Nobody asked me, but...: 03/01/2006

Friday, March 31, 2006

Sounds familiar...

A couple of years ago I saw a story that was widely publicized, and I said to myself something is not right. I shared my discontent with a few people, and while no one said I was full of it, no one seemed to share my view. I dropped discussing it, and never even posted my concerns here.

This week there is a lot of coverage on the release of Jill Carroll. And some people have started to question the circumstances surrounding her kidnapping and release.

It's still too early to judge the story involving Ms. Carroll, but now I am starting to wonder again about Elizabeth Smart, and her kidnapping and recovery. In Ms. Smart's case, too many issues in the story were too neat, too convenient. I am hesitant to restate my entire concern here, but suffice it to say the media provided me some circumstantial (at best) evidence that backed up my suspicions. The issue of Ms. Smart is now moot, at least as it relates to Ms. Carroll.

However, I am going to watch what happens in the next week regarding Ms. Carroll. If her story doesn't add up, and as of now I am unsure if it does, I will state it here.

Jill Carroll

Coffee Conundrum

UserFriendly is what can best be described as a 'geek toon', a daily comic that is centered around an ISP and its staff. I post links to strips that I think will have broad appeal to my readers:

Click above for complete strip
Geek or not, I am willing to bet you can relate to the poser in the third panel. Especially if you drink coffee!

User Friendly, Coffee

On Immigration

OK, I've promised a post on Immigration, and today is the day. In my DRAFTS I have 3 different posts that go on (and on), spanning up to 5 pages in MS Word. I won't post them because even I get tired reading them, and they're my words.

I'll try to bullet my Immigraton reform position succinctly here:

This nation was built with the significant sweat and toil of immigrants. I know his because my grandparents were among them. My paternal grandfather, for an example, dug ditches for water lines and later worked on the crews digging NYC subway lines; years later he built a prosperous wholesale food business. America was then and remains today the land of opportunity.
I am pro Immigration. LEGAL immigration. Continued... Just as I would welcome any honest, good person into my home, that same honest, good person would have to come knock, then enter through my door, and not climb in through my window. Same logic for immigration.

Want a different analogy? Festival seating at a rock concert has been shown to be a bad idea, right?
I reject the notion there are jobs that 'Americans won't do'. That is bullshit. Laziness knows no boundaries; there are lazy people everywhere, and not just in America. The fact that many people who won't do less-than-glamorous-jobs only means some people are lazy. Last year I posted about a local businessman who couldn't get anyone reliable to earn $33K cleaning septic tanks. The previous year I griped about people who thought taking a lesser job made them look bad; some people think there's an idea that dirty jobs are somehow demeaning -- I say those people are looking for an excuse not say they are lazy (Meanwhile, the Discovery Channel documents people doing Dirty Jobs, so clearly there are plenty of people who aren't lazy in this country).

Want more proof some people are lazy? Visit Dog Gone Doo Doo, a business that specializing in picking up dog crap. You want to tell me that's a glamour job? Yet I would do it if I needed a job (and I am, in fact, a little jealous I didn't think of it myself). And business must be good: there's even a national Association of Professional Animal Waste Specialists, so that means more than this company has found a marketable niche to make money (another sign the economy is picking up, but that's another post).
Paying illegal aliens off-the-books demonstrates why Minimum Wages are a farce. Even with the artificial price control of a Minimum Wage, the free market works to find the supply to meet the need. If there weren't people holding out for their $6/hr (or whatever minimum wage is), more LEGAL CITIZENS people would be working. And with them there would be more taxes would being collected, and more money spent on goods and services, which mean more hiring... and the wheel turns on and on.

And once the free market finds that costs to hire workers are going up, then just like the effects of inflation, the cost of living goes up all around. And so would wages. Perhaps some smaller fish may suffer (the smaller house painter, for example, who relies on low-paid illegals, may succumb to competition that can afford better workers; that painter may no longer be a 'boss' but rather a worker for someone else... until he can build a new start once again), but in the end all will benefit.
No one seriously believes we can deport the estimated 10 million illegal aliens from this country. We can't give them a free pass, either. We tried that in 1986, in one of the few proposals President Reagan endorsed that I found atrocious -- and only more illegals came 'through the window.'

