The census guy just knocked on my door. Since a couple of months ago, the future was uncertain, I never got around to sending my form in. He seemed like a nice dude, so I invited him in to ask his questions. While here, he met the cats, and of course, Mulder, being the aggressively friendly sort that he is, was all over him (in a good way). He recognized the name from The X-Files, and said he loved the show. He asked me if I watched Lost, and wondered if he should watch it on DVD from the beginning. (He'd NEVER SEEN AN EPISODE!). After 10 minutes of evangelizing, I had him convinced he was going to the library to pick up the first season tomorrow.
We also talked about The Wire, Friday Night Lights (which we had both seen) and The Sopranos.
I think I also completely sold him on Battlestar Galactica and Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which he hadn't watched before.
I feel like I did a huge service to humanity today.
Too bad he wasn't from the Nielsens. I'm much more interested in having them count me.
Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Death, now $123 cheaper
When I moved here, I was aghast at the cost of ciggies. At the supermarket, which back in the motherland generally had the cheapest smokes (along with QuickTrip), they are exorbitant. Last year, on my first trip to the grocery store, I walked up to the counter and they told me my tasty tobacky friends would be $50 per carton. Wha - huh? I was used to paying around $35 at the local Publix, and that was shocking. And that $50 was BEFORE they raised the tax on them another dollar per pack, bringing the total to $60 per carton. I begrudgingly paid that a couple of times, before I ventured back south for the Dawgs games, and "stocked up" there.
Over the course of the summer, without regular supply runs to the south (or a Dharma drop) I did some research on how to cut the prices locally. I checked out ordering by mail from an Indian reservation, but that seemed like a pain in the ass, and the Feds regulate it such that you can't order by credit card, and I didn't feel quite right mailing checks or giving my bank account info to Chief Crazy Tumor. I finally found a local c-store that claimed "lowest prices in town!" and reluctantly shelled out $52 for a carton (but I got a free bic lighter!). Thankfully, football