They are giving prisoners
computers
in some states here now. Can you believe it? Ohio became the latest
state last month to allow inmates to purchase and use mini tablet
computers while in jail. It is a controversial move intended to,
"better connect those in jail with their families and friends outside
of it." Actually, I think it will enable the prisoners to be able to
better connect with on line crimes. Hmmmm I wonder which state will be
the first one to have one of its convict order a murder though use of
his prison tablet?
Anyway, at least six other of the fifty states permit criminals to have
a personal computer in jail. Those who favor the policy say that it
will "deepen prisoners' ties to their communities and keep them in sync
with modern technology." They envision it as an "educational tool".
Yes, educational too....but a negative one in many cases, I think. I
wonder if giving them computer access is also a training guide for more
crimes once the prisoner is released from jail. I would prefer that
those in jail are not " tied to the community" as they are in prisoner
because their ties to the community have been criminal ones. They can
tie all they want themselves when they have served their jail term and
are released from prison.
Is not one reason that prisoners are confined in jail to protect the
community from their harmful activities? Giving convicts computers is
like handing an arsonist a box of matches and pointing him toward a
wood house. Too, I wonder if the victims of their crimes will be put in
jeopardy by convicts in jail who exact revenge on their victims through
use of the computers. Unrestricted and unsupervised use of the
computers can make it easier for inmates to re-victomize or continue to
intimidate the victims they harmed in the first place. More than
four in 10 offenders in the U.S. return to state prison within three
years of their release, so the odds are great that many prisoners will
abuse their computer privileges.
In the states that allow the convicts to have the tablets inmates or
their family members can purchase a $49.99 mini tablet that allows them
to send E mails and listen to music, The E mails and any included
attachments can be monitored by the state's department of corrections
or the individual facility, but that is hard to do given the number of
computers in use and the shortage of the number staff to do it. One
would think that prison officials would realize the danger of convicts
having computers by recalling the endless number of crimes already
committed by convicts who have sneaked cell phones into their cells and
used them to commit crimes. Drug gangs who often sneak cell phones in
must be happy that computers are now allowed. Uh...prisoners do like
breaking rules and giving them access to technology that make it easier
to do so seems to me to be stupid.
Androids for convicts! Do you think it's a good idea? I wonder if it is
the responsibility of prisons to make life more comfortable and high
tech for the convicts, or is it better to rehabilitate prisoners with
tools that do not pose a potential threat to those of us outside of
jail? The old hard labor system seemed to work well. Maybe that might
be a better tool for rehabilitation. At least after a full day of hard
physical work the convicts would be too tired to plan or execute crimes
on line from their jail cells
Friday, September 20, 2013
We Need More Commandments
The world has become way more complicated than in the days
of thee and
thy. I don't know about you, but sometimes I am confused about what is
the right and wrong thing to do when acting. It's the era of moral
relativism, one in which whatever we do is ok if we can make an excuse
for behaving badly or unwisely based on our own perspective. I think
the old Ten Commandments are not enough of a moral guide anymore
because we have so many more temptations to resist today.
So I say, lets add on the the, 'Thou shalt not kill' and 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife' (Hmm Most men would have to confess guilty on that from time to time. God should let us covet as long as we don't touch) list of the Ten Commandments. We need modern commandments to make all those other people (you and I excluded, since we are the only true ethical people) behave and stop annoying us. How about these additional commandments, Moses?
* 11th- Thou shalt not watch Reality TV... unless you have a certified IQ score less than 50.
* 12th- Thou shalt not participate in a pro or anti abortion, gay rights or global warming march...unless you march all the way into the sea.....stay there.
* 13th- Thou shalt not annoy others with your cell phones....well, I guess this is the commandment no one will obey. Never mind!
* 14th- Thou shalt nor call rappers "rap artists"..... "Untalented thugs" or "Hate mongers" are titles that will assist you in your journey to heaven.
* 15th- Thou shalt not lecture anyone who is eating a donut about the values of organic/vegan foods.....because an eternal donut diet awaits you in heaven....... if you are wise enough to renounce your healthy diet and make it to donut world (heaven)
* 16th- Thou shalt never be politically correct....or yee shall be sent to politically correct purgatory after death
* 17th- Thou shalt never use "lol", "brb" or other inane computer abbreviations in any written correspondence with another individual who is not classified as brain dead.
* 18th- Thou shalt never pay attention to celebrity opinions on politics, social justice or "saving the planet"..... for those who disobey, heaven has a video that constantly plays those morons whining their views.
* 19th- Thou shalt never utter, "Islam is a peaceful religion" when decapitating or abusing a non Muslim.....Muslims who wish to enter heaven must leave on earth all knives, swords, artillery and weapons of mass destruction.....the Islamics you leave on earth will appreciate your earthly weapon contribution.
* 20th- Thou shalt never read heathen garbage....uh, except what I wrote here.
So I say, lets add on the the, 'Thou shalt not kill' and 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife' (Hmm Most men would have to confess guilty on that from time to time. God should let us covet as long as we don't touch) list of the Ten Commandments. We need modern commandments to make all those other people (you and I excluded, since we are the only true ethical people) behave and stop annoying us. How about these additional commandments, Moses?
* 11th- Thou shalt not watch Reality TV... unless you have a certified IQ score less than 50.
* 12th- Thou shalt not participate in a pro or anti abortion, gay rights or global warming march...unless you march all the way into the sea.....stay there.
* 13th- Thou shalt not annoy others with your cell phones....well, I guess this is the commandment no one will obey. Never mind!
* 14th- Thou shalt nor call rappers "rap artists"..... "Untalented thugs" or "Hate mongers" are titles that will assist you in your journey to heaven.
* 15th- Thou shalt not lecture anyone who is eating a donut about the values of organic/vegan foods.....because an eternal donut diet awaits you in heaven....... if you are wise enough to renounce your healthy diet and make it to donut world (heaven)
* 16th- Thou shalt never be politically correct....or yee shall be sent to politically correct purgatory after death
* 17th- Thou shalt never use "lol", "brb" or other inane computer abbreviations in any written correspondence with another individual who is not classified as brain dead.
* 18th- Thou shalt never pay attention to celebrity opinions on politics, social justice or "saving the planet"..... for those who disobey, heaven has a video that constantly plays those morons whining their views.
* 19th- Thou shalt never utter, "Islam is a peaceful religion" when decapitating or abusing a non Muslim.....Muslims who wish to enter heaven must leave on earth all knives, swords, artillery and weapons of mass destruction.....the Islamics you leave on earth will appreciate your earthly weapon contribution.
* 20th- Thou shalt never read heathen garbage....uh, except what I wrote here.
Airports
One of those dot com airline review web sites just
put out a user
survey of the worst airports. That would be both in the U.S and
internationally. The worst ranked airport in the United States came as
no surprise to me. It is New York City's Laguardia Airport, a domestic
airport so old and antiquated that it creeks more than my knees. The
only reason it is still operating is location. It's close to Manhattan
and for a lot of people like me, that beats a fancy airport any day. It
not only works well but is cheaper to use and a short ride from it
takes you to Manhattan.
Anyway I looked at the lists of worst airports and have been in a few of them. Los Angeles airport, for instance, is on my list too. It's dirty, has too many terminals spread out too far away, has few places of any quality to buy food, and must be the leader in lines and waits of all U.S. airports. I dread that one and will go out of my way to avoid using it for connections. Not only is it antiquated it leave s the user with a bad experience almost every time. My worst international airports concur with what the readers said, just about any of the older European airports. The Europeans have not built many airports in recent years. Now that doing so is so expensive they are stuck with small, antiquated and primitive airports, even in many the biggest and most traveled European cities.