The 11 year plan is, in my mind, the best plan presented so far. They are here, fine. Make sure they aren't felons, and after 11 years they're granted permanent status (some may want dual citizenship, etc.). Fine. HOWEVER, legislation must be written to allow LEGAL immigrants an easier path to becoming citizens. Those that have lived here illegally ought not be able to take that path; only those that come 'through the door' the right way should have the easier path. The illegal entries have the 'brass ring' in that they are here already; those trying to 'do it the right way' should be welcomed with easier rules (but still have their background checked).

Of course, before that happens....
ENFORCE THE BORDERS. This blog has long bemoaned the President's lack of attention to this pressing issue, and has also pointed out no Democrat has ever offered a sensible plan, either. Mr. Bush could have deployed the National Guard on September 12th and no one would have said boo. Within a few months, sufficient electronic monitoring and/or barriers would have been erected to make this issue largely moot. He missed that opportunity.

And I don't mean only on the southern borders; I mean on the Canadian border and on ports as well. NYC is known to have illegal Irish immigrants, for example. I am equal-opportunity when it comes to immigration: all must follow the rules.

But the military can still be used, today, to protect the borders, and implement the protections described above (and please, spare me your reference of posse comitatus; defending the borders is not local law enforcement). Start with the southern border and grow from there. Some call the idea of starting in the south proof of racism: I ask for evidence of widespread Canaians illegally entering the country, and then we'll talk.

No fence, wall, or electronic monitor would stop all comers. But it would curtail the numbers greatly. And don't give me the 'Berlin Wall' analogy; we're not keeping people in, we're trying to keep BAD people out. All are welcome to apply at the embassies... just stand in line and wait your turn .... if your ticket is valid, you will be seated before the opening act (back to the Festival Seating analogy).

Then, when the border is secured, and the illegal immigrants here already have had sufficient time to get their 'status' officiated....
DEPORT ILLEGALS WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE: I mean that. Once the opportunity has been made for the illegal immigrants to become 'legitimate' passes, anyone found to be here illegally ought to be deported immediately, and with a speedy due-process. No matter what color their skin, hair or eyes are: once the appointed time to get 'legal' has passed, if you are found you are deported.

Once the border is secured, once the word has gone forth to all resident, illegal immigrants that they must get legal or face immediate deportation, and once the process to come here legally is streamlined, then you'll see a near-elimination of human-traffickers preying on those who think it's ok to break our laws.
We've been tolerant too long to those who flaunt our laws and come here, claiming that they're entitled to the same American Dream everyone else is. First requirement in any dream is playing by the rules; breaking a law of the USA is hardly the prescription to good citizenship.

immigration

Thursday, March 30, 2006

Don't do it!

While on a conference call, someone IM'd me the link to this game. It took me 3 or 4 tries to figure it out, but this was my highscore.

How well did you do?

FISA Judges reinforce President's role under Article II

Thanks to ALa...

Washington Times: "A panel of former Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges yesterday told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that President Bush did not actillegally when he created by executive order a wiretapping program conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA).

The five judges testifying before the committee said they could not speak specifically to the NSA listening program without being briefed on it, but that a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act does not override the president's constitutional authority to spy on suspected international agents under executive order...."

Who gets to tell Sen. Feingold the news??

FISA, President Bush, NSA,
Sen. Feingold, Censure, Impeachment

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

What say you, Charlie?

A dip into my e-mail and IM log:

Charlie... what do you think about the Immigration protests and proposals?
Charlie: Did you hear Sean Hannity rip/get ripped by Alec Baldwin?

Yes, there's a lot in the news this week; these are two of the topics I want to speak about, but time is fleeting these days. In particular, since I've made my name as a caller on Sean Hannity, I'd like to comment about Sunday's exchange.

The good news is work is busy, and is not boring. The bad news is the idle time I used to have during report compilations or the like is now being used up by other tasks.

Home is no different: Last week I spent 5 days where I was out of my home from 4:30 AM to 8:30 PM every day, plus being out on the prior Sunday and that Saturday... all day, both days. Suffice it to say a lot of Spring projects are on tap, and that cuts into my free time.

Fear not... I'll start to consolidate my tasks and be back before long. Also on tap is an eventual template update -- yes, this one is too narrow... so stay tuned.

Thursday, March 23, 2006

ABC News Confirms OBL and Hussein relationship; can we now stop calling this an illegal war??

