Obama's Dumb stunts.

Obama gives the PM of England Gordon Brown a pathetic 25 DVD  ‘gift’, that is not playable in England.

Obama has tried to enter the White House through a window.

Obama nearly burned down his office when he lit the fireplace with the flue closed - the mantle burned, building was evacuated… the fire department extinguished the burning mantle. - 

Obama reads from the wrong teleprompter and thanked himself for inviting the Irish PM to the East Room of the White house.

Obama bumps his head getting into or out of the Presidential helicopter. (Maybe they should add Gerald Ford to those presidents he is being compared too?)

Obama does not understand a Profit and Earning ratio.

Obama stuns a Marine by not saluting him, before boarding the Marine One Helicopter - 

He tucks his shirt into his underpants.

Obama does not know who the President of France is.

The UK is having a field day with our President and his perpetual Gaffes.  I guess he is changing how the world views us...  for the worst...

I'm sure he will do a first rate job running GM...

And another thing

What a day...

There is a near religious fervour around man made global warming.  The hysteria is echoed in the MSM and the current administration.  It was yanked from the hands of scientists to a political movement, then scientific opposition was censored.   It took awhile for scientists to  have the bullocks to shout "Hey, we have data that disproves this." It took longer for this voice to find its place in the new media.  This prompted muddying the waters by the 'Global Warming' being re-christened as 'Climate Change.'   Now the UN has all but stated this is about money.  

This appears to be taken from the ideas of agenda driven James Hansen.

"A rising carbon price is essential to “decarbonize” the economy, i.e., to move the nation toward the era beyond fossil fuels. The most effective way to achieve this is a carbon tax (on oil, gas, and coal) at the well-head or port of entry. The tax will then appropriately affect all products and activities that use fossil fuels. The public’s near-term, mid-term, and long-term lifestyle choices will be affected by knowledge that the carbon tax rate will be rising.

The public will support the tax if it is returned to them, equal shares on a per capita basis (half shares for children up to a maximum of two child-shares per family), deposited monthly in bank accounts. No large bureaucracy is needed. A person reducing his carbon footprint more than average makes money. A person with large cars and a big house will pay a tax much higher than the dividend."

This same Hansen apparently prefers scientists under him be censored.

Al Gore created this industry and has a vested interest in collecting back his investment.

How Offensive is that?

Was thinking the other day about a lady at work who was offended that I listened to Rush Limbaugh.  Her feeling was people "like that" should be taken off the air.

Curiously, I asked her if she as ever listened to his show?

"Never, I will not subject myself to his hate filled rhetoric!"  At that point, vindicated, I dropped the subject.  She had chosen to be offended by nothing.

Being offended is a choice.  It requires you to demand an apology or that "something be done" to right some perceived wrong.  That puts it into the realm of perception and context.  

To be offended is usually a rather unpleasant experience, one that can expose a person to intolerance, cultural misunderstandings, and even evoke the scars of the past.  This is such an unpleasant experience that many people develop a thick skin and try to only be offended in the most egregious and awful situations.  

Some people live in hope that one day they will encounter a person who will say something offensive.  When this happens, they can leap into action with quotes, statistics, and historical examples.  Once they have finished lecturing another white person about how it’s wrong to use the term “put in term here” instead of “Politically Correct term” they can sit back and relax in the knowledge that they have made a difference. Perhaps it is easy to be offended at things that are sexist and/or homophobic.  Both cases offering ample opportunities for lectures, complaints, graduate classes, lengthy discussions and workshops.  

(special thanks to clander)

Little things to do.

When you play World of Warcraft (WoW).  You will find little things to do.  One of these things is called Farming.

Example:  Let us say your WoW character has the engineering skill and you want to build the flying machine.  As with all things in entertainment, the motivator is because you want said thing.

So you will head to an area and do whatever is needed to gather up the raw materials required.  This could mean digging up ore, to finding out what character in the game sells a hula doll.

When you are farming for an item, you come across others who are doing something similer or the same.  This can lead to conflict as the resource may be limited and you both want the same thing in  the same amount of time.  In some cases one or the other will move to a different location, other times some odd battle for the goods, will take place.  It is just human nature even when your a big cow man.

New phrase today "Debt Bomb"

Hope and Change (read: Tax and Spend) has brought us to this little problem.

We are broke.  Not living within our means.  If it was wrong for Americans to borrow money earlier this decade to purchase a house they couldn’t afford, why Obama making the very same mistake?

The United Kingdom failed to attract buyers for $2.5 billion of 40-year bonds, the United States Treasury had the same difficulties with its sale of $34 billion worth of five-year notes and was forced to raise their interest rate to a much higher yield than had been anticipated. This came on the heels of Germany having two failed auctions of its bonds already this year.

Briefing.com had the following to say: "Treasuries were battered on the poor showing on the 5 year auction. The 5-yr was swung off to add over 8 basis points to its yield, while the 7-yr, which has its offering tomorrow, saw a beat down of over 9bps. The market has enough concerns about global supply and this ugly offering of the “relatively” safe, mid-duration notes adds to that jaundiced view."  

