German pop star marries a pineapple

Yes, a pineapple. Ananas comosus Y'know, Dole, Hawaii, all that.

Quote:
'I loved her. I wanted to marry her. We stayed in Gretna Green Hall Hotel..."

Loved her?

Ummmm...didn't that sting a bit?

...you're surrounded.

I've been pondering the debate for the past 24 hours, and I have a very brief analysis: Both candidates suck, far worse than I'd imagined.

Ironically, each candidate showed one strength and one weakness, but they fit in like puzzle pieces.

• Sen. McCain had some specific plans and ideas, but he just seems tired and worn out, and doesn't inspire leadership when he speaks.


• Sen. Obama sounds like a leader, but we went through the entire evening hearing once again a very high-level description of obvious general needs with little or no clear definition of what specific areas need to be tackled.

Driving down to the Jersey Shore a week ago, I made a rest stop on the Merritt Parkway. I got a cup of coffee, and saw some unusual little packets next to the little containers of creamer. They looked just like the liquid creamer containers, but they were black, and the label told a story of something very much unlike coffee creamer.

I grabbed two of these, but didn't use them.

On the way home on Sunday, I wondered if I'd be able to stay alert. I thought about those little packets, but somehow they just looked like theyneeded a little bit of something as a mixer. I hit rest stop on the Garden State Parkway, got a YooHoo, mixed it up, and chugged it down.

The caffeine lasted me until Massachusetts.

These things are great. I grabbed a handful when I stopped for gas on the Merritt Parkway again.

By way of hollie_is_right:

Evolution of Wedding Dance

Prediction?

Mark your calendar for 2058 when whatever passes for news media at that time digs up this archaic video, and then interviews the couple on their 50th anniversary. It will be possible because that newlywed couple has a long, loving...and most of all, delightfully happy...marriage ahead of them.

I saw this yesterday, did not respond at the time...

This is mainly for evelynne, I know we've talked about this but I don't recall if we've ever done photos.

W talked about the times back when you made a couple of trips down to Long Beach Island, and you said something about staying in an apartment above a bookstore.

Is this it?





Does this look familiar for across the intersection?



How about this view for looking across the street and westward towards the bay? If so, notice that the third telephone pole on the left side of the street bisects a tall house? That house is at a stop sign.



The photo below is the view looking west approaching the stop sign.



Next is from just beyond the stop sign. In that view, on the left you've got a few cars, a blue house, and then (just short of the telephone pole) a white house?



I'm inside the white house posting this entry.



(Doodz. I'm in the white house, posting to the interwebs.)

(Edited because I had my captions out of sequence with photos.)

Another glorious day at the Jersey shore (of which I'll be spending most inside at the keyboard...well at least if I lean back I can see the bay...)

Blue sky, calm air, mostly quiet.

A little while ago I heard an unusual buzz, an airplane overhead, loud buzzing, low, slow. Got out the door in time to see a bright yellow Stearman against the blue sky, flying south over the bay not too far offshore. By the time I grabbed the binoculars and got back out the door, it was gone.

Ten minutes later, the buzzing came back, and this time I went out the door with binoculars in hand, got a great view as it flew almost directly over the house. There was something written on the lower wing surface...at first I thought the plane was a flying billboard (but that's unusual, normally down here they use banners that trail the airplane...and this is awfully late in the year to be trying to catch people on the beach).

It was a URL...something about BP...rides...what an odd slogan for British Petroleum even though yeah I can sorta get the "rides" ...wait, I don't even think there are any BP stations around here...oh...biplane rides!

Yeah. Biplane rides.

Hey, stmachiavelli, if from your location you were able to notice a flight of four F-16s that took off from McGuiire and headed east about a minute or two after 1500 today...at 1504 they passed directly over the street where I am on Long Beach Island. Perfect east-west right up the road, if they had dropped ordnance by accident I would right now be turning into a smokin' hole in

{#`%${%&`+'${`%&NO CARRIER

The newest version of the bailout bill has a very strange name. It used to be the Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, but it isn't any longer.

Rhode Island's Providence Journal explains how it happened here.

Quote:

In part, it has to do with the U.S. Constitution. Article 7, Section 1 says tax bills must originate in the House of Representatives.

In order to improve chances that the bailout bill, which the House defeated on Monday, would be approved this time around, the Senate tacked on several popular provisions [i.e. "earmarks," i.e. "pork"--ed.], such as extending the life of business tax cuts that were set to expire and changing the alternative minimum tax, a much-loathed part of the tax code intended to ensure that the well-to-do pay their fair share but that in recent years has increasingly affected the middle class.

