This is to let you know that our lavatory seat is broken and we can’t get BBC2.Â
Anonymous Britisher to his town council
Must be a shitty channel if your toilet seat is the antenna.
Seriously though, this is just one of the funny quotes over at Rodger’s from anonymous Britishers to their town council’s housing board.
The reason for them, for those who haven’t been paying attention, is that folks in the UK cannot perform repairs/upgrades on their own homes without the approval of the “Town Council”. You should go read some of them to see just how much of a RPITA (Royal Pain in the Ass) something as simple as replacing a few roofing shingles or a leaky faucet can become when you live in a Nanny State.
One of the things on my “List of Things to Do if I Win the Lottery” is to take my father-in-law over to the UK to be sort of like Archibald “Harry” Tuttle (Robert De Niro’s character in Brazil). The guy can fix damn near anything and has more energy to do so at 62 than I do at 35.
30 years of being an Army Engineer will do that to you, though, not like it’s a bad thing. Except for maybe a few Brits having heart attacks over not having to wait for three months to fix a leaky faucet.
As can be guessed by the YouTube stuff below, yesterday was my first viewing of the movie “300” (finally).
I have to say that I’m a bit confused; Everyone said it was along the lines of “hyper-violent”, but from what I saw, it was no more violent than it needed to be, and I could have actually done with a bit more.
I don’t know, maybe it was the 15 Russian kids in the theater acting like nuisances for part of the movie that made me want to commit a few violent acts which bent the calibration of my “Necessary Violence-O-Meter”, or maybe I just had my standards set too high?
Either way, I’m looking for a Director’s Cut of some sort to really just knock my socks off.
When “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas” hit theaters I saw it two to three times a weekend for the four weeks it was in the theaters. I may go back and see “300” one more time, but I’m sure it’ll be out on DVD by this summer, so I may just wait.
Still, a damn good flick, just maybe too much hype from the media.
A Democratic lawmaker has introduced a bill that would ban the sale of traditional incandescent light bulbs – which are less energy-efficient, prompting claims that they contribute to “global warming” – one day after a colleague told a press conference that legislating a ban would be a “last choice.”
As Cybercast News Service reported last week, Rep. Don Manzullo (R-Ill.) and Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) held a news conference Wednesday calling for more efficient lighting options, and Manzullo said “the last thing we want to do is force legislation down people’s throats.”
One day later, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) introduced legislation that would set target dates for certain types of light bulbs to be prohibited for sale in the United States.
Harman calls the bill “an important first step toward making every household, business and public building in America more energy-efficient.”
The key word in that quote in “Making”. Democrats looove making people do things they aren’t already doing. Sure, the Repubs have their moments, but the Dems actually get off on it.
Do the bulbs last longer? Certainly. Do they use less electricity? You bet. Have I already started replacing my incandescent bulbs with the flourescent ones when the “incans” burn out? Yes, I have.
But if they outlaw “incans” then only outlaws will have “incans”.
And I will purposely buy up a pallet-load just to be an outlaw.
There’s no reason to make a mountain of a molehill, unless you’re the man who makes a living trapping moles.
David Krick is that business owner and this week, he’s very scared that he might lose his business.
Moles are pesky little creatures. They tunnel their way through your yard, looking for food. They leave behind piles of dirt, or molehills, all over the yard.
You can try a variety of ways to get rid of moles, but unless you kill the moles you’ll only be forcing them into the neighbor’s yard. Once he figures it out, you can bet he’ll force the moles back into your yard.
The ‘Mole Guy’, David Krick, knows how to get rid of moles. He’s been trapping moles for 13 years. He uses a four-pronged trap.
“The mole comes through the ground and puts some pressure through the soil,” he said. “He’s not suffering. It’s the most humane way I know of killing moles.”
It is, however, illegal in Washington to trap moles with a body-gripping device. This week, a wildlife officer followed David Krick to a customer’s house.
“And read me my rights and said that I have to shut down my business,” Krick explained.
This is actually the fifth time the Department of Fish and Wildlife came after Krick since Initiative 713 passed in 2000. That initiative makes it illegal to use body-gripping traps for fun, or to profit from selling the animal’s fur.