This is really, really, bad news.  The kind of news you should ask your representatives about.

Bloomberg reported on what this means: "President Barack Obama’s government is selling record amounts of debt to revive economic growth, service deficits, and cushion the failures in the financial system. Debt sales will almost triple this year to a record $2.5 trillion, according to estimates from Goldman Sachs Group Inc."

The Congressional Budget Office’s forecast is over $9 trillion in deficits in the next ten years. So the Treasury will be auctioning off $1 trillion worth of paper a year forever!

Will there come a point when we’ll have the same difficulty selling our debt as the U.K. had today and Germany has had twice this year? What happens then?

The Obama administration and a Democratic-controlled Congress as they continue to spend money faster than it can be printed.  They do NOT care!

Must hear for everyone.

If only we had people like this representing us in Washington. 

"The truth, Prime Minister, is that you have run out of our money.  The country as a whole is now in negative equity.  Every British child is born owing around 20,000 pounds.  Servicing the interest on that debt is going to cost more than educating the child.  Now, it's not that you're not apologizing.  Like everyone else I've long accepted that you're pathologically incapable of accepting responsibility for these things.  It's that you're carrying on willfully, worsening our situation, wantonly spending what little we have left.  Last year, in the last 12 months, a hundred thousand private sector jobs have been lost, and yet you've created 30,000 public sector jobs.  Prime Minister, you cannot carry on forever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in order to fund an unprecedented engorgement of the unproductive bit."

There is truth layed out oh so well.

Loosing weight

Over the years I gained some weight. Up to 285 pounds.  I made some half-harted attempts to increase exercise, change my diet and read some more about weight loss.  Kind of thought the zen of knowing would translate into doing.

I joined TOPS and I was able to get down to around 245 lbs.  I stalled out there and creeped up to 260 lbs.  On the reading side of things I kept seeing articals about the disconnect between exercise and weight loss.  That is to say, they are not directly related.  You can work yourself at olympian levels and not drop a pound.   Do NOT misunderstand, exercise has so many positive health benifits you cannot, should not ignore and get some measure every day (check with your doctor prior to  embarking on any diet or exersize plan)  However, here I was 30 some odd pounds lighter and holding.

My son got a trampolene and the weight limit on it is 250 pounds.  So I can go on it but it could be problematic.  Also, I just feel like I am too heavy.   Not to mention getting off the diabetic medicine would be really nice.

So enter Facebook and an old friend from High School.  Jack (Doug) by name.  Jack went from a heavy 210 to a fit 150.  He is doing some ongoing fitness quests and rollerblading all over parts of California for fun and fitness.

As I am always reading and looking for some actual good results .vs. stories in magazines and online.  I quizzed him about his methodology.  Jack went for a numerical, mathematical approach that really clicked with what I have been reading.  It was as if he had resolved the same puzzle I have been pondering (and pondering too long).  He also went from theory to practice, which I should have done.

Here it is:  Your body needs to take in calories to function.  Your body needs X amount of calories to work, if you take in too little you have problems, you take in too much you have problems.  Before the problem's there is weight gain and weight loss.  By creating a calorie deficit you loose weight.  By creating a calorie surplus you gain weight.  This is not new and should not be a surprise to anyone.

So then, how to find that X?  You need to find your RMR! This acronym stands for Resting Metabolic Rate.  Simply it is how many calories you burn in a day when your sedentary.  

Here is a handy online calculator.  Lets say your a Female, age 46 and weigh 135lbs.  Your sedentary RMR would be 1504 calories per day.  Over a week 10,528 cals.  Lets also say you walk at a brisk pace one hour every week day that is around 490 Calories or 2450.  That would mean your caloric intake to maintain current weight would be 1854 per day.

That number now needs to have your goal assigned.  Lets say that you want to weigh 130lbs.  Each pound is equal to 3500 calories.  You would need to create a deficit of 17,500 cals.  lets say you want to loose this over eight weeks.   You would need to consume 1500 claories a day and maintain the exersize you are already doing.  After the eight weeks you would adjust your diet to 1477 + exersize cals a day.

So this is what I am doing.  I'll keep you posted.

The words they are a changin'

So President Obama has ended the "Global War on Terrorism."  and started the "Overseas Contingency Operation."

Oh and we no longer have to worry about "Toxic Assets"  those are now "Legacy Loans" or "Legacy Assets"

"Man Made Global Warming" is now a thing of the past look out for "Climate Change"

How about the term "Liberal"  that is so passe'  you need to be "Progressive"

Be very aware that the very words the policy makers are using, have changed into something other then what Webster has listed.  They are more mallible and have a warm fuzzy feel.

The MSM appears to be in cahoots as well, turning a blind eye to news and reporting propaganda in its place.

And yet more proof that Manmade global warming is a myth.

Climate Change - Who's Fault? Or No-Fault?

The idea of a global climate change event which is caused by human activity and most specifically by the use of fossil fuels is considered by some people as a concept which cannot be denied.

Others who study the current changes in weather patterns and mean temperatures are far from convinced and posit other causes or sometimes admit they don't know the "why" but can chart the changes.

