Posts

Showing posts from April 11, 2010

That was then....

Image
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NJxmpTMGhU0&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NJxmpTMGhU0&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

I guess now is somehow different. 

Too funny not to repost

Image
(BLACK) CALLER, KEVIN: They're having a Tea Party in Boston Common right now. (NEAL) BOORTZ: I don't know, are they? KEVIN: Yeah, 10,000 people there. BOORTZ: Are there really? KEVIN: Yeah, but you know what? Remember the first Boston Tea Party thing they had? Who was the first man to die there? BOORTZ: Crispus! Attucks!KEVIN: And that's why we don't 'ttend Tea Parties...
from here


Grammar and political movements

Image
It has come to my attention that any grammatical errata by any person associated with a political movement renders said movement comical and unworthy of discussion

That said, I would now like the add the following to the aforementioned list:



Sorry anti-war people and animal lovers, you have been rendered comical and irrelevant.



Concerned about the environment?  Sorry, you're on the list.



That'd be from Rene Flowers, Democrat.  Democrats, you're now on the list.  (Remember, all it takes is one.  I'm just playing by your rules)



Well, just damn.  Believers of racial equality are now on the list.  Now <i>I'm</i> on the list.



Anti-war you're on the list twice!  (Ed. -Does that count as a double negative?)



Damn.  Anti-war just can't get a break.  Aw, heck, we'll give them a pass and call this one for supporters of public schools.  Now you're on the list.



Prop 8 protesters are now on the list.  Now we can only hear from Prop 8 supporters!  Crap, now I…

Your long awaited update

Dear Reader(s),

Herewith is a long awaited but overly simplified update.

Many moons ago I was laid off. Unceremoniously given the boot from the project I was working on. I was told it was "budget cuts" but I suspect there was more to it than that. I was vocal about the risk profile of the project. I can now tell you the plan was to consolidate the servers for a mission critical application to a secure, dedicated facility. So far, so good, right? Oh, and they were changing their information delivery model. And the platform. And the database schema. And data feeds. Right about then I raised my hand and, ever so meekly, inquired if it was wise to change all these at once. I mentioned that the problem with multiple concurrent changes like this makes testing nearly impossible. They, of course, blew me off.

The thing about being an IT consultant is that you're like Cassandra. So many places make the same mistakes you see them over and over. I used to get angry …

and Jesus wept...

Image
This is so wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to begin

Bravo! Bravo!

Pajamas Media » No Taxation without Satirization
"But the point isn’t to design a tax system capable of supporting the government, but to devise the simplest, fairest tax code devoid of niggling manipulations, and tailor the government to fit the revenues."


Precisely.  He gets to the heart of the matter in a single sentence.  The point is to set up a fair taxation system and provide Constitutionally required services.  Not to create a rapacious taxation system designed to humble and hobble the Evil Rich People.  Nor to reward the Noble Poor.  Nor to squeeze the ever loved but often screwed Middle Class.  The point is that we're all in this together and all must pay some.  Not some paying (nearly) all.