One thing I notice about big city international airports is that Asian big city airports tend to be the best. That's because they are far newer than those in the west. Really though, I am not so impressed with high tech, clean airports as much as with those both located close to where I need to go and not over-crowded with passengers. No matter how new and high tech an airport is, no matter how much entertainment is inside the airport and how comfortable it may be, the main priority for me is to get me in and out of the airport quickly. I like functionality over glitzy.
Some airports do combine function with comfort and beauty. The airport in Singapore is an a example. It's beautiful, easy to use and fast functioning, with plenty of things to do inside the terminal while waiting. Problem is, it's located in one of the most dreary places on earth- Singapore. I only want to use the Singaporean airport for a connection when I am passing through that place. God forbid having to stop and stay in Singapore.
But let's face it. Few want to be in any airport these days. Flying is not fun and we are happiest when seeing an airport from the rear...as we leave it.
Anyway I looked at the lists of worst airports and have been in a few of them. Los Angeles airport, for instance, is on my list too. It's dirty, has too many terminals spread out too far away, has few places of any quality to buy food, and must be the leader in lines and waits of all U.S. airports. I dread that one and will go out of my way to avoid using it for connections. Not only is it antiquated it leave s the user with a bad experience almost every time. My worst international airports concur with what the readers said, just about any of the older European airports. The Europeans have not built many airports in recent years. Now that doing so is so expensive they are stuck with small, antiquated and primitive airports, even in many the biggest and most traveled European cities.
One thing I notice about big city international airports is that Asian big city airports tend to be the best. That's because they are far newer than those in the west. Really though, I am not so impressed with high tech, clean airports as much as with those both located close to where I need to go and not over-crowded with passengers. No matter how new and high tech an airport is, no matter how much entertainment is inside the airport and how comfortable it may be, the main priority for me is to get me in and out of the airport quickly. I like functionality over glitzy.
Some airports do combine function with comfort and beauty. The airport in Singapore is an a example. It's beautiful, easy to use and fast functioning, with plenty of things to do inside the terminal while waiting. Problem is, it's located in one of the most dreary places on earth- Singapore. I only want to use the Singaporean airport for a connection when I am passing through that place. God forbid having to stop and stay in Singapore.
But let's face it. Few want to be in any airport these days. Flying is not fun and we are happiest when seeing an airport from the rear...as we leave it.
The Wonderful Future That Never Was
There is an interesting nostalgia book by Gregory Benford
called, 'The
Wonderful Future That Never Was'. The book collects the various
technological and lifestyle predictions made in the magazine 'Popular
Mechanics' between 1903 and 1969. It's notable to read and
see how many of the predictions actually came true in one form or
another. I don't know if some can predict the future or if they are
just lucky at guessing about it.
Predicting even what we will personally do tomorrow morning is hard for most of us, but predicting far into the future about things we have little knowledge is extremely tough. It's sort of an imagination test, I guess. We have to imagine the future on the limited data we already have and then make a guess.
The book is only about technological predictions. I am not sure if it is harder to predict future technology or to predict how humans will use new technology. Hmmmm How many people 50 years ago would have predicted the invention of cell phones versus how many would have predicted the awful behavior of most cell users? That's a hard question to answer, but I suppose human behavior is the most enigmatic thing in the universe, so I think that in the much more highly mannered era of 50 years ago the rudeness of the cell user would not have been predicted as often as was the prediction of the technology itself.
You can look below at some of the predictions that were made in those years and see what years the predictions were made. I wonder if anyone has compiled a list of social predictions of the future, predictions about changes in human behavior. And is our behavior better now than it was between 1903 and 1969 (the years of the technological predictions of the book)? What are some predictions of the future about our behavior in society that you think might come to pass 50 years from now? The only thing I can predict is that the future will always be unpredictable.
Predicting even what we will personally do tomorrow morning is hard for most of us, but predicting far into the future about things we have little knowledge is extremely tough. It's sort of an imagination test, I guess. We have to imagine the future on the limited data we already have and then make a guess.
The book is only about technological predictions. I am not sure if it is harder to predict future technology or to predict how humans will use new technology. Hmmmm How many people 50 years ago would have predicted the invention of cell phones versus how many would have predicted the awful behavior of most cell users? That's a hard question to answer, but I suppose human behavior is the most enigmatic thing in the universe, so I think that in the much more highly mannered era of 50 years ago the rudeness of the cell user would not have been predicted as often as was the prediction of the technology itself.
You can look below at some of the predictions that were made in those years and see what years the predictions were made. I wonder if anyone has compiled a list of social predictions of the future, predictions about changes in human behavior. And is our behavior better now than it was between 1903 and 1969 (the years of the technological predictions of the book)? What are some predictions of the future about our behavior in society that you think might come to pass 50 years from now? The only thing I can predict is that the future will always be unpredictable.
Illegal Immigrant Or What
I am confused again. This time it is about
what to call those people,
estimated between 12 and 20 million and mostly from Mexico and other
central American countries, who walk into this country without
permission and stay here without documentation. They used to be called
"illegal immigrants", a term I think fits well but is now politically
incorrect. I rarely see any story in the press that used that term
anymore and in fact most major press organizations have banned it on
the basis that it is "offensive". When you can control the words
people use, you can frame the issue your own way, and that way for the
media is to pretend that illegal immigrants are here legally. By
changing the vocabulary they have helped to control the way people in
the United States view illegal immigration.
That is exactly what is happening with the immigration debate today. UCLA's’ undergraduate student government, for example, recently approved a resolution that condemned the use of the term “illegal” when describing immigrants in the U.S. without legal permission. They like the term "undocumented immigrant" instead. It does make it seem that the illegals here should be seen as legal citizens and that we should just welcome them despite their illegal status.
The U. S. constitution long ago defined an alien as a person who comes from a foreign country. The term "illegal alien" was what we used to call those people who were here without permission. It is a broader and more accurate description because it includes undocumented aliens and non immigrant visa overstayers. An undocumented alien is an individual who has entered the U.S. illegally, without entry documentation. But that one isn't politically correct either now because there are many millions of Hispanics here who support illegal immigration. No politician wants to insult that voting block by applying the term illegal to those who come here without permission.. Now many of those who support people coming here illegally like to use the term "undocumented workers". The media likes it too because it sanitizes the act of breaking into the country without permission, and that makes the media outlet feel safe from the wrath of those who like illegal immigration.
Are you confused yet? If not, here are some more often used euphemisms for the more accurate and neutral term "illegal immigrant": alien absconders, alien residents, asylum applicant, border crossers, border jumpers, day laborers, entrants, foreign nationals, foreign students, foreign born, foreign born newcomers, foreign born workers, guest workers, illegal border-crossers, illegal entrants, illegal newcomers, illegal residents, illegal workers, lower wage illegal workers, Mexican nationals, Mexican born expatriates, Mexicans, migrant workers, newcomers, out-of-status migrant, paper less immigrant, poor immigrants, residents, unauthorized workers, under banked, undeserved population, undocumented, undocumented citizens, undocumented foreigners, undocumented immigrants s, undocumented Mexican immigrants, undocumented Mexicans, undocumented persons visa overstayers.
I am out of breath! When someone breaks into your house he or she is called a "burglar". Instead, maybe we should just call them "undocumented resident? That way we would not hurt the burglar's feelings as we hurt the feeling of the illegals here when we use :illegal" to describe their status. But I doubt that any of the illegal immigrant advocates would want to call their house burglar an undocumented resident, or to let those who break in stay in the house and use it they way the "undocumented resident" wished.
It's odd. The problem with euphemisms is that they eventually take on the derogatory meaning of the thing they were trying to slowly back away from. "Retarded, for example, started out as a euphemism to replace slow which was a euphemism started to replace moron which was also… you get the idea.
Sigh...maybe if we just deport them all we won't have to worry about the politically correct term for them.