Dr. Anastasios Tsonis from the University of Milwaukee is one of the latter. Dr Tsonis is willing to say that there is a climate shift occurring, but admits he can't fully explain why it happens.

Dr. Tsonis and the rest of the team of scientists at the University are using a math application called synchronized chaos.

The synchronized chaos was applied to data from the past 100 years and found it works well in describing the actual events which now seem to be occurring.

..... The University team suggest the act of synchronization is capable of creating the resulting climate shift.

They also note the last climate shift probably occurred in 2000.

That would be the end of the warming trend which had been happening for the thirty years prior, and ushered in a cooling trend.

The synchronized chaos math application also appears to account for the global temperature trends over that 100 year period.

So Dr. Tsonis has a global temperature variance theory that correlates with reality and has nothing to do with human activity.

DVD gift Obama gave UK leader does not work in UK.

While not exactly a film buff, Gordon Brown was touched when Barack Obama gave him a set of 25 classic American movies – including Psycho, starring Anthony Perkins on his recent visit to Washington.

Alas, when the PM settled down to begin watching them the other night, he found there was a problem.

The films only worked in DVD players made in North America and the words "wrong region" came up on his screen. Although he mournfully had to put the popcorn away, he is unlikely to jeopardise the special relationship – or "special partnership", as we are now supposed to call it – by registering a complaint.

Why exactly is President Obama considered so bright?

All the leaves are brown

"Me time" is the catch phrase.  A time when you just get off the merry-go-round.  Walking to work is an option I have available,  one that I have been taking close to full advantage.  I live just under a mile from where I work and about 150 feet above.  There is a second hill around 120 feet to traverse as well.  

I walk at a brisk steady pace and my breathing has increased with my heart rate for a good chunk of my hike.  I do this four times a workday, as I go home for lunch.  I really enjoy the weather, no matter how cold, icy, rainy or sunny it may be.  Sometimes I will listen to the local AM news, other times I just think.

It is during these times that I debate various issues, plan out things to do around the house and yard, or just wonder about the nature of the univerise.  I highly recommend "Me time"

Political Cartoon

Green Collar work

As I understand it, Green Jobs is the big thing.  That leads us to quite a few questions and exposing some myths:

Myth: Everyone understands what a green job is.
Reality: No standard definition of a green job exists.

Myth: Creating green jobs will boost productive employment.
Reality: Green jobs estimates include huge numbers of clerical, bureaucratic, and administrative positions that do not produce goods and services for consumption.

Myth: Green jobs forecasts are reliable.
Reality: The green jobs studies made estimates using poor economic models based on dubious assumptions.

Myth: Green jobs promote employment growth.
Reality: By promoting more jobs instead of more productivity, the green jobs described in the literature encourage low-paying jobs in less desirable conditions. Economic growth cannot be ordered by Congress or by the United Nations. Government interference - such as restricting successful technologies in favor of speculative technologies favored by special interests - will generate stagnation.

Myth: The world economy can be remade by reducing trade and relying on local production and reduced consumption without dramatically decreasing our standard of living.
Reality: History shows that nations cannot produce everything their citizens need or desire. People and firms have talents that allow specialization that make goods and services ever more efficient and lower-cost, thereby enriching society.

Myth: Government mandates are a substitute for free markets.
Reality: Companies react more swiftly and efficiently to the demands of their customers and markets, than to cumbersome government mandates.

Myth: Imposing technological progress by regulation is desirable.
Reality: Some technologies preferred by the green jobs studies are not capable of efficiently reaching the scale necessary to meet today’s demands and could be counterproductive to environmental quality.

Joke I just wrote.

Obamas Prepare to Plant White House Vegetable Garden!

They are starting with Geitner, Pelosi, Reed, Frank and Dodd...

*rim shot*  (now to wait for Leno to call)

BBC America

I really enjoy the bulk of BBC shows that have made it to our side of the pond.  This in and of itself makes me happy I switched to DirecTV.  Trying to narrow down why the appeal is tougher.

Yes, it is new so it has that new car smell going on.  However, I have been a fan of UK television shows for quite some time.  Going back to Captain Scarlet, The Avengers and Doctor Who,  which are decidedly different from the US counterparts.  

There seems to be greater risk on the part of the producers.  The Avengers started out with Honor Blackman and John Steed, then transitioned into Diane Rigg.  How many shows in the US survive the replacement of a main character?  How about eleven replacements of the main character over a 46 year period?  Doctor Who did just that, with its cheesy sets and over the top science the characters intrigued people to keep tuning in week after week, year after year.

So we have the appeal as lack of predictability, more emphasis on quality over quantity,  stories that have an ending  and a smaller talent pool for acting.

When watching desk and couch shows from the UK, you see more reasonable expectations of the celebrity.  That is to say, they appear to be less 'stars' and more actors.  More approachable, humble and understanding of where they fit in society.  Political correctness has not gored humor.

Could be I'm just tired of hearing the latest tabloid gossip being touted as headline news.  Maybe its the fact we never had a caste society.  