In many quarters, and in this humble Blog in particular, there have been ample examples of the intelligence gathered by the government AND OTHERS that gave convincing evidence of the relationship between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Yet still, today, there are those on the Left who would still our actions in Iraq 'illegal' (there are even those further extremists who claim our actions in Afghanistan are illegal, but I won't waste time now with people out of touch with reality).

Now, today, ABC NEWS confirms the links between OBL and Saddam.

A newly released pre-war Iraqi document indicates that an official representative of Saddam Hussein's government met with Osama bin Laden in Sudan on February 19, 1995 after approval by Saddam Hussein. Bin Laden asked that Iraq broadcast the lectures of Suleiman al Ouda, a radical Saudi preacher, and suggested "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. According to the document, Saddam's presidency was informed of the details of the meeting on March 4, 1995 and Saddam agreed to dedicate a program for them on the radio. The document states that further "development of the relationship and cooperation between the two parties to be left according to what's open (in the future) based on dialogue and agreement on other ways of cooperation."

Taking this evidence, add to it the intel from our allies, add to the mix all of the data that's still unclassified, how can anyone justify the phrase 'illegal war'?

Please, enlighten me!

Iraq, OBL, Bush "Lied", "Illegal" War, Politics

Never judge a book by its cover..

Seen on Interstate 78: a Cadillac Avalanche with the following on the back window:

Silly boys; trucks are for chicks!

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

President Bush must take a definitive stand

The US State Department has taken a predictably weak stance on the matter of Abdul Rahman, the Afghan who converted from Islam to Christianity and is now facing the death penalty in his homeland.

That the State Department is wishy-washy is of no surprise; they are replete with career beaurcrats, and have been traditionally so for a long time.

What troubles me is the lack of a firm stand from President Bush. Surely, were this person a convert to Judaism, one would expect a vocal outcry from the Administration. And yet we hear little in the way of calls to Afghan president Hamid Karzai. As important as freedom of speech, freedom of religion is essential in any democracy. This is a no-brainer.

What say you, President Bush?

Ahmed Rahman, Abdul Rahman,President Bush, Hamid Karzai

TANK YOU BEDY MUCH

What a way to start the day!!

While trolling the TV spectrum 4:30 this morning, I stumbled across a re-run of TAXI on a FOX affiliate. The immeasurably funny Andy Kaufman portrayed the alter ego of Latka, Vic Ferrari.

Fans of the show will remember the scene where 'Vic' is in the garage listening to headphones of some rock LP (for the youngsters out there, LPs were 12" vinyl records). Louie called to him several times, but Vic kept playing air guitar, prompting Louie to scratch the needle across the record a dozen times.

Even though I knew it was coming, I nearly spit my cereal across the room...

Andy Kaufman, Taxi

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Press Conference Noise

Editor's Note: I originally typed this post using a Text Message from my cell phone. It was unceremoniously truncated. I checked my cell phone's SENT folder and it looks good there, so I am unsure why it wasn't complete here. As of 22:15 I am finishing my intended post:

During President Bush's press conference, veteran columnist (and curmudgeon) Helen Thomas have him a lot of static.

Thinking back, however, didn't she treat President Lincoln the same way??

POTUS, Helen Thomas

Canada takes Steps to Thwart Bird Flu Outbreak

H/T Cmd Salamander

Bird Flu

Quick Hits

Have been busy of late, time to take a look about and comment on some items in the news today:

Best Job market in 5 years for grads:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. college graduates are facing the best job market since 2001, with business, computer, engineering, education and health care grads in highest demand, a report by an employment consulting firm showed on Monday."We are approaching full employment and some employers are already
dreaming up perks to attract the best talent," said John Challenger, chief executive of Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

In its annual outlook of entry-level jobs, Challenger, Gray & Christmas said strong job growth and falling unemployment makes this spring the hottest job market for America's 1.4 million college graduates since the dot-com collapse in 2001.

It used to be that the naysayers said the employment numbers only showed people working at so-called dead-end job (slandered with the phrase ‘McJobs’) and that the job reports were therefore inaccurate. What say them today?
Yes, I realize there are people who aren’t working in ideal positions, and there are those who cannot yet locate a job. I submit these people are considerably fewer than many in the MSM would care to admit. Credit to the Bush Administration's economy.

