I, too, have conversations with my cats... and they do indeed, talk back. One of them is obviously an Ambassador from the Home World, and informs me of how inadequate are all things from those that should be supplying his every need. He is most emphatic that nothing bad has ever come from the large box shaped thing in the kitchen that is cold on the outside and has a warm draft under it, perfect for warming paws. It is, obviously, the most important thing to serve his needs around... and those two legged creatures are just not up to the job of meeting his needs adequately.
Yea and verily, do I have speaks with that one.
His goofy brother, on the other hand, is more into the 'Ooooo shiny!' mentality and often has an attention span that would put him into the world of gnats. He doesn't talk much, although he, too, complains a lot.... mostly about being lost... in the living room... the stairway... the hallway... various bedrooms and bathrooms. He will go to the largest open space available and proclaim that he is lost. Repeatedly. At length. And he will go looking for these two-legged creatures in their regular haunts and then look at you and complain that you are in another room. The one with the door closed. 'Yes you are here, can you go in there and get yourself?'
Between these two brothers they are two average cats intelligence-wise.
The only thing I ask of the Ambassador is that when the Mother Ship comes, to take me with him and off of this strange world. I am obviously on the wrong one and if anyone can find the *right* one, he can.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 17.04.2007 @ 20:52
Well, I do hope these paragons of pointing out that NYC was unprepared have ginned up the list of all the cities that *were* prepared in 2001 for something like this... I can think of a number of cities that are unprepared for huge disasters, that make Katrina seem like summer breeze. And how about NOLA, have we gotten a clue as to how to stop it from sinking yet? Or even find a way to ensure the population there is safe in the future? Ready for the La Palma slump and tsunami on the East Coast yet? The 'Big One' in LA? Cascadia earthquake and tsunami? New Madrid Fault Zone all shock absorbered thoroughly? No? Why not? We have known about these for years, if not decades... shall we call all those Mayors and Governors and Congresses and Presidents slouches?
Probably, yes on that last.
If we aren't preparing for the things that *will* happen sooner or later. Where is the preparedness *now*?
And why are we putting billions into a city that is *sinking*?
Terrorism? Well, if we can't prepare for the 'knowns' then how, pray tell, are we going to handle the 'unknowns'?
If VV starts at 'preparedness' then they can go take a jump as the Nation, as a whole was not prepared before 9/11 nor since. That is not only *not* serious, it is disingenous. How much was the Village Voice calling for terrorist preparedness before 9/11? Did they have splendiferous insight into all things nasty? If that is the sort of place they want to start, then they have stepped off the end of a dock.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 30.03.2007 @ 15:29
I hereby nominate the title for this 'scandal': Purgatory.
Be seeing you!Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 16.03.2007 @ 13:18
Looks like just the thing JP Aerospace will need in a few years...Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 12.03.2007 @ 18:38
The whole thing has stunk since the get-go because of Mr. Wilson's pompousness. And I find it very strange that people outside the INTEL Community actually believe that one can marry a high-profile Ambassador while being undercover. One actually does agree to be circumspect in their life while undercover and for 5 years afterwards while the Agency gets anyone who may be compromised by your compromise out of danger. And that really does put the lie to this entire affair. After that it is pure politics, and not even entertaining. The Fitzgerald research should have taken exactly one phone call to the head of the CIA, and the rest dismissed as the politics it is. So, on top of a pompous ex-Ambassador we get a pompous Prosecutor, and the mass of inflated egos would have set the hot-air ballooning community at ease that they would never, ever lack for a source of much hot air from mobile sources.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 7.03.2007 @ 13:18
As a retired federal employee who had to deal with similar documents, I have had it with the two-tiered system of justice for them. Mr. Berger gets a wrist-slap and those who are not well connected face a long time in the Federal Pen. When I talked to a co-worker at the time about this I asked him what Mr. Berger's sentence should be. His answer: 15 years of turning big rocks into small ones.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 21.02.2007 @ 18:05
One thing Congress is ignoring is *its* high negative ratings both before and after the election. It rose out of the level of 'used car salesman' to barely even with the President. Remember, that they deride the President's negatives while keeping mum about their own negatives... and if they keep up with the foolishness they are doing now, used car salesman will start to look as a mighty good alternative, because that is how far they will drop. There is no 'up' in their direction as America has come to look askance at Congress, too.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 23.02.2007 @ 13:38
When AP would not treat questions about its reporting in a manner described in its own Code of Ethics, they then changed the story from one about Jamil Hussein to the AP itself. Sole sourcing stories is not something recommended in J-school, and yet over 60 stories have been sole sourced to Jamil Hussein by multiple AP reporters. By not bringing its sole source out and by not finding other sources to verify the sole source accounts, AP has not acted in a manner consistent with its Code of Ethics nor in a manner requiring reporters to actually adhere to journalistic ethics in reporting. That is not a point-source problem, it is a systemic one that has caused an AP customer to actually question it on its trustworthiness.
By not doing as it outlines for the Public, AP is no longer serving the Public.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 5.01.2007 @ 16:20
From my commentary at Gatewaypundit:
Then you look at something like the actual death rate in Iraq circa 2002 which was estimated at 6.02 deaths per 1,000 from the folks at history central, and then compare them to the estimated death rate for this year which is 5.37 per 1,000 from indexmundi. So, from before the war to today the actual death rate per 1,000 has DROPPED by nearly 9%.
And we are to believe that more have *died* above the regular amount under Saddam while the death rate for the entire population has fallen? And while the population has also increased by a bit over 2 million people, to boot! So, the deaths attributable to war have actually *lowered* the overall death rate in the population, *increased* population, and increased life expectancy from 67.38 years at birth to 69.01 years at birth. Also note that infant mortality has gone *down* from 57.61 per 1,000 live births to 48.64 per 1,000 live births.
So, even with an increasing population the death rate has fallen in proportion to the entire population... not something you can expect from you basic concept of warfare. If this is *war* then it needs to be practiced on a global scale because, by all measures of life expectancy, death rates, infant mortality, and, basically, all demographic measurements, the Iraqi people are way more better off today and living longer lives and increasing their population.
Funny kind of war, that.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 11.10.2006 @ 10:22
This would be less troubling for me if the House Leadership had not already tried to shield a democratic member from investigation: Rep. Jefferson (D-LA). I do not like Congress thinking it is above the law, should impede the law and in anyway try to circumvent the law of the land. This tiny House of Representatives is far too cozy for my liking, and is *not* doing a job of actually understanding their role in the Federal system. The House of Representatives was never made to be efficient, smooth operating, shielding its members from investigation and, generally, thinking of themselves *first* and the Nation *second*. That goes for Democrats, too.
It is disingenuous of any Democrat to point their finger at the House Leadership when it has done as much and *more* to shield one of their members from investigation. And it continues to push that case up the Court system even after losing the first round. That said it is better than the *give everything away* Senate that not only wanted "amnesty" for illegals, but wanted to give gifts and presents and then tell the Executive what to do in Foreign Policy. Both are over-reaches of power and need to be seriously addressed before they get the bright idea that they really should be running *everything*.Comment Posted By ajacksonian On 1.10.2006 @ 12:16