Whatever it is, I am enjoying the entertainment and news they are delivering.

Slight of Hand Administration

And Lo a pattern shall emerge.

Mr. Gibbs was nailed by questions by the press on the AIG bonuses.  Which brings us back to the good old "Who knew what, when?"  Which, to me, is fairly stupid.  Harry Trueman (one of my personal heroes) had this sign on his desk which simply stated The buck stops here.  This was a statement of ownership that any president should have over issues involving the country on a federal level.  All in all this 'outrage' over the year old known surprise that AIG paid bonuses is a distraction.

Boosting the ratings and exposure of Rush Limbaugh (who has higher approval ratings then Nancy Pelosi) by the president then the MSM was also a distraction.  Further the Santelli attacks, the Cramer attacks all distractions.  

There are some major issues.  11 trillion dollar's we cannot pay for without long term financing and a booming economy.  China wondering if investing in the US is a good idea.  The multiple snubs against the UK.  A huge spending budget with heavy socialist ties.  Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Nancey Pelosi doing some amazingly anti-Obama things, without being publicly called to task.  Slipping ratings (Obama is now below where Bush's popularity was at this time of his presidency).  Michelle Obama's diss of Laura Bush. Afghanistan offensive.

One of the more stark issues is Obama's idea of making veterans use private insurance to pay for treatment of combat and service-related injuries.   I know Obama says we all have to sacrifice, but this is just piling on those who sacrifice much more then your average citizen, or more then our current President for that matter.

Obama dishonesty.

So this tiny portion of 93billion dollars that is going out to AIG people is causing outrage in Obama (or at least his teleprompter).  

How many of you folks out there know that the Government has known about these bonuses for over a year?  "AIG disclosed its retention-payment program more than a year ago, and the amount of the bonuses had been widely reported. But as the payments were coming due in recent days, the White House began to express its indignation."

Again the WSJ is doing the work that MSM ignores:

"President Obama joined yesterday in the clamor of outrage at AIG for paying some $165 million in contractually obligated employee bonuses. He and the rest of the political class thus neatly deflected attention from the larger outrage, which is the five-month Beltway cover-up over who benefited most from the AIG bailout.

Taxpayers have already put up $173 billion, or more than a thousand times the amount of those bonuses, to fund the government's AIG "rescue." This federal takeover, never approved by AIG shareholders, uses the firm as a conduit to bail out other institutions. After months of government stonewalling, on Sunday night AIG officially acknowledged where most of the taxpayer funds have been going.

Since September 16, AIG has sent $120 billion in cash, collateral and other payouts to banks, municipal governments and other derivative counterparties around the world. This includes at least $20 billion to European banks. The list also includes American charity cases like Goldman Sachs, which received at least $13 billion. This comes after months of claims by Goldman that all of its AIG bets were adequately hedged and that it needed no "bailout." Why take $13 billion then? This needless cover-up is one reason Americans are getting angrier as they wonder if Washington is lying to them about these bailouts."

False indignation at best.  Out and out falsehood?

Some thoughts I thunk.

$165 million is really a minute amount of  $93 billion.  Yet, it is part of a contratual agreement, and these are given to people who do a good job.  Why would you want to fire your best workers?

The stock market rally, while it is a good thing to see, I am pondering the reasons given.  That the bail out banks are showing a profit.  Umkay, if you got a crapload of money from the government how could you NOT show a profit?  Current accounting practices being what they are?

The current stem cell coverage in the Media is a plethoria if mis-information and out and out fabrication and lies.  In my search for documentation I ran across this website that had already done a much better job linking all the information to the sources. No matter what side of a debate you fall on knowledge is important.

I sometimes get the feeling that our country is being run by a teleprompter...

Science should not be based upon consensus, rather on duplication of experiments that prove a premise.

Why is cutting down a tree more important to some people then killing an innocent baby?

When you pull a higher being or purpose out of the equation, what basis for morality do you have other then "Dont get caught"?

Being a member of a Union immediatly negates any value you have above that the union provides.

When the president says the fundementals of our economy is strong it is taken as a joke or gospel, depending on which president.

Taking what people say out of context is not honest.

If someone has an idea or statment, why would you disregaurd that statment simply because it was uttered by someone you dislike?  Only because the idea scares you.-

The Obama Rosetta Stone. (wonderful stuff)

By DANIEL HENNINGER

Barack Obama has written two famous, widely read books of autobiography -- "Dreams from My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope." Let me introduce his third, a book that will touch everyone's life: "A New Era of Responsibility: Renewing America's Promise. The President's Budget and Fiscal Preview" (Government Printing Office, 141 pages, $26; free on the Web). This is the U.S. budget for laymen, and it's a must read.

Turn immediately to page 11. There sits a chart called Figure 9. This is the Rosetta Stone to the presidential mind of Barack Obama. Memorize Figure 9, and you will never be confused. Not happy, perhaps, but not confused.

One finds many charts in a federal budget, most attributed to such deep mines of data as the Census Bureau or the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The one on page 11 is attributed to "Piketty and Saez."

