definitely bungled it–but this is a story with lots of murkiness.
Impossible Math
The September 17 BusinessWeek mentioned that the government takes in $1 trillion in income tax revenue, but gives up another $1.1 trillion in tax deductions. That includes:
- $47 billion in charitable giving (I thought that figure would be higher. Disappointing.)
- $89 billion in mortgage interest.
- $118 billion in retirement savings.
- $131 billion in employer-provided health insurance.
Now, Mitt Romney says he wants to cut income tax rates for the wealthy by 20%. That, according to BusinessWeek, accounts for $251 billion in less revenue. Romney says he’ll pay for these tax cuts by closing loopholes. But, says BusinessWeek, the total of all deductions for the wealthy comes to just $165 billion. The specific loopholes he has in mind would come to considerably less than that.
So, Mitt: can you please explain how you’re going to make this work?
Here’s my take. THERE IS NO SOLUTION. We’re just way too deep into debt, too overdrawn in every way. There is no math that will work. And every possible cut will make some group of voters mad, so politicians will prefer doing nothing.
Which explains why both candidates are avoiding specifics.