ACLU complains about a choice involving abortion: Here’s a poser: Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm (D) will sign bill into law that would require abortion providers to give the women the option of seeing the ultrasound of their fetuses. This law apparently replaces the existing Michigan law that required women seeking abortions to view diagrams and descriptions of a developing fetus, but not their own. By my reading, this means instead of mandatory review of a fetus, there’s now an option. Yet this annoys the ACLU…. It is duplicitous reasoning such as this that will be the bane of pro-choice advocates.
H/T Peejz at RightVoices
Gas Prices on the rise. I’ve been reminded that I was recently crowing about lower fuel prices, as recently as 3 weeks ago. Now that same gas station is charging $.41 more per gallon; the best pump price I am getting today is $2.249. In my commute I drive over 1,100 mile each week, so I am attune to price fluxuations.

Market forces cannot be ignored, and the law of supply and demand will always affect pricing:
= We don’t have any new refineries to make the product, so we’re at production capacity, thus tightening the spigot.
= We don’t do enough domestic drilling; shipping all that oil from the Middle East to here cost money, which adds to the final price per gallon.
= Tensions in the Middle East, certainly not aided by Iran, Hamas or the continuing effects of the Iraq insurgency, will always keep the prices higher.

I’ve said repeatedly (here, for example) quickest and easiest way to reduce gas pump pricing is to repeal the GORE TAX. Republicans have the majority in Congress… it’s a no-brainer (perfect for most in Congress). Bring immediate relief to the masses NOW by repealing this unnecessary tax.

Congress just recently argued for a Sunshine Clause for the Patriot Act. This is a reasonable safety valve, forcing our elected representatives to review the Act and ascertain whether it is still necessary. So why aren’t there Sunshine Clauses on tax legislation? Why are they always assumed ‘permanent’?

Readers in both parties: support the repeal of the Gore Tax, now! Who would argue with lower gas prices??

Unemployment, Abortion, Middle East, Gas Prices

Monday, March 20, 2006

Senator Durbin endorses President's Iraq plan

Sean at EIKNiW picked up on what I heard yesterday.

On FOX NEWS SUNDAY, Chris Wallace (son of Studly Mike Wallace) asked Illinois Senator Dick Durbin (D) for the Democrat's Plan for Iraq:

DURBIN: What we propose and what Senator John Warner accepted as a bipartisan approach in the Senate includes the following. This year, 2006, a year of transition, where the Iraqis take control of their own security and defense.
Secondly, the Iraqis are put on notice they have to form a government that embraces all of the factions within Iraq so that we can see finally a government
of unity leading to some sort of progress for the people of Iraq.

OK: show of hands: who here knows why this is any different from President Bush's stated plan?

Anyone? No?

Answer: It isn't. It is the same plan. Perhaps, in time, more Democrats will start to acknowledge that's the plan, instead of constantly nay-saying everything the Administration does. No one is suggesting the Opposition Party is not allowed to campaign for their candidates, but to lie about the President and his plans is simply childish.

Iraq, Democrats, President Bush

Friday, March 17, 2006

Drinking Liberally

You know, I think I finally a reason for me to consider becoming a Liberal ...

Nah.

Liberal

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

24 on 24

The following is an incomplete list of questions that are running through my mind during my daily commute. The order of the questions is purely random. Some may be answered before the end of Season 5, others may never be answered at all.

Knowing the likelihood of people close to him being killed, who would ever want to be Jack’s friend?

Monday, March 13, 2006

You never know what you might find

This post was drafted several weeks ago, and wasn't posted. That I have been swamped this month and haven't posted much, I resurrected it, as I think there's fodder for discussion in this topic.

"Hey Charlie, did you ever Google an ex?"

Why no, but why would I? A couple of co-workers were laughing about what appears to have been a popular meme at one time, and asked if I ever did a search on an ex. I had never gave it any thought... the days of long ago and far away are just that, so what's the point?

Of course, curiosity is a nagging nuisance, so after a few hours I went to Google and entered the name of a certain someone who was once the center of my life (not that I ever had that many to draw from).

If I can assume the former occupier of my attention -- I do so hate the term ex, unless it is applied to someone who warrants contempt, which was not the case -- uses a hyphinated maiden-married name, the only item to appear is a little something involving a state worker being found guilty of accepting bribes.

Obviously, I cannot provide more detail, other than to say the person referenced in the articles (and there were many reporting this woman's name and circumstances) has done her time in jail and has long since been released.