Either you know instantly what "Piketty and Saez" means, or you don't. If you do, you spent the past two years working to get Barack Obama into the White House. If you don't, their posse has a six-week head start on you.

Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, French economists, are rock stars of the intellectual left. Their specialty is "earnings inequality" and "wealth concentration."

Messrs. Piketty and Saez have produced the most politically potent squiggle along an axis since Arthur Laffer drew his famous curve on a napkin in the mid-1970s. Laffer's was an economic argument for lowering tax rates for everyone. Piketty-Saez is a moral argument for raising taxes on the rich.

As described in Mr. Obama's budget, these two economists have shown that by the end of 2004, the top 1% of taxpayers "took home" more than 22% of total national income. This trend, Fig. 9 notes, began during the Reagan presidency, skyrocketed through the Clinton years, dipped after George Bush beat Al Gore, then marched upward. Widening its own definition of money-grubbers, the budget says the top 10% of households "held" 70% of total wealth.

Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute criticized the Piketty-Saez study on these pages in October 2007. Whatever its merits, their "Top 1%" chart has become a totemic obsession in progressive policy circles.

Turn to page five of Mr. Obama's federal budget, and one may read these commentaries on the top 1% datum:

"While middle-class families have been playing by the rules, living up to their responsibilities as neighbors and citizens, those at the commanding heights of our economy have not."

"Prudent investments in education, clean energy, health care and infrastructure were sacrificed for huge tax cuts for the wealthy and well-connected."

"There's nothing wrong with making money, but there is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few. . . . It's a legacy of irresponsibility, and it is our duty to change it."

Mr. Obama made clear in the campaign his intention to raise taxes on this income class by letting the Bush tax cuts expire. What is becoming clearer as his presidency unfolds is that something deeper is underway here than merely using higher taxes to fund his policy goals in health, education and energy.

The "top 1%" isn't just going to pay for these policies. Many of them would assent to that. The rancorous language used to describe these taxpayers makes it clear that as a matter of public policy they will be made to "pay for" the fact of their wealth -- no matter how many of them worked honestly and honorably to produce it. No Democratic president in 60 years has been this explicit.

Complaints have emerged recently, on the right and left, that the $787 billion stimulus bill will produce less growth and jobs than planned because too much of it goes to social programs and transfer payments, or "weak" Keynesian stimulus. The administration's Romer-Bernstein study on the stimulus estimated by the end of next year it would increase jobs by 3.6 million and GDP by 3.7%.

One of the first technical examinations of the Romer-Bernstein projections has been released by Hoover Institution economists John Cogan and John Taylor, and German economists Tobias Cwik and Volker Wieland. They conclude that the growth and jobs stimulus will be only one-sixth what the administration predicts. In part, this is because people anticipate that the spending burst will have to be financed by higher taxes and so will spend less than anticipated.

New York's Mike Bloomberg, mayor of an economically damaged city, has noted the pointlessness of raising taxes on the rich when their wealth is plummeting, or of eliminating the charitable deduction for people who have less to give anyway.

True but irrelevant. Mayor Bloomberg should read the Obama budget chapter, "Inheriting a Legacy of Misplaced Priorities." The economy as most people understand it was a second-order concern of the stimulus strategy. The primary goal is a massive re-flowing of "wealth" from the top toward the bottom, to stop the moral failure they see in the budget's "Top One Percent of Earners" chart.

The White House says its goal is simple "fairness." That may be, as they understand fairness. But Figure 9 makes it clear that for the top earners, there will be blood. This presidency is going to be an act of retribution. In the words of the third book from Mr. Obama, "it is our duty to change it."

China to call US notes due?

This is of paramount concern. 

SHANGHAI - China is ``a little bit worried'' about the safety of all the American debt it holds,Premier Wen Jiabao said Friday.

``We have lent a huge amount of money to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the security of our assets and, to be honest, I am a little bit worried,'' Wen said at a news conference ending the annual meeting of National People's Congress, the country's top advisory body.

Wen called on Washington ``to honour its words and stay a credible country and ensure the safety of Chinese assets.''

With more and more debt being piled onto the US taxpayer, China is gaining tremendous leverage.  If they call for the US to pay back the debt...  Well, it would be bad.

The embarrassment of euphoria

My vast skill set includes computer system diagnostics near a divine level.  That is to say, most times I am working on a computer problem, the answer will present itself in serendipity, sometimes...

While I make a mental note of the solution, I also continue on my rigid diagnostics until I have a confirmation.  More times then not I could have gone with my instinct instead.  There is value in having a solid reason for your action other then "My gut tells me its this..."

Take the issue with one of our Library systems.  It's a Dell Optiplex GX260, which is a good workhorse of a computer.  It has great accessibility of the innards where I can get my meat hooks inside with ease.  This particular machine is used to create flyer's and pamphlets.  It uses an easy to use graphics program, with a Color printer and a SCSI card hooking it into a CD-ROM changer (Yes, this system has been around quite some time).  The CD-ROM changer is actually decommissioned as we are using a CD emulator to hold the various graphics libraries.  