But Humane Society spokeswoman Jennifer Hillman said the initiative wasn’t meant to shut down mole trappers like Krick.
“Initiative 713 was never intended to ban mole and gopher trapping,” she said.
Well, gee-golly-wilakers, Jenny, maybe when you all were pushing the POS law through the statehouse, you should of fucking thought of that.
Oh wait, thinking isn’t part of law-making. Sorry, I’ll remember that next time.
He beat her and threatened her with murder. But because husband and wife were both from Morocco, a German divorce court judge saw no cause for alarm. It’s a religion thing, she argued.
I’d almost agree except for the fact that I don’t want to give up one inch of dirt to those who would use their “religion” in order to violate the human rights of others.
On my way home from work this morning I witnessed something every driver should recognize and stay away from.
Three vehicles travelling in the two southbound lanes of the SR (State Route) Highway. Occupying the left lane by one of those “Drive 55 and Stay Alive” twits. The right lane is occpied by one rather drunk individual who cannot read his speedomenter and in pacing the guy in the left lane. He is being tailgated by a guy about to roadrage. The tailgater is switching lanes and flashing his highbeams from a distance of less than three feet from the cars.
As I roll up on the gaggle, I assess the situation and decide to roll back about 200 feet or so and wait for these three to become a rolling mass of spare parts.
This doesn’t quite happen, though the manuevers at the interchange with I-5 had me on pins and needles.
As a post-script, the tailgater takes off in the carpool lane when he gets to I-5 and stays in said lane even though it is only him in the vehicle. I use the guy as a rabbit (to trip the potential State Troopers before I get to them) and stay around a quarter mile behind him on my way home. Sure as shit, he gets to the top of a blind rise, sees the Trooper, but not before the Trooper tags him for at least 15 over the 60mph limit ($286) and being a single in the carpool lane ($101).
From his album “In Transit” , which is made of only 25% songs such as that one. The rest is some rather well done Drum and Bass tunage good for long drives, or anything else moody you might like to do, including attracting women not like the one above.
Make sure you do the monetary conversion before ordering.
———————-
And on that note, I would like to let y’all know that (hopefully) this weekend I will be purchasing a new turntable.
Right into ugly politics, 22 months before the election.
This ad made it’s debut either last week or over the weekend. Click and watch. (You Mac freaks will enjoy the sentimentality)
Yes, it features Hillary Clinton, so you may need to shield your eyes at times, but do make sure to watch the whole thing, especially the end.
Effective, eh?
If I didn’t already know that Obama was a bigger socialist than FDR and a more ardent moobat than Kucinich (aka: a typical idiot Democrat), I would definitely think of voting for him because of the ad.
When this went out, the leftists, of course, screamed high and low that this was a hit job, done by the Rethuglicans, in an attempt to make Obama look bad for going ugly this early.
But he (Micah Sifry) says that the blogosphere reaction to the ad from the start also suggests that the creator is not associated with Obama’s camp. “If you look at the Obama grass roots conversation about this when the video first surfaced, they were not happy,” he said.
Chris Finnie, a Santa Cruz-based Democratic operative, said the widespread coverage given to the “mashup” in GOP circles suggests the ad could have come from a Republican operative and smacks of “Swift Boat” tactics used in 2004 against Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
“It killed two birds with one stone,” she said, by sharply attacking Clinton as being a political drone and smudging “Obama’s positioning as the ‘Mr. Clean’ of politics. This is politics as usual, and by running a smear ad that is associated with him, it puts a dent in that image.”
Throughout said editorial are numerous denials by the Obama camp that they made it, including the reference to Obama’s denials on Larry King’s show.
Which is why, surprise, surprise, that it turned out to be none other than the Internet Communications Director for Sherrod Brown and an employee of Blue State Digital, Howlin’ Howard Dean’s web crew which supplies tech to Dem campaigns, including Obama’s, but oddly enough, not Hillary’s, a guy named Phil de Vellis.
And from the left there is, surprise, surprise, near stone silence. No howls for de Vellis’ head on a plate, no apologies for false accusations, no nothing. They’re just forgetting it never happened.
Personally, I’d like to forget it all happened too. But the screaming hypocrisy is keeping me awake in bed.