Could it have been the same gal I knew long ago? There were a few quotes provided that I could conceivably hear her saying, but that's far from convincing. We haven't spoken in about 14 or 15 years, and I can't think of anyone who knows her... hell, outside of my much-better-half, there aren't many people who I knew 15 years ago that I still speak with, outside of family. Alas, this mystery will have to remain one.

So now it's your turn: ever Google and ex? If so, what did you find?

Meme

Friday, March 10, 2006

Day After Dubai Divesting

In yet another post about the Dubai Port Deal, now defunct, I have a thought I’ve yet to hear or read anywhere else, and if it is not as unique as I think, please advise.

With the announcement that the UAE will divest themselves from ownership from the company Dubai Ports World; the lingering question remaining is who in the US has the necessary capital and skill to operate this entity – there aren’t many firms in the world that can handle a deal of this size -- but that will play out over the next few days. It is interesting to note that the US has successfully pressured a foreign company – one at least partially owned by a sovereign nation -- to sell a legally owned company. Please keep this fact in mind should a foreign court or government ever question any overseas ownership by an American company.

The bigger, underlying issue that has received comparably little discussion is the entire Council on Foreign Investment in the US (or CFIUS) that approved the deal in the first place.Read More... We’ve paid a little lip service to the fact that body approved the plan, without the principals in the State, Defense, and DHS even being aware who was involved. This Council was formed by the Congress, and ultimately that body shares the blame for the deal getting so far as it did.

The issue remains still is whether the US should court foreign investment in the first place. Granted, especially with our trade deficit, it’s an easy way to funnel our US dollars back into this country, so it is not without its benefits. But if we’re going to get excited every time a non-US entity buys a US holding, we’ll need to lay in a supply of Maalox down the road.

The thought I’ve yet to hear elsewhere deals with the White House’s response to the initial deal. President Bush took a hard line from the outset, and one that I questioned at the time. He threw down a gauntlet and he received in return a predictable outcry from the Congress. Suddenly, the Republican Party was energized as the “calls to action” were made. Then the seemingly decision was reversed, and victory was declared.

Of course, the last two sentences could be said for the Democrat Party as well, but that’s not terribly important to my argument.

The GOP, however, had new life seemingly breathed into it, in an otherwise slow news cycle of the last 2 weeks.

So why has this looked strikingly similar to the time President Bush does nominated Harriet Myers to be a Supreme Court Justice? Then, a grass roots effort was mounted, few people defended her nomination, and the Congress (on both sides of the aisle) declared victory, but in the end the President got his choice candidate confirmed.

The Left (or the party out of power) will always howl and moan about President Bush (or other incumbent), so their grass roots efforts mean little except during the months before an election. The Right (or in this case, the party in power) will often get complacent, absent another big-ticket news story. So perhaps the strategery in play was give the people a reason to get fired up.

Granted, some of my longstanding complaints about President Bush -- including the proposed illegal alien amnesty, poor border security, and run away spending -- are reasons enough to energize the base. Yet those three issues alone, in spite of their inherent danger, aren’t sexy for campaign issues since the opposition party hasn’t taken a stand on them either (more is the pity). However, overall, and in spite of the polls, there’s no one on any radar that could count on a victory today against President Bush, in either party.

So for now I will chalk the ports deal as an elaborate way of getting voters to pay attention (which I already do, as well as many of my readers) and I’ll sit back and wait to see Congress takes a serious look at CFIUS.

President Bush, Congress, UAE, Ports

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Promise of Spring

Oh boy! Freezing rain from 0300--0800 ... and right in the middle is my commute!

"The nicest thing about the promise of spring is that sooner or later she'll have to keep it." -Mark Beltaire

0430 UPDATE: 417 AM EST THU MAR 9 2006 ...FREEZING RAIN ADVISORY IS CANCELLED... WITH TEMPERATURES EXPECTED TO REMAIN IN THE MID 30S THROUGH DAYBREAK, THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN .......... HAS CANCELED THE FREEZING RAIN ADVISORY.

Weather, Spring

Monday, March 06, 2006

New York Times takes a pro-Union stance against Wal-Mart

Tuesday's NEW YORK TIMES has a piece attacking Wal-Mart and, get a load of this, bloggers who support the company. Advance word I've read says the Times may even accuse Wal-Mart of paying bloggers to write nice things about them.

Imagine that! A company wants good PR, and are willing to pay for it!