The issue?  The system will not post or boot.  Posting is what you first see when you start a computer, usually a logo for the manufacture or something that says Bios or Set-up or CMOS or whatever.  This is followed by the Operating system (OS) displaying as it loads.  A colorful logo screen that says Windows, or MAC or a penguin (don't ask).

Diagnostically there are some lights on the front of the system.  When they are different colors it is a clue as to whats going on.  In this case the light was green, which was no help.

The computer gets power and the power reaches the mother board and the other devices, yet the system does not post: bad power supply, or bad power cord.  I grab a cord from the huge pile any IT person has and viola!  It starts up fine!  EASY fix,  I cut the old cord and put the system back.  Bad news, next time it did not start up.  Two bad power cords is unlikely.  

So I haul the system back to my table and IT WORKS!  I shut it down and try it again,  It works.  Okay...  I head back to the desk plug it in and no work...  I plug it into a different wall socket.  IT WORKS... once..  I plug it into a different wall socket.  IT WORKS.. once...

I  pull out the multi-meter and check the power.  It's all per specification.  I haul it back to my desk plug it in and NO POST.  

Okay this has got to be the power supply.  Its pooched.  So I order a new one and wait.  

A few days later it arrives and I swap it out then try to fire it up.  No Post No Boot.   WTF??!!

This time no cable or socket will let it start.  Bad New power supply?  Meter says its fine.

Then the depression hits.  I fixed a computer from partial functionality to no functionality.  I'm just thinking I am too close to the problem.  So I talk to the other tech's and they are perplexed as well.  oh joy...

Time to work on something else.  I slunk down in my chair and begin updating our intranet wiki page.  I get the code setup in notepad then goto the different pages edit and move on.  Then as I turned my head and looked at the misbehaving PC, sudden inspiration took ahold of me.

I yanked the power cord, pulled the SCSI card, plugged the system in and hit the power button.

IT Started up perfectly.  I did a shut down then restarted three more times.  No problem at all.

Now I'm a mixture of happy and stupid...

All computers have a power supply, these are all rated at certain wattage's.  You really want as much wattage as you can reasonably get, unless your Dell... Dell has a habit of using just enough wattage to get by without issue. SCSI cards use a good bit of power, just enough to brown out the system. Think of it as the proverbial straw during camel torture.

Why did I feel dumb?  When I worked for Dell the bigger flat panel monitors started to arrive.  This prompted people to buy them and install them only to find the wide aspect would look "funny", this was due to the older graphics not being able to handle that aspect ratio. (the old graphic cards could only display the more square picture and stretched to fill the HD size picture).  

The solution?  Get a new graphics card!  The problem, that old power supply cannot pump the needed power.  Final answer, return the Monitor and Graphics card to Dell.  Seeing as how returns are hated, I started firring off missives to anyone who cared showing them that you cannot just send out any old graphics card to any old PC. 

Ah well

Dieting

Dieting, has to be one of our nations favorite past times.  Just look at the book sales around this topic.  Not to mention the countless TV shows!  Yet we all know in our heart of hearts that Diets do not work for weight loss and exercise does not work for weight loss.

What does work?  Responsibility for your actions.  Eat less then you burn.  

Resting Metabolic Rate (RMR) + Exercise = Your daily burn rate in carlories.  

Every 3500 cal deficit will loose a pound.  There you go, it is all about the calories.

So take it a week at a time try to lower your calories by 500 a day below your daily burn rate.

 wait!  if I dont eat enough my body will go into starvation mode???  Well yeah but you need some facts on that.

Using myself as an example, my current weight is 255 lbs. and my bmr is 2061.  So, I would have to cut my calories to below 1030 per day.  However, if I were at my goal weight of 190 lbs., my RMR would be 1725, and so I would have to cut my calories to below 862 calories.

In general, it's true that metabolic rate tends to drop more with caloric deficits; as well, people vary in how hard or fast their bodies shut down. Women's bodies tend to shut down harder and faster. 

But here's the thing: no study has the drop in metabolic rate been sufficient to completely offset the caloric deficit. That is, say that cutting your calories by 50% per day leads to a reduction in the metabolic rate of 10%. 

Starvation mode you say. But you still have a 40% daily deficit. 

At least thats what makes sense based upon all the studies.  BTW, check with your doctor.

Next Obama speech I'm eating CHIPS!!!

Source:

Ever wonder why those French fries taste so good when you are depressed?

Here’s one theory: Salt is a natural antidepressant, which might explain why we have a tendency to over-ingest it.

Kim Johnson, a psychologist from the University of Iowa, discovered that when rats were lacking sodium chloride, they did not assume their normal activities, such as eating or playing.

“Things that normally would be pleasurable for rats didn’t elicit the same degree of relish, which leads us to believe that a salt deficit and the craving associated with it can induce one of the key symptoms with depression,” Johnson said.

Johnson’s findings will be published in the July issue of Physiology & Behavior.

Johnson said the human body comes equipped “with a taste system designed to detect salt and a brain that remembers the location of salt sources,” which is why your body often craves the taste of salty foods.