And an element of the tax package was legislation advanced by Kennedy that requires health-insurance companies to offer coverage of mental illness on a par with that of physical illness.

Once the Senate added those provisions to the rescue bill, it qualified as a tax bill, which the upper chamber is constitutionally prohibited from originating.

In order to get around the Constitution, the leaders turned to the time-honored stratagem of finding a live but dormant House bill —[Rep Patrick] Kennedy’s mental-health parity bill — to use as a shell.

“They take out the entire text” of Kennedy’s old bill, “and then, by amendment, they substitute the other bill,” said Don Ritchie, an assistant Senate historian. Two bills, in this instance: the emergency rescue bill and the tax provisions and the final version of Kennedy’s mental-health parity wrapped inside.

The son of one of our friends has cystic fibrosis, on Sunday we joined them and a number of other friends for a fundraising walk in a nearby NH town.

( Pictures below the cut )

I made it to the island. Excellent time, 357 miles in just over seven hours...including a half-hour lost to a traffic jam north of Hartford, CT.

It's funny how much faster the trip goes on the last Monday in September as opposed to the typical Friday in August...

Happy Birthday smjayman!

In a couple of hours I'm hitting the road for another drive down to Long Beach Island. I'll be there for a week, by myself. I figure I'll be arriving somewhere around 5:00 PM my time, so there's a bit of driving ahead. But I know the road well. 357 miles (about 570 km), door-to-door.

I really, really need to focus in order to complete the Jeep/MUTT books I'm working on. After months of not being able to get away from distractions or having enough time, I finally faced the reality that what I need is to be away from them, isolate myself in a place where there isn't much to do except write and stare at a bay. The goal is to finish the main narrative for Jeeps in Action, then get as much done as I can for the main narrative of M151 MUTT in Action. Once I've got the main body of text, the photo selection, caption writing, and layout work will be much simpler.

I'm not bringing much for entertainment other than some CDs to listen to. Oddly, I grabbed the old War of the Worlds album, mainly because that Justin Hayward song Forever Autumn has been on my mind of late and somehow I think it's going to feel right when I'm down there under grey skies by myself. Gotta be careful, hearing that song brings a tear every time for some reason. I guess I'm just an old sentimental fool.

Hey, stmachiavelli, if you're still in that area and have a free moment between this evening and late Saturday, ping me. I can probably tear myself away from the keyboard for a bit if you want to meet up.

it I watched very little of the debate last night, for reasons I foamed-at-the-mouth about here.

However, in the course of some of the excellent replies (thanks cahwyguy!) I'm coming up with a concept I'd like more and more to see this weekend...but am concerned that we won't.

Much of Sen. Obama's platform is based on the concept of "change," more specifically change to the way things are done in Washington. He's promised to bring both sides together, to act in a bipartisan manner, to build bridges across party lines.

These are indeed worthy goals that (if successful) will go a long way towards repairing the broken political process in this country.

So...why wait until January 20, 2009? Why not start now?

As I write these words, the financial package legislation remains deadlocked with Democrats and Republicans unable to agree. This is an excellent opportunity for Sen. Obama to step up in a leadership role, build the bridges, bring both sides to the middle, and get the deal done. Action, not talk.

I suggested this in a comment reply at the post linked above, and yesterday I also suggested it to a co-worker who is a supporter of Sen. Obama. In both cases, the reply I've gotten amounts to "He can't, he's only a Senator...not the President."

I disagree.

There is no special authority or power imbued to the guy who sits in the Oval Office, if there was then George Bush would be able to handle the task. He can't. I'd like to see if Sen. Obama can.

Some will argue (and have) "But he's just a junior Senator, other people are in control in the Senate." I do not see this as an excuse for a failure to act.

The act of bringing the warring political factions together isn't a by-product of a job title, it's the result of leadership. Leaders step forward no matter what their rank, no matter what their standing, no matter what their position. A person does not become President in order to aquire the ability to heal the political process, rather a person who demonstrates the ability to fix the problem demonstrates the leadership necessary to deserve the election to the White House.

If Sen. Obama wins in November, nothing magical or special is going to happen to him to give him the ability to change the political process. He either has that ability right now, or he does not. If he has it, this is a perfect time to use it, for two reasons:

1. It will help solve the problem.


2. It will show that his promises arean't just words.

1. Deal in place by the start of the business day on Monday September 29.


2. The agreement on the deal clearly was the result of Sen. Obama's successful efforts to bring the sides together.

Threats to Missourians who dare to oppose Obama

Quote:
I can see nothing wrong with a squad that rebuts the other side or lays out its version of the truth. But word that an organization of police and prosecutors is going to go after opponents of a candidate, and see if they can nail them under state law (when they haven't spoken yet) is simply and crudely an attempt to chill free speech.