Speaking for this humble blog, I've never taken a dime from Wal-Mart... and truth be told they never offered. Hell, I haven't even made toll money from my AdSense yet. But if they are paying bloggers, and are looking for an outlet...

But beyond that shameless self-promotion, even without any coins my way, I will support a company that doesn't break the law, provides millions of good paying jobs, and provides the goods and services people want.

Do I shop at Wal-Mart? Rarely; ever since they expanded the local Wal-Mart into a SuperCenter, I don't seem to find what I want as quickly as before, but then that's me... why should organized labor use hard-earned dues money (often extorted from their members) to influence legislation that targets one particular company (i.e. Wal-Mart)?

It's unfair, and I'll say as much. For free.

Wal-Mart, Organized Labor

Military recruiters on campus

In a move that demonstrates common sense and free speech, the Supreme Court ruled today -- unanimously -- that colleges accepting federal funding cannot block Military Recruiters from distributing literature and holding interviews with prospective recruits.

Whereas the esteemed Ivy League schools wanted to ban military recruitment on the grounds that the Military policy on homosexuals ('Don't ask, don't tell') violates the school's free speech, the argument falls flat. No one says the schools can't protest the military policy; far from it. But in banning the recruitment, they themselves attempted to usurp the military's speech. There's nothing like suspending one group's free-speech in an attempt to argue for that very same right.

Adding to the defense, how can anyone who accepts federal funding tell the federal government what their agents can or cannot do on campus? As Chief Justice John Roberts so succinctly pointed out: is no compulsion involved; the schools do not have to take the money.

And, in the true spirit of free speech, let the counter protests continue, provided that they conform with the school's own rules for public demonstrations.

The liberal ideology wanted to silence free speech as a way to defend it. Not very different from using discrimination as a tool to fight it. It's a good thing, indeed, that the Court has stopped it.

SCOTUS, Military Recruiters,
Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights

Sunday, March 05, 2006

Blogging by cell light

In my previous post, I wrote via my pocket pc; this time I come via my
cell phone in the Franklin Institute. while I prefer writing with a
stylus, the lack of a wireless card is a drawback.

--
Charlie On The Pennsylvania Turnpike
http://whatsit2you.blogspot.com

Saturday, March 04, 2006

Something old, new, & mysterious

Oldies radio fans will recognize the names Dan Ingraham & Cousin Brucie (Morrow), perhaps from their WABC/MusicRadio days. These gents were tops in their field, and have become legendary.

Tonight, like every Saturday night, WABC goes oldies from 6-10pm, with Mark Simone at the mic. Mark's guests tonight will be Dan & Brucie. Stream the show at wabcradio.com.

Right now I'm writing this post on my Pocket-PC. It still lacks a wireless card, so it won't send until I dock it. (And, I won't even yry to add Techorati links)

Tonight, I'm leading a bunch of Webelos Cub Scoats to the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia for a Camp-in. They close the science museum to groups and hold a Spy Camp, with a mystery to be solved with clues throughout the building. In my day we used to camp outside in this weather; good thing times have changed!

Friday, March 03, 2006

Winter Wonderland

People laughed at me yesterday when I showed up for work.  Across the the entire PA-NY area, there was threats of snow and ice.   As of 5:00 AM yesterday, no precipitation had started to fly, so I left home and started my 110 mile ride.

Some of the people who live closer to the office called out, because they feared the snow.   I was there, on time.  Others told me ‘you could have stayed home today!  Who would have argued?’

Last night, my ride home took about 20 minutes longer, but about an inch had fallen by then, and the roads were slick.  No big deal.

At midnight, I checked outside and e-mailed my boss; everything was pretty, in an ass-kicking dangerous way.  Everything was glazed with ice, I told him, and I had then decided to work from home Friday.   Knowing I had showed up when others either called in late or called out altogether on Thursday gave me the juice to sleep in today.

Sometimes it pays to be a little crazy, when everyone else tells you to sit tight.  But hey… I’m not losing any sick or vacation time.

Thursday, March 02, 2006

$2.04⁹!

Such a deal... paid $2.04⁹ for gas this morning in Western NJ, a price about $.15 cheaper than over the border in the Commonwealth. This is probably the lowest I've seen since August...

I would submit the Katrina-related supply interruptions have been resolved. Now all we need to do is counteract the huge demand on oil from China.

I KNOW! More domestic drilling !

Gas Prices, Katrina, Oil Prices, Oil, Drilling