"This suggests that salt need and cravings may be linked to the same brain pathways as those related to drug addiction and abuse," Johnson said.

However, before you switch from Prozac to potato chips, remember that eating too much salt can contribute to health problems such as high blood pressure and heart disease.

And the bad news keeps comming

The budget here is such that they are scaling back hours.  This means six hours less a week.  So figure almost a days wages a week gone.

This on top of an already tight home budget and double digit unemployment.  The Dow still crashing. The White House borrowing and spending and still forcasting things are going to get worse.

We live in interesting times.

Pork Lovers

Here's the top 20 earmarking senators with the value of their solo earmarks:

1) Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. -- $122,804,900 

2) Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala. -- $114,484,250 

3) Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo. -- $85,691,491 

4) Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. -- $76,899,425 

5) Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss. -- $75,908,475 

6) Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska -- $74,000,750 

7) Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa -- $66,860,000 

8) Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. -- $53,133,500 

9) Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. -- $51,186,000 

10) Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii -- $46,380,205 

11) Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. -- $39,228,250 

12) Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. -- $36,547,100 

13) Sen. Pat Leahy, D-Vt. -- $36,161,125 

14) Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. -- $35,577,250 

15) Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa. -- $27,169,750 

16) Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. -- $26,628,613 

17) Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. -- $25,320,000 

18) Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis. -- $23,832,000 

19) Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. -- $21,952,250 

20) Former Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M. -- $19,588,625

Source

administration incompetents

Looks like Obama is trying to "re-shape" the opinion of the US to the world. Primarily to make us a laughing stock?

Clinton Goofs on Russian Translation, Tells Diplomat She Wants to 'Overcharge' Ties

"Clinton said earlier she was presenting the gift because it "represents what President Obama and Vice President Biden and I have been saying and that is, 'We want to reset our relationship.' And so we will do it together." 

Ugh....

Just plain embarrassing.

Source:

Well, what would you buy Gordon Brown? He's not a man known for pleasure - rather as the sort to take an afternoon's summer holiday before heading straight back to work, so it must be hard. But Barack Obama can't have predicted the scornful response of the Daily Mail when he decided to pick Gordon up a few DVDs.

In return for a pen holder carved from the timbers of the sister ship of the one the White House desk is made from and a first edition of a seven-volume biography of Winston Churchill, the Mail is appalled that "Barack Obama, the leader of the world's richest country" gave Brown a box set of 25 DVDs selected by the American Film Institute. These include Raging Bull, Casablanca, Psycho and The Graduate. It is, the Mail says, "a gift about as exciting as a pair of socks".

Yet another example of the British press's apparent mission to feel snubbed by Obama on Gordon Brown's behalf and obsession with the passing of the special relationship with Bush (which was - at best - bittersweet). Was it only yesterday a commentary in the Times bemoaned the supposed injustice of the Browns giving the Obama's daughters Top Shop dresses (with matching necklaces) when all their parents gave the Brown boys were models of the presidential helicopter Marine One? Yes it was.

It's difficult to resist reading political messages into these films. Like Marlon Brando in On the Waterfront, could Brown have been "a contender ... a somebody" if the US Congress had shown a little more interest in his global New Deal? Like Luke Skywalker on the Millennium Falcon, is Brown's history of support for light-touch financial regulation in the City of London now endangering the mission?

The 25 films also include two from the end of the Great Depression: the Grapes of Wrath (recommended to Obama on this blog a while back) and the Wizard of Oz. Perhaps there is something here. A 1990 paper in the Journal of Political Economy argued it could be read as monetary allegory: in this interpretation the yellow brick road represents the gold standard (a return to which is not US policy).

The set also include three of Obama's five personal favourites, according to his Facebook page: Casablanca, The Godfather and Lawrence of Arabia (omitted are the second Godfather film and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest).

Obama is, incidentally, really, really pleased with the pen holder and books. The White House even put out a press release saying so. It tells us the president thanked the prime minister and "noted the pen set is being displayed on the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office and the books are in the president's personal study adjoining the Oval Office".

Maybe Brown's office will tweet each time he watches one of the 25. The Mail's full list is here. Please add your own cinematic/political interpretations below.

Intentions .vs. Results

You keep seeing, hearing, reading the case for someones 'intentions' touted as all important, more important then the results.  

I personally cringe whenever I hear somone state "My intentions were honorable."   

Intentions are secondary(or lower) and results are key.   The current example of huge deficit spending, coupled with tax increases during a depression, being the results of an 'intention' to help stop a recession.  Look at the other day in Columbus, Ohio.  Obama addressed the 25 jobs his spending bill helped create. but nobody knows it's just for one year.   Not an impressive photo-op to me.

Our Preisdents Intentions are killing the Dow.  The new bottom is being predicted at 3000 *shudder*.  His intent to redistribute the wealth of the rich is on a proven path of hurting the middle class.

However, his intentions are good.  So lets just cheer him on...  ugh.

Truble

The vast majority of computer problems a help desk person faces can be solved by drilling down to find the actual problem.  If your very good, the person on the other end of the phone does not feel like a total idiot.  