He's already getting law enforcement organized to bring legal action against people who challenge his views, and he's only a candidate.

What will he do to dissent if he wins?

(Obligatory World Parody Alert: A candidate for US President is actively proclaiming his Christian faith, has been accused of sexist behavior regarding women in the campaign, and his operatives are using law enforcement officials to stifle dissent. Meantime, a young supporter has possibly violated the law by stealing documents belonging to the opposition, in hopes of causing political damage. And the candidate in question is the Democrat.)

Happy Birthday beckypoc

Goodbye, cuivenar.

Never met the guy, but somehow I think I would have liked him.

James William "Jim" Adams

( Obit avialable at the link or below the cut. )
UPDATE: Best entry in the comments: " so, let me get this straight, His wife and sister-in-law are both single? "

So today the country is in a tizzy about the move by Sen. McCain to suspend his campaign and go to Washington to work on the controversial finance bill.

Quote:
"It has become clear that no consensus has developed to support the Administration's proposal. I do not believe that the plan on the table will pass as it currently stands, and we are running out of time. Tomorrow morning, I will suspend my campaign and return to Washington after speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative. I have spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of my decision and have asked him to join me."

Although events changed overnight, yesterday Sen. Obama's reaction was that he'd prefer to press on with the scheduled debate.

Quote:
“With respect to the debates, it’s my believe that this is exactly the time the American people need to hear from the person who in approximately forty days will be responsible for dealing with this mess and I think that it is going to be part of the presidents job to deal with more than one thing at once. And I think there’s no reason why we can’t be constructive in helping to solve this problem and also tell the American people what we believe and where we stand.”

My opinion?

This is absolutely the wrong time for two gas-bag politicians (and I'm not voting for either one) to stand in front of cameras and re-hash rehearsed lines that actually tell us nothing about what they actually will do, but are instead geared towards garnering votes. I have much less interest in hearing them bloviate than I do in seeing them get the hell back to the office and do some real work.

Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama are still on salary as US Senators, for which they both continue to collect a tidy paycheck (made up of taxpayer money) despite the fact that neither has shown up for work very much since announcing their campaigns.

I am much more interested in seeing how each of them responds to a crisis than I am interested in hearing either of them gassbag about how they want us to think they will respond. It is a sad irony of our society that so many people right now think that hearing talk about solutions is more important than actually working on the solutions, that so many people believe that political grandstanding speeches will a better indicator of performance in a crisis than is an actual observation of how they perform in a real crisis.

Additionally, the country has come to think somehow that televised political debates are a required part of the process, they are not. It's difficult for a lot of people to remember that presidential debates never happened before Nixon/Kennedy in 1960, and didn't happen again after that until 1976. The morning-after media discussions on their impact is actually more like a true debate than the candidate's discussions, and the events really serve little than for supporters to strut about claiming "My guy won!" As for significance? It is widely believed that Nixon "lost" the televised debates (and lost votes) because of a poor makeup job in front of the camera, and that in 1992 Bush '41 lost the debates and votes when a camera breakaway shot caught him looking at his watch. It's also considered that Ronald Reagan "won" the 1980 debate with not-very-profound "There you go again" chortle response to President Carter's remarks.

I don't need to see two gussied-up candidates re-hash their best lines, I don't need to see Saturday's headlines about one candidate's drop in the polls because a breakaway shot caught him picking his nose, or that another went up in the polls because of a snarky but vapid remark. I don't need to spend Friday night listening to these two political hacks re-deliver empty promises about how they'll make America a paradise if all I do is vote for them and make sure those bad guys from the other party don't get power, because in that respect they're both wrong.

And frankly, the current financial problem is too important for two US Senators to opt out of the discussion so that they can feed their egos by standing in front of cameras while their co-workers in Washington put in late hours at hammering out a plan that will work.

I want to see action. Asses and elbows. Late night lights burning at the Capitol dome. Earning some of that salary they've been collecting all year long while making fundraising stops.

Screw the debates. Get the hell to Washington and solve this problem.

(And by the way, I feel compelled to point out to one candidate that no matter who wins the election, "the person who in approximately forty days will be responsible for dealing with this mess" will still be George W. Bush. The new president doesn't take office until January 20, 2009.)