That is exactly what is happening with the immigration debate today. UCLA's’ undergraduate student government, for example, recently approved a resolution that condemned the use of the term “illegal” when describing immigrants in the U.S. without legal permission. They like the term "undocumented immigrant" instead. It does make it seem that the illegals here should be seen as legal citizens and that we should just welcome them despite their illegal status.
The U. S. constitution long ago defined an alien as a person who comes from a foreign country. The term "illegal alien" was what we used to call those people who were here without permission. It is a broader and more accurate description because it includes undocumented aliens and non immigrant visa overstayers. An undocumented alien is an individual who has entered the U.S. illegally, without entry documentation. But that one isn't politically correct either now because there are many millions of Hispanics here who support illegal immigration. No politician wants to insult that voting block by applying the term illegal to those who come here without permission.. Now many of those who support people coming here illegally like to use the term "undocumented workers". The media likes it too because it sanitizes the act of breaking into the country without permission, and that makes the media outlet feel safe from the wrath of those who like illegal immigration.
Are you confused yet? If not, here are some more often used euphemisms for the more accurate and neutral term "illegal immigrant": alien absconders, alien residents, asylum applicant, border crossers, border jumpers, day laborers, entrants, foreign nationals, foreign students, foreign born, foreign born newcomers, foreign born workers, guest workers, illegal border-crossers, illegal entrants, illegal newcomers, illegal residents, illegal workers, lower wage illegal workers, Mexican nationals, Mexican born expatriates, Mexicans, migrant workers, newcomers, out-of-status migrant, paper less immigrant, poor immigrants, residents, unauthorized workers, under banked, undeserved population, undocumented, undocumented citizens, undocumented foreigners, undocumented immigrants s, undocumented Mexican immigrants, undocumented Mexicans, undocumented persons visa overstayers.
I am out of breath! When someone breaks into your house he or she is called a "burglar". Instead, maybe we should just call them "undocumented resident? That way we would not hurt the burglar's feelings as we hurt the feeling of the illegals here when we use :illegal" to describe their status. But I doubt that any of the illegal immigrant advocates would want to call their house burglar an undocumented resident, or to let those who break in stay in the house and use it they way the "undocumented resident" wished.
It's odd. The problem with euphemisms is that they eventually take on the derogatory meaning of the thing they were trying to slowly back away from. "Retarded, for example, started out as a euphemism to replace slow which was a euphemism started to replace moron which was also… you get the idea.
Sigh...maybe if we just deport them all we won't have to worry about the politically correct term for them.
Aging Slowly
As I get older I think that I notice all the "aging talk"
more often
than when I was young and stupid (I know...today I am old and stupid.
Half the equation never changes with me). Everything from science to
superstition to pop psychology keeps telling me that some people age
faster than others. I know that. But what good does it do to learn
that. We either have good or bad aging genes, and we either get hit by
that truck or it misses us. There is nothing we can do to get on the
good side of the equation, because we age the way nature wants us to
age.
Just the other day I read that recent research says that people who seem to stay younger for longer are likely to have more moles. So how do I make myself get moles? They forgot to tell me that in their study. I don't have any moles now, so I am panic stricken that I might die before I can make some moles magically appear on my wrinkled body. Hmmmmm I know they sell mole cream, but can I have a mole transplant? I want to be immortal.
There was also a report in the news that scientists have found a 'Peter Pan gene' that could explain why some people remain baby faced while others become old before their time. A British led research team (probably composed of old timers) made the discovery after trawling the DNA of more than 12,000 people for patterns that affected the rate their bodies aged. They found that people with the 'Peter Pan' version had longer telomeres, meaning their biological clocks ticked more slowly. Ok, but what good is that for those who don't have those long telomere things? Mick Jagger may be the oldest looking human on earth, but I am sure his drug and alcohol binges over the years have as much to do with his wrinkles as does short telomeres. Besides, Mick seems to having a lot more fun that us during his old wrinkled says.
Those two studies are useless. But another study by researchers showed that people who are physically active in their leisure time aged more slowly than their more sedentary counterparts. Hmmmm We could do all that exercise if we wanted to, but I think one or both of us might have a heart attack and die if we try. One of the exercise slows aging studies said it best. "Inactivity may diminish life expectancy not only by predisposing to aging related diseases but also because it may influence the aging process itself." Ahhhhhhhhh, I think I'll just stay on the couch eating my potato chips. I can always lather on some wrinkle cream to hide the fact that I am not exercising like they want me to.
Even the business world has something to say about our aging process. A London University study compared the DNA of 450 office workers and found that those with more advanced degrees had longer telomeres, and thus, longer life spans. It said that long term exposure to "lower status" makes a person age faster. What good does that do for me and many others? We are too stupid to go back to college and get an advanced degree. Well, I suppose I could get one of those phony on-line degrees that one can buy for $20. It might be worth a few dollars to live a few more years.
I think I better stop reading about all of these studies. It's frustrating me and there are that probably studies saying it will shorten my telomeres, which will just make me age faster.
Just the other day I read that recent research says that people who seem to stay younger for longer are likely to have more moles. So how do I make myself get moles? They forgot to tell me that in their study. I don't have any moles now, so I am panic stricken that I might die before I can make some moles magically appear on my wrinkled body. Hmmmmm I know they sell mole cream, but can I have a mole transplant? I want to be immortal.
There was also a report in the news that scientists have found a 'Peter Pan gene' that could explain why some people remain baby faced while others become old before their time. A British led research team (probably composed of old timers) made the discovery after trawling the DNA of more than 12,000 people for patterns that affected the rate their bodies aged. They found that people with the 'Peter Pan' version had longer telomeres, meaning their biological clocks ticked more slowly. Ok, but what good is that for those who don't have those long telomere things? Mick Jagger may be the oldest looking human on earth, but I am sure his drug and alcohol binges over the years have as much to do with his wrinkles as does short telomeres. Besides, Mick seems to having a lot more fun that us during his old wrinkled says.
Those two studies are useless. But another study by researchers showed that people who are physically active in their leisure time aged more slowly than their more sedentary counterparts. Hmmmm We could do all that exercise if we wanted to, but I think one or both of us might have a heart attack and die if we try. One of the exercise slows aging studies said it best. "Inactivity may diminish life expectancy not only by predisposing to aging related diseases but also because it may influence the aging process itself." Ahhhhhhhhh, I think I'll just stay on the couch eating my potato chips. I can always lather on some wrinkle cream to hide the fact that I am not exercising like they want me to.
Even the business world has something to say about our aging process. A London University study compared the DNA of 450 office workers and found that those with more advanced degrees had longer telomeres, and thus, longer life spans. It said that long term exposure to "lower status" makes a person age faster. What good does that do for me and many others? We are too stupid to go back to college and get an advanced degree. Well, I suppose I could get one of those phony on-line degrees that one can buy for $20. It might be worth a few dollars to live a few more years.
I think I better stop reading about all of these studies. It's frustrating me and there are that probably studies saying it will shorten my telomeres, which will just make me age faster.
Losing Our Humanity
Are you getting tired of all the technology in our lives?
Had enough? I
have. Well, I had enough long ago and abstain from most of it apart
from my computer. The thing I like about the computer is that I bother
no one else with it, as I have a desktop that I use in privacy. Still,
I know I use my computer too much. But unlike the desktop, so much of
the other new technology we are given the opportunity to use is used
annoyingly in public. It makes those devices so much worse. And just
today I have read that those people without secure connections on their
computer are being victimized by hackers who can hack a private
connection to spy on a person (through the victim's computer camera) or
even unlock front doors remotely to make it easy to burglarize their
home.
I keep hearing, but never have believed, the old adage that computers are freeing time for us to do other things. Right...... but unfortunately those other things are to access even more technological devices and be more stressed and alienated by them. What happened to the pre computer days free time in which we just sat on the front porch and watched life unfold naturally? Too, I suspect we got as much done in those days as we do now. Now, we are frantically on our devices spending hour after hour accomplishing nothing, doing nothing of value but pretending to.