"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who

There are very strict rules that a computer can follow and getting a computer to stop following a set of rules can be quite the task. 

In laymans terms...  Let us say that someone calls you on the phone to complain that the ducks are eating all the Buicks.  Now you know that ducks cannot ingest a Buick and that this is not remotley close to duck behavior.  Now you could just state the obvious fact and hopefully go back to inputting numbers into a spread sheet.

"Ducks cannot eat Buicks,  Good day to you SIR!"

This will not allow you to hopefully go back to inputting numbers into a spread sheet, rather this will start a useless discussion about the eating habits of ducks..

So the course of action is to find out as much about the callers duck gastronomic incident.

Exactly where was the duck eating the Buick?  Did the duck eat the entire Buick?  Did you see the duck actually chomping on the Buick? What did the duck look like?  What did the Buick look like?  Have you seen a duck eating a Buick before?  What medication(s) are you on?

The various drill down questions will lend out tiny bits of information that will allow you to build the actual question.

"So what we really need to know is why the  duck eating in front of Buick made the car disappear"

Another of my shows Cancelled

Back in 1987, ABC put together a show about investigative journalism in a near future time.  It went two seasons for a total of 14 episodes. Then it was cancelled.  This show was called Max Headroom (It should have been kept. 20 minutes into the future).  

This is significant because, it was the first time a TV show, I was really into, got cancelled.  

Yesterday, I found that Life on Mars was cancelled.  A show with a Great story, solid cast being flushed.  This was a remake of a BBC show by the same name, which was a big hit there.  I guess some things just do not translate over to this side of the pond.

On the brighter side of things, with our switch from Dish we now have BBC America and they are starting the sequal to the UK Life on Mars, Ashes to Ashes in a scant three days.

This leaves me to ponder the how's and why's of network executive decisions.

Eleven years

Today marks Connors eleventh trip around the sun on good ole' Planet Earth.  That is eleven years of smiles, eleven years of the best entertainment, eleven years of love.

As this is his last year in Elementary school, Tina and I are sponsoring a Pizza Party at his classroom.  We have struggled with having him be in a regular classroom as much as possible.  Not because we are under some delusion that his Autism will suddenly be cured.  Rather, the more people that know him, the better off he will be in our town.  Currently, when we go shopping, someone who knows Connor will say hello to him.  Usually getting in eye line and waiting for a response.  Sometimes they get one, sometimes we prompt.  The kids in his school learn that being 'different' does not mean unapproachable.  

He is a sweat affectionate kid.  He has an interesting and fun sense of humor and we see him overcome obstacles everyday.   Happy Birthday Connor.

It's how you treat people.

A while back during a heated series of Blog postings a friends wife posted some really nice guidelines on polite discourse.  I read through them and have tried to implement them.  I have done so with mixed success.  It boiled down to this, Treat People with respect, treat opinions with scrutiny.

The Wizard (link to the right) is very good at this form of discourse and a highly recommended role model for Blog Moderation.

One noticable change has occured in my reading of various sources is how often the person is attacked when they disagree with a position.  I can only come to the conclusion that being polite is not a priority when online or in the news media, for that matter.

If someone makes a posting with factual errors, their conclusion is tainted at best, or totally off.

If someone states a position, I can fully see challenging them in order to see how solid that foundation could be.

If someone states an opinion, countering that opinion or asking questions is key to understanding your opinion and the other persons view.  

Name calling, Labelling, Straw man arguments and other fallacy, will only muddy the actual argument and either confuse, deflect or minimize the point.

The only time to be dismissive is when it becomes apparent that the person is only interested in their own viewpoint to the exclusion of others.

It seems the English are much better at civil discource the us Americans.

Paul Harvey 1918 -2009

When I walk home for lunch, my little AM radio is tuned into The Paul Harvey Noon news.  I believe I have been listening to him for Forty years.   His news items always had good news laced in with commercials blended throughout.  He was entertaining and and informative.  

I sometimes felt I was back in a simpler time, nostalgic for an era I never witnessed.  Always appreciative of his "Rest of the Story" features, trying to figure out which historical figure he was referring too, often times not even comming close.

I bought my first pair of Wells Lamont gloves because of him.  Recommended Roach Prouf to many folks who enjoyed the results.  Over the last few years his contribution was pre-recorded, the guest newsreaders kept alive many of the elements that made his broadcasst so unique.

Being a long time Radio fan, his passing really does make me sad.  At least he is reunited with his Angel in heaven.  Thank you Mr. Harvey.

Rush hits it out of the park!

Rush Limbaugh addressed CPAC.  His 20 min speech went 90 min.  He was Entertaining, honest and passionate.  Looking at the blogs and MSM today, he scared the heck outta people.

Let's just tally this up a second.  House and Senate and Presidency are all Democrat controlled.  They do NOT need Republicans for anything, as long as they can keep their own in lock step.  Again and again we hear how the Republicans input is reduced to meaningless.   You would think CPAC would be a one minute footnote in the news, given the irrelevance.

But no, this has now become the focus more rather outlandish spin and attacks.  You would think that the Republicans are back in charge...  I find that interesting.