If being "connected" to computers is your idea of a meaningful life you may not be in the minority. But is that depth or just fun and convenience? I do believe computers are making us lazier, less willing to do many ordinary things ourselves, the things that used to define us. How many times do we hear today that hard work is a positive value? Not very often. We seem to want to take shortcuts (like those computer shortcuts we adore) in so many things in our lives, even in our personal relationships. The man or woman who tweets "I'm done with this relationship! Good Luck." as away of breaking a romance is not a rarity. The teenager who is locked onto his or her computer screen every night while ignoring mom and dad is not an aberration. And on and on......
What bothers me about all of this is the fact that so many of us don't realize how we have become addicted to and are prisoners of our technology. We are their slaves and yet don't know it. It may be hyperbole to suggest that we are losing our humanity to the machines, but a few have and many more will in the days ahead. It's enough to make me want to give my computer a good swift kick!
I keep hearing, but never have believed, the old adage that computers are freeing time for us to do other things. Right...... but unfortunately those other things are to access even more technological devices and be more stressed and alienated by them. What happened to the pre computer days free time in which we just sat on the front porch and watched life unfold naturally? Too, I suspect we got as much done in those days as we do now. Now, we are frantically on our devices spending hour after hour accomplishing nothing, doing nothing of value but pretending to.
If being "connected" to computers is your idea of a meaningful life you may not be in the minority. But is that depth or just fun and convenience? I do believe computers are making us lazier, less willing to do many ordinary things ourselves, the things that used to define us. How many times do we hear today that hard work is a positive value? Not very often. We seem to want to take shortcuts (like those computer shortcuts we adore) in so many things in our lives, even in our personal relationships. The man or woman who tweets "I'm done with this relationship! Good Luck." as away of breaking a romance is not a rarity. The teenager who is locked onto his or her computer screen every night while ignoring mom and dad is not an aberration. And on and on......
What bothers me about all of this is the fact that so many of us don't realize how we have become addicted to and are prisoners of our technology. We are their slaves and yet don't know it. It may be hyperbole to suggest that we are losing our humanity to the machines, but a few have and many more will in the days ahead. It's enough to make me want to give my computer a good swift kick!
Roaches
Cancel my plans to vacation in China!
According
the Chinese media, 1.5 million cockroaches escaped a breeding facility
in eastern China's Jiangsu province, infesting nearby farmland and
homes. Oh, my...want to buy a cheap house? I bet real estate in
Juangsu is cheap now. Jiansu’s board of health investigators
have no idea how to rid the region of the pests. You know what they
say, nuke the world and the only survivors will be cockroaches. Here in
cool climate Portland I rarely see roaches, but in my former New
Orleans they were everywhere. We used to say that we could put a saddle
on a New Orleans roach and ride him.
Maybe Jiangsu province should use their pest control on the guy who raised the 1.5 billion. That would at least prevent him from orchestrating a repeat performance The roach breeder, Wang Pengsheng, began raising the insects so their extracts could be used as a traditional Chinese medicine treatment for cancer and inflammation, and to allegedly improve immunity. He had been raising the roaches on a diet of fruits and biscuits when something destroyed the plastic greenhouses he was using for the enterprise. Thank God he wasn't breeding any more of those Kardashian girls! I'll take a self respecting roach over a Kardashian any day.
Local villagers were reported to be worried that the escaped roaches would damage their crops and bring diseases. But Wang says he is a humanitarian as well as a blattaculturist (someone who breeds roaches) and that his roaches are not bad guys. I've known a few leeches in my time (most of them were relatives) but never a harmful roach. They may be disgusting to look at and invasive, but roaches never ask for money like the relatives did. According to the Chinese roach web site YinYangHouse.com, roach parts or extracts can renew “joints, sinews and bones, (heal) contusions, fractures and lacerations” and are also used for a “wide variety of blood stasis such as abdominal masses and amenorrhea, (as well as) numb and swollen tongue.”
That's probably wishful thinking, like using the horns of Rhinos to make sex better. But roaches do serve some known useful purposes. As part of the food chain, cockroaches are a food source for birds and some other animals. Roaches also feed on other (some even more disgusting) creatures. They also recycle dying vegetation. So, it might be better if we both traded or relatives for some of those Chinese cockroaches.
Maybe Jiangsu province should use their pest control on the guy who raised the 1.5 billion. That would at least prevent him from orchestrating a repeat performance The roach breeder, Wang Pengsheng, began raising the insects so their extracts could be used as a traditional Chinese medicine treatment for cancer and inflammation, and to allegedly improve immunity. He had been raising the roaches on a diet of fruits and biscuits when something destroyed the plastic greenhouses he was using for the enterprise. Thank God he wasn't breeding any more of those Kardashian girls! I'll take a self respecting roach over a Kardashian any day.
Local villagers were reported to be worried that the escaped roaches would damage their crops and bring diseases. But Wang says he is a humanitarian as well as a blattaculturist (someone who breeds roaches) and that his roaches are not bad guys. I've known a few leeches in my time (most of them were relatives) but never a harmful roach. They may be disgusting to look at and invasive, but roaches never ask for money like the relatives did. According to the Chinese roach web site YinYangHouse.com, roach parts or extracts can renew “joints, sinews and bones, (heal) contusions, fractures and lacerations” and are also used for a “wide variety of blood stasis such as abdominal masses and amenorrhea, (as well as) numb and swollen tongue.”
That's probably wishful thinking, like using the horns of Rhinos to make sex better. But roaches do serve some known useful purposes. As part of the food chain, cockroaches are a food source for birds and some other animals. Roaches also feed on other (some even more disgusting) creatures. They also recycle dying vegetation. So, it might be better if we both traded or relatives for some of those Chinese cockroaches.
A Record To Remind Us
Rah Rah Rah
for the oldies! Sixty four
year old Diana Nyad, endurance
swimmer, became the first person to swim from Cuba to Florida without
the help of a shark cage. Yes, sharks chewing on the swimmer is one of
the high possibilities of that swim. To make the swim without the cage
is astounding courage. It took 53 hours after she began her journey in
Havana for her to arrive in Miami.
She had been slurring her words while she was out in the water. She was on a stretcher on the beach and received an IV before she was taken by ambulance to a hospital but was ok. Doctors expected to find massive stings from rays, dehydration and severe burns from the intense sun of that area. Apparently the old girl did quite well because she was released from the hospital in good condition.
She wore a full body suit, gloves, booties and a mask at night, when jellyfish rise to the surface. The new silicone mask caused bruises inside her mouth, making it difficult for her to talk, she told her team when she was about 2 kilometers from land. (The swim was a total of about 100k). It's such a phenomenal feat at her age.....err, for any age. Diana tried it twice before in her youth but failed. I think is is a good feel story because it lets everyone know, old and young, that persistence and effort are not lost values, even in this age of entitlement. She had a dream (an odd dream, but a dream nonetheless), very few people could do and she did it.
Haha This does not imply I will get off my sofa, leave my potato chips and start swimming again. Living vicariously off this is best suited for me. I think it is enough because it lets me and others know we can achieve what seems unrealistic when we stop depending on others and undertake tasks ourselves. Not depending on the government for free "stuff" or anyone else to "help" us when we fall behind is probably the greatest single need in the U.S and many other places. Whether she knows it or not, Diana has shown us self reliance and determination never get old or die.
She had been slurring her words while she was out in the water. She was on a stretcher on the beach and received an IV before she was taken by ambulance to a hospital but was ok. Doctors expected to find massive stings from rays, dehydration and severe burns from the intense sun of that area. Apparently the old girl did quite well because she was released from the hospital in good condition.
She wore a full body suit, gloves, booties and a mask at night, when jellyfish rise to the surface. The new silicone mask caused bruises inside her mouth, making it difficult for her to talk, she told her team when she was about 2 kilometers from land. (The swim was a total of about 100k). It's such a phenomenal feat at her age.....err, for any age. Diana tried it twice before in her youth but failed. I think is is a good feel story because it lets everyone know, old and young, that persistence and effort are not lost values, even in this age of entitlement. She had a dream (an odd dream, but a dream nonetheless), very few people could do and she did it.
Haha This does not imply I will get off my sofa, leave my potato chips and start swimming again. Living vicariously off this is best suited for me. I think it is enough because it lets me and others know we can achieve what seems unrealistic when we stop depending on others and undertake tasks ourselves. Not depending on the government for free "stuff" or anyone else to "help" us when we fall behind is probably the greatest single need in the U.S and many other places. Whether she knows it or not, Diana has shown us self reliance and determination never get old or die.
Another Labor Day To Forget
Another Labor Day has come and gone here, and Americans did
pretty much
what they do when with their work tasks when at work. They ignored it.
Outside of the constant whining by unskilled minimum wage workers who
keep asking the government to mandate a higher minimum wage, the labor
movement isn't very big or productive. I think if Labor Day were
abolished here few would notice or care. Give this country is a
capitalist democracy emphasizing equal opportunity over equal outcomes,
we don't have the social movements for "equality" that is found in many
other places. In truth, American workers do work hard on the job but
they are not happy about being there.
A recent Gallop poll of American workers looked at how Americans function at work. Its conclusion was discouraging. Seventy percent of the American workforce is going through the motions or, worse, is actively disengaged and seeking to cause problems. No wonder that woman at the Carl's Jr. hamburger restaurant keeps getting my burger order wrong. Gallup doesn't blame the workers for their apathy. Instead, it calls for companies to take steps to better connect with their employees. I am not sure exactly what that means. In a free market economy the only imperative for the employer is to make a profit. Providing comfort for the worker isn't' a necessity. The fact that the employee has a job and opportunity to prove him or her self should be enough.
Regardless of the less than favorable economic conditions today, Gallup said that worker happiness is most influenced by relationships on the job and a variety of other intangibles. Hmmm Not pay. Among the factors that influence worker satisfaction are "the opportunity to do what I do best everyday" and working for a company with a mission or purpose "that makes me feel my job is important." But someone who works in a low skilled job that is filled with repetitive tasks has little chance for that. Perhaps that kind of worker should be more realistic and not expect such abstractions.
The No. 1 determinant of worker engagement, Gallup concluded, is the way employees are treated by their bosses. Only the employers can make employees happy and they try to do so as much as feasible because happy workers tend to be more productive. But the cost of making workers happy can sometimes be so big that profit is lost. As a result what most employers do is to simply fire the employee who goofs off at work or shows little interest in working hard. Seems reasonable to me.
Unfortunately the government today has sent a message to workers that their employer must "take care of them", provide unrealistically high wages and provide a fulfilling environment. Is that really the responsibility of the employer? Should not the worker make his or her own fulfillment? If a worker is dissatisfied with his or her job should not the worker quit and upgrade the skill and education level to find a more fulfilling job?
The worker might be better off if he or she make him or her self enjoy coming to work. If not, they probably should work elsewhere. My Labor Day dream is that workers here will stop asking their government to force employers to "take care of them:, and instead decide they should be personally responsible for their own work experience. Personal responsibility is a quality being lost today. Sad, because nothing is more satisfying or produces happiness more at or away from the job site.
A recent Gallop poll of American workers looked at how Americans function at work. Its conclusion was discouraging. Seventy percent of the American workforce is going through the motions or, worse, is actively disengaged and seeking to cause problems. No wonder that woman at the Carl's Jr. hamburger restaurant keeps getting my burger order wrong. Gallup doesn't blame the workers for their apathy. Instead, it calls for companies to take steps to better connect with their employees. I am not sure exactly what that means. In a free market economy the only imperative for the employer is to make a profit. Providing comfort for the worker isn't' a necessity. The fact that the employee has a job and opportunity to prove him or her self should be enough.
Regardless of the less than favorable economic conditions today, Gallup said that worker happiness is most influenced by relationships on the job and a variety of other intangibles. Hmmm Not pay. Among the factors that influence worker satisfaction are "the opportunity to do what I do best everyday" and working for a company with a mission or purpose "that makes me feel my job is important." But someone who works in a low skilled job that is filled with repetitive tasks has little chance for that. Perhaps that kind of worker should be more realistic and not expect such abstractions.
The No. 1 determinant of worker engagement, Gallup concluded, is the way employees are treated by their bosses. Only the employers can make employees happy and they try to do so as much as feasible because happy workers tend to be more productive. But the cost of making workers happy can sometimes be so big that profit is lost. As a result what most employers do is to simply fire the employee who goofs off at work or shows little interest in working hard. Seems reasonable to me.
Unfortunately the government today has sent a message to workers that their employer must "take care of them", provide unrealistically high wages and provide a fulfilling environment. Is that really the responsibility of the employer? Should not the worker make his or her own fulfillment? If a worker is dissatisfied with his or her job should not the worker quit and upgrade the skill and education level to find a more fulfilling job?
The worker might be better off if he or she make him or her self enjoy coming to work. If not, they probably should work elsewhere. My Labor Day dream is that workers here will stop asking their government to force employers to "take care of them:, and instead decide they should be personally responsible for their own work experience. Personal responsibility is a quality being lost today. Sad, because nothing is more satisfying or produces happiness more at or away from the job site.
When Video Games Become Too Real
An 8-year-old boy allegedly shot and killed his
grandmother recently after playing the “Grand Theft Auto” video game. Grand Theft Auto
IV,’ a realistic and vulgar game that has been associated with
encouraging violence. It awards points to players for killing people.
Clearly this was a case of a failure in supervision by an 87 year old
and the parents who left the child with the 87 year old. The 87 year
old is probably at that age is incapable of such supervision. Just
about every kid plays violent video games today (another case of poor
parenting in society), with many speculating they are a terrible
influence on the lives of children.
Anyway, Marie Smothers, 87, was pronounced dead inside her Slaughter, La. (no joke...the great irony that the town where it happened is named "Slaughter") home with a gunshot wound to the head from a very real gun used by the 8 year old. Police initially thought the shooting was an accident, but now believe it was intentional. That brings up the question of the effect of the garbage, the computer games kids are addicted to today, on children and society. So do video games that rely on extreme violence affect society, or does this violent society we live in lead to people creating these type of video games? Personally, I don't see the attraction to any computer/video games, but then I grew up without them. I'm kind of thankful for that too.
The first question to ask is, "How did the 8 year old get his hands on the gun"? The responsibility lies with the owner , unless some outsider came and interfered with her weapon storage plan. In this killing there was no interference. And if you have children in a home where there are guns (another crazy habit of about half of Americans who allegedly keep them for "protection"), that comes with an added responsibility to educate them early and often so they grow up to be responsible around firearms. What was an 8 year old doing playing Grand Theft Auto? The game is rated M (for mature) and nobody is supposed to be able to purchase it unless they are 18 or older. Somebody bought that game for the boy or let him have access to it., and that is the bigger issue, not the idiotic video game's effect on the child.
Whether one believes that violent video games beget violence or not, I just can't imagine why anyone would allow their 8-year-old to experience the kinds of visual experiences that first person shooter games so realistically convey. That implies guilt by the parents as much as by the grandma baby sitter who was watching that 8 year old. Apparently none of them understand that video games can't raise children, responsible adults do.
There is some evidence from research on the subject that there is a distinct gap/dysfunction in a young child's ability to distinguish between “the game” and reality. Killing in these games has become so prominent that the player focuses only on the death count, which is the reward. Is it possible that the child merely acted out the game on his grandma because the game was more real to him than the reality of life. If so, it is sad and a warning that the current generation of kids (and by implication the adults of the future) may be less empathetic to others, desensitized to violence and more inclined to not be able to differentiate reality from games.
This brings up an adult component to the violent/ vulgar video game of today. In our vulgar culture it seems to me that too many adults spend way too much time playing video games of all sorts (Should not video games be for children, not grown-ups?), neglecting their responsibilities to work and family and distracting them from modeling good/loving behavior for their kids. When adults behave irresponsibly, so will children. Teaching positive values and modeling them with our own good behavior might make the coarse culture of today less attractive to kids. But then to expect adults to be responsible role models today is about as real as those idiotic video games.
Anyway, Marie Smothers, 87, was pronounced dead inside her Slaughter, La. (no joke...the great irony that the town where it happened is named "Slaughter") home with a gunshot wound to the head from a very real gun used by the 8 year old. Police initially thought the shooting was an accident, but now believe it was intentional. That brings up the question of the effect of the garbage, the computer games kids are addicted to today, on children and society. So do video games that rely on extreme violence affect society, or does this violent society we live in lead to people creating these type of video games? Personally, I don't see the attraction to any computer/video games, but then I grew up without them. I'm kind of thankful for that too.
The first question to ask is, "How did the 8 year old get his hands on the gun"? The responsibility lies with the owner , unless some outsider came and interfered with her weapon storage plan. In this killing there was no interference. And if you have children in a home where there are guns (another crazy habit of about half of Americans who allegedly keep them for "protection"), that comes with an added responsibility to educate them early and often so they grow up to be responsible around firearms. What was an 8 year old doing playing Grand Theft Auto? The game is rated M (for mature) and nobody is supposed to be able to purchase it unless they are 18 or older. Somebody bought that game for the boy or let him have access to it., and that is the bigger issue, not the idiotic video game's effect on the child.
Whether one believes that violent video games beget violence or not, I just can't imagine why anyone would allow their 8-year-old to experience the kinds of visual experiences that first person shooter games so realistically convey. That implies guilt by the parents as much as by the grandma baby sitter who was watching that 8 year old. Apparently none of them understand that video games can't raise children, responsible adults do.
There is some evidence from research on the subject that there is a distinct gap/dysfunction in a young child's ability to distinguish between “the game” and reality. Killing in these games has become so prominent that the player focuses only on the death count, which is the reward. Is it possible that the child merely acted out the game on his grandma because the game was more real to him than the reality of life. If so, it is sad and a warning that the current generation of kids (and by implication the adults of the future) may be less empathetic to others, desensitized to violence and more inclined to not be able to differentiate reality from games.
This brings up an adult component to the violent/ vulgar video game of today. In our vulgar culture it seems to me that too many adults spend way too much time playing video games of all sorts (Should not video games be for children, not grown-ups?), neglecting their responsibilities to work and family and distracting them from modeling good/loving behavior for their kids. When adults behave irresponsibly, so will children. Teaching positive values and modeling them with our own good behavior might make the coarse culture of today less attractive to kids. But then to expect adults to be responsible role models today is about as real as those idiotic video games.
Longer Live The Beatle
An enthusiastic fan of the late Beatle, John Lennon,
has purchased the
rock star's decayed tooth from the son of Lennon's former housekeeper,
the rock star's decayed tooth..... for more than $30,000. But wait
until you hear why. Uh, Canadian dentist Michael Zuk figures that
science has now advanced far enough that Lennon can be cloned and can
start writing music again. Most of us probably think that dentist
should just "Let it Be". But he says that "We Can Work it Out" with
Lennon's DNA if science will only "Help" him in his quest to make
Lennon live again. Oh my! "Obla di obla da"...life goes on.
Zuk thinks that the "science is almost there" and that any research into cloning race horses, mice or mastodons could ultimately be applied to humans. "It's the unknown. These are legitimate questions that are right on the edge of science right now, he said." I wonder if Zuk sucks too much on that laughing gas in his office, because I think this has only a tooth of a chance to work. Zuk has already sent the Lennon tooth to a lab in the United States to extract Lennon's DNA. I just hope he also doesn't bring back Yoko when she dies!
Aside from that crazy dentist's idea, I wonder about the future days ahead when cloning of DNA to produce humans will actually be possible. Might future human cloning of the ultra-rich and famous become a rage? I can think of more people that I don't want them to bring back than those that I do. For example, Some jokester is likely to bring back Hitler. Worse!!! Just think how awful it would be to clone those Reality TV stars. I can't take another life for the Kardashians. And with some famous people we can't be sure of they are yet dad. I dare you to prove that the Rolling Stone's Keith Richard's is either dead or alive. That guy is a zombie.
Ok, I am making light of this stupidity. But I am not kidding about that dentist and about what he thinks he can do. If you doubt my report check his web site dedicated to the John Lennon DNA project. It can be found at JohnLennonDNA.com.
Zuk thinks that the "science is almost there" and that any research into cloning race horses, mice or mastodons could ultimately be applied to humans. "It's the unknown. These are legitimate questions that are right on the edge of science right now, he said." I wonder if Zuk sucks too much on that laughing gas in his office, because I think this has only a tooth of a chance to work. Zuk has already sent the Lennon tooth to a lab in the United States to extract Lennon's DNA. I just hope he also doesn't bring back Yoko when she dies!
Aside from that crazy dentist's idea, I wonder about the future days ahead when cloning of DNA to produce humans will actually be possible. Might future human cloning of the ultra-rich and famous become a rage? I can think of more people that I don't want them to bring back than those that I do. For example, Some jokester is likely to bring back Hitler. Worse!!! Just think how awful it would be to clone those Reality TV stars. I can't take another life for the Kardashians. And with some famous people we can't be sure of they are yet dad. I dare you to prove that the Rolling Stone's Keith Richard's is either dead or alive. That guy is a zombie.
Ok, I am making light of this stupidity. But I am not kidding about that dentist and about what he thinks he can do. If you doubt my report check his web site dedicated to the John Lennon DNA project. It can be found at JohnLennonDNA.com.
Red Is Not Dead
I am a redhead. Well, maybe most of my hair isn't red any
more as I
have whitened with age, but there is a 1% population of people born
with red hair (no dye jobs count) and I still see a few red ones in my
beard and on my head. Scotland has the highest percent of population
with red hair ( 10%) while the United States has the highest total
number of redheads in its population. Redheads are a breed of their
own in that they identify with each other and are often gawked at by
non redheads. Sometimes I even gawk and strangely, feel negative
thoughts when I see another redhead. In Portland this weekend more
than a thousand redheads packed Pioneer Courthouse Square downtown,
hoping to break a Guinness World Record for the most redheads in a
single place.
I didn't know about the event or I would have attended and added to the count, but unofficial counts clocked in between 1,300 and 1,600 natural redheads at the Pioneer Square. It would break the former record set last year when 1,255 redheads gathered in Breda, Netherlands. Science tells us that even though the population of red heads is small and that both the mom and dad must have the red recessive gene to produce a child with red hair, it is impossible for redheads to become extinct. There are just too many red recessive genes out their to make it statistically possible to wipe us out.
The redheads that gathered for the record had to be photographed, they had to be identified by number and they had to stand in a corral for 10 minutes in bright sun in order for the event to count toward the record. The "gingers", people like me whose red hair has turned a different shade, also had to bring a color photo of themselves when they were young as proof of their true redheaded nature. But I still have enough visible red hair to not be called a ginger.
>From the days of my childhood when old ladies would rub my red head for good luck I have known that no other single human trait has provoked such a range of emotions in such a large number of fellow humans as when they spot a redhead. Maybe it's because there were so many diverse redheads in history to make people react to the next redhead they see. Among the famous historical redheads are; Queen Elizabeth, Judas, Nero, Napoleon Bonaparte, Cleopatra, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Florence Nightengale. I doubt if anyone could say those characters were in any way alike. Yes, I know about Little Red Riding Hood. There were also many other red headed animated characters.
There are many more superstitions about redheads than any other hair colored human. Among them are............
It's felt that red-haired people don't make good butter, for the butter always has a slight tang to it.
Salute no red-haired man nearer than 30 feet off and, even so, hold 3 stones in the fist wherewith to defend thyself.
Straight and course red hair, also coarse and kinky, most always shows dishonesty.
Redheads have no soul.
Never lodge at red-haired person's houses for these be folks that are to dread.
Red hair is the sign of a vixen.
Redheaded women are either violent or false and usually are both.
An honor it is to have a child who is born with red hair
A lady with long red hair is glib of tongue, talkative, and vain.
Auburn or ginger hair denotes a person to be very passionate and hasty, very suspicious and extremely jealous; thereby much sorrow will come to such persons and those who associate with them.
Rumored they'd turn into a vampire after they die.
Red hair denotes a person of sharp wit, easily agitated, unforgiving, but once a friend, a true one.
Let not the eye of a red-haired woman rest on you. Do not let the shadow of a red-headed person fall upon you. It will work you back luck.
In Spain, there is a strong prejudice against red hair, which originated in their belief that the hair of the traitor Judas Iscariot was red. The Irish, on the contrary, are very fond of red hair and think it brings them good luck.
Ladies with red hair are usually great talkers.
It is also said that Cain had red hair, and this will greatly account for the popular prejudice against it.
In ancient Egypt, people with red hair were associated with the god Seth, the slayer of Osiris. In Donegal, if a girl is born with red hair, it is a sign there was a pig under the bed.
In New Zealand, red hair is sacred, and a woman with red hair is believed to have a clear road to heaven.
Red hair was a sign of unclean sex (during menstruation); degenerate offspring.
Red hair was called the "Mark of Gilgamesh" (after a mysterious figure of this name around 2600 B.C.)
If the person has red hair on the top of his head or the back of the neck, then he will be wealthy.
Bees will sting redheads more
If you should pass a redhead in the street, spit and turn around. If you pass by 3 red-haired people, you will win the state lottery.
A man with long red hair is cunning and deceitful.......but Aa red beard and a black head can catch him with a trick and take him dead.
It is unlucky to see a red-headed Negro.
It's lucky to rub your hand on the head of a redhead.
It's said that redheads are born witches, because their hair has turned red like the fires of hell.
For many years redheaded women were not allowed at the craps tables in Las Vegas-they were thought to bring good luck to the gentleman that they accompanied, but bad luck to the others at the table.
Have you had enough redhead information for the day? I think I have given you enough data to verify that there is a reason for all my character flaws. Just blame it on my red head!
I didn't know about the event or I would have attended and added to the count, but unofficial counts clocked in between 1,300 and 1,600 natural redheads at the Pioneer Square. It would break the former record set last year when 1,255 redheads gathered in Breda, Netherlands. Science tells us that even though the population of red heads is small and that both the mom and dad must have the red recessive gene to produce a child with red hair, it is impossible for redheads to become extinct. There are just too many red recessive genes out their to make it statistically possible to wipe us out.
The redheads that gathered for the record had to be photographed, they had to be identified by number and they had to stand in a corral for 10 minutes in bright sun in order for the event to count toward the record. The "gingers", people like me whose red hair has turned a different shade, also had to bring a color photo of themselves when they were young as proof of their true redheaded nature. But I still have enough visible red hair to not be called a ginger.
>From the days of my childhood when old ladies would rub my red head for good luck I have known that no other single human trait has provoked such a range of emotions in such a large number of fellow humans as when they spot a redhead. Maybe it's because there were so many diverse redheads in history to make people react to the next redhead they see. Among the famous historical redheads are; Queen Elizabeth, Judas, Nero, Napoleon Bonaparte, Cleopatra, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Florence Nightengale. I doubt if anyone could say those characters were in any way alike. Yes, I know about Little Red Riding Hood. There were also many other red headed animated characters.
There are many more superstitions about redheads than any other hair colored human. Among them are............
It's felt that red-haired people don't make good butter, for the butter always has a slight tang to it.
Salute no red-haired man nearer than 30 feet off and, even so, hold 3 stones in the fist wherewith to defend thyself.
Straight and course red hair, also coarse and kinky, most always shows dishonesty.
Redheads have no soul.
Never lodge at red-haired person's houses for these be folks that are to dread.
Red hair is the sign of a vixen.
Redheaded women are either violent or false and usually are both.
An honor it is to have a child who is born with red hair
A lady with long red hair is glib of tongue, talkative, and vain.
Auburn or ginger hair denotes a person to be very passionate and hasty, very suspicious and extremely jealous; thereby much sorrow will come to such persons and those who associate with them.
Rumored they'd turn into a vampire after they die.
Red hair denotes a person of sharp wit, easily agitated, unforgiving, but once a friend, a true one.
Let not the eye of a red-haired woman rest on you. Do not let the shadow of a red-headed person fall upon you. It will work you back luck.
In Spain, there is a strong prejudice against red hair, which originated in their belief that the hair of the traitor Judas Iscariot was red. The Irish, on the contrary, are very fond of red hair and think it brings them good luck.
Ladies with red hair are usually great talkers.
It is also said that Cain had red hair, and this will greatly account for the popular prejudice against it.
In ancient Egypt, people with red hair were associated with the god Seth, the slayer of Osiris. In Donegal, if a girl is born with red hair, it is a sign there was a pig under the bed.
In New Zealand, red hair is sacred, and a woman with red hair is believed to have a clear road to heaven.
Red hair was a sign of unclean sex (during menstruation); degenerate offspring.
Red hair was called the "Mark of Gilgamesh" (after a mysterious figure of this name around 2600 B.C.)
If the person has red hair on the top of his head or the back of the neck, then he will be wealthy.
Bees will sting redheads more
If you should pass a redhead in the street, spit and turn around. If you pass by 3 red-haired people, you will win the state lottery.
A man with long red hair is cunning and deceitful.......but Aa red beard and a black head can catch him with a trick and take him dead.
It is unlucky to see a red-headed Negro.
It's lucky to rub your hand on the head of a redhead.
It's said that redheads are born witches, because their hair has turned red like the fires of hell.
For many years redheaded women were not allowed at the craps tables in Las Vegas-they were thought to bring good luck to the gentleman that they accompanied, but bad luck to the others at the table.
Have you had enough redhead information for the day? I think I have given you enough data to verify that there is a reason for all my character flaws. Just blame it on my red head!
English Not Necessary?
How politically correct has the United Sates
become? I think there is
no end to the stupidity of political correctness here, where concern
that any rule or standard that might "offend" someone's feelings is
reason to invalidate the rule or standard. The latest nonsensical
example is in the state of New Mexico. According to a constitutional
provision of the state, New Mexico citizens who don't speak English
have the right to serve on juries, even if they are non-English
speakers. New Mexico is half Hispanic speaking today and many of those
Hispanics speak no English at all. According to a 19th century New
Mexican constitutional provision of the New Mexico constitution, "A
citizen's right to vote, hold office or serve on a jury cannot be
restricted "on account of religion, race, language or color, or
inability to speak, read or write the English or Spanish languages".
In the 1800's or even early 1900's this might have made sense, since the population then was sparse and more Spanish speaking than English speaking. New Mexico was part of Mexico before becoming part of the United States in the mid-19th Century, and many residents spoke only Spanish at the time. The state's constitution drafted for statehood gave protections for Spanish speakers. But courts in New Mexico have consistently upheld that provision and not allowed it to be changed.. Hence if you are arrested in New Mexico you might be placed in a trial where one or more of the jurors deciding your case does not speak or understand the English language your defense attorney uses to try to prove your innocence.
The most recent court ruling about the matter says that if a juror is illiterate in English a trial should be delayed a reasonable time in order to secure an interpreter for a juror. Hmmmm Can someone listening through an interpreter really full y understand all the information and nuances of the case? In selecting jurors in New Mexico, the individual simply fills out a questionnaire that asks "yes" or "no" to fluency in English, and that alone is supposed to be the proof of fluency. I suspect many jurors there are not fluent enough to understand the forms much less the legal arguments the lawyers present in a case. In those instances the accused is surely not truly receiving a fair trial.
The United Sates government has a rule for all prospective citizens (one must be a citizen to serve on a jury) that makes those applying for citizenship prove fluency in English. Yet, this is rarely enforced, leaving us with a nation with some citizens who can not understand English well enough to competently serve on a jury. But the U.S. constitution also guarantees a trial by a jury of "peers"? That means an English speaking American be judged by a jury whose members speak the same language. How can it be a jury of peers if a juror does not speak the same language as the accused?
Anyone who is a juror and is not fluent in understanding English can not have followed the complexities of a court case, and anyone who can not speak English could not communicate with other jurors during deliberations. Communications between jurors is critical, especially in criminal cases when a unanimous decision is required for a guilty verdict. If a juror cannot understand well what is said during a trial, how can they vote in a thoughtful, proper manner?
"Citizens who don't speak English" should be an oxymoron, but we have decided to forgo having any standards for the sake of not "offending" anyone. It's sad.
In the 1800's or even early 1900's this might have made sense, since the population then was sparse and more Spanish speaking than English speaking. New Mexico was part of Mexico before becoming part of the United States in the mid-19th Century, and many residents spoke only Spanish at the time. The state's constitution drafted for statehood gave protections for Spanish speakers. But courts in New Mexico have consistently upheld that provision and not allowed it to be changed.. Hence if you are arrested in New Mexico you might be placed in a trial where one or more of the jurors deciding your case does not speak or understand the English language your defense attorney uses to try to prove your innocence.
The most recent court ruling about the matter says that if a juror is illiterate in English a trial should be delayed a reasonable time in order to secure an interpreter for a juror. Hmmmm Can someone listening through an interpreter really full y understand all the information and nuances of the case? In selecting jurors in New Mexico, the individual simply fills out a questionnaire that asks "yes" or "no" to fluency in English, and that alone is supposed to be the proof of fluency. I suspect many jurors there are not fluent enough to understand the forms much less the legal arguments the lawyers present in a case. In those instances the accused is surely not truly receiving a fair trial.
The United Sates government has a rule for all prospective citizens (one must be a citizen to serve on a jury) that makes those applying for citizenship prove fluency in English. Yet, this is rarely enforced, leaving us with a nation with some citizens who can not understand English well enough to competently serve on a jury. But the U.S. constitution also guarantees a trial by a jury of "peers"? That means an English speaking American be judged by a jury whose members speak the same language. How can it be a jury of peers if a juror does not speak the same language as the accused?
Anyone who is a juror and is not fluent in understanding English can not have followed the complexities of a court case, and anyone who can not speak English could not communicate with other jurors during deliberations. Communications between jurors is critical, especially in criminal cases when a unanimous decision is required for a guilty verdict. If a juror cannot understand well what is said during a trial, how can they vote in a thoughtful, proper manner?
"Citizens who don't speak English" should be an oxymoron, but we have decided to forgo having any standards for the sake of not "offending" anyone. It's sad.
Bubble Gum
You know what old time favorite seems to be less and less
present
today? It's bubble gum. I don't chew it much anymore, but it was big
with both adults and kids when I was a boy. I remember another craze
when I was a child, collecting baseball and football cards. Inside each
card that sold for a penny each was a square slab of bubble gum. The
cards were fun to trade and a source of info about players, but no one
ever let the gum sit very long. We usually goggled it before we even
looked at the card, which was sold with it. Today the sports trading
cards are still sold in the same format but they have no gum inside the
package. Perhaps this has dimmed the popularity of bubble gum with
kids.
Bubble gum was invented in 1928 by an accountant who worked for a chewing gum factory. It seems he was playing around with the chewing gum one day instead of charting debits and credits and accidentally stumbled on the formula for bubble gum. The reason bubble gum is pink today is because the inventor colored it with what was available that day, the pink the factory used in it's chewing gums. Can you imagine a slab of bubble gum being any other color? I think it would taste different if it were not pink. Being a bubble gum purist I like the pink slabs of bubble gum far more than the many colored bubble gum balls that can be bought from vending machines. The texture of slab bubble gum is the best one.
Anyway, 1928 to now, I am sure (anecdotal evidence only) that fewer people chew bubble gum today. I once read that the two countries with the highest chewing gum (not bubble gum) consumption are Iran and Saudi Arabia. Bubble gum seems to be more of an American habit than is chewing gum. I notice in stores the endless racks of chewing gum for sale but have to look long to find any bubble gum. Chewing gum comes in low calorie, sugar free, breath freshening scents, longer lasting flavors and multi flavors. Bubble gum is mostly that pink stuff...plain and simple. I rarely chew gum and never choose chewing gum if I chew gum. It's bubble gum or nothing. My daughter used to like bubble gum so we kept some in the car and I, of course, sneaked my share of bubble gum from time to time. It tastes just as good now as when I was a kid.
One thing some food makers do now is to add a bubble gum flavor to their products. Bubble gum ice cream or snow cones are very popular flavors. But for me, bubble gum should only be chewed and not sneaked into other sweets. I think that today parents try to keep their kids from chewing bubble gum bu using their "healthy diet" routine on their defenseless children. Instead of bubble gum they give junior one of those awful unsweetened chewing gums and swear at the kid, "Your teeth will rot out if you chew bubble gum." Gee, what's the fun of being a kid if you can't rot your teeth by chewing bubble gum.
Bubble gum was invented in 1928 by an accountant who worked for a chewing gum factory. It seems he was playing around with the chewing gum one day instead of charting debits and credits and accidentally stumbled on the formula for bubble gum. The reason bubble gum is pink today is because the inventor colored it with what was available that day, the pink the factory used in it's chewing gums. Can you imagine a slab of bubble gum being any other color? I think it would taste different if it were not pink. Being a bubble gum purist I like the pink slabs of bubble gum far more than the many colored bubble gum balls that can be bought from vending machines. The texture of slab bubble gum is the best one.
Anyway, 1928 to now, I am sure (anecdotal evidence only) that fewer people chew bubble gum today. I once read that the two countries with the highest chewing gum (not bubble gum) consumption are Iran and Saudi Arabia. Bubble gum seems to be more of an American habit than is chewing gum. I notice in stores the endless racks of chewing gum for sale but have to look long to find any bubble gum. Chewing gum comes in low calorie, sugar free, breath freshening scents, longer lasting flavors and multi flavors. Bubble gum is mostly that pink stuff...plain and simple. I rarely chew gum and never choose chewing gum if I chew gum. It's bubble gum or nothing. My daughter used to like bubble gum so we kept some in the car and I, of course, sneaked my share of bubble gum from time to time. It tastes just as good now as when I was a kid.
One thing some food makers do now is to add a bubble gum flavor to their products. Bubble gum ice cream or snow cones are very popular flavors. But for me, bubble gum should only be chewed and not sneaked into other sweets. I think that today parents try to keep their kids from chewing bubble gum bu using their "healthy diet" routine on their defenseless children. Instead of bubble gum they give junior one of those awful unsweetened chewing gums and swear at the kid, "Your teeth will rot out if you chew bubble gum." Gee, what's the fun of being a kid if you can't rot your teeth by chewing bubble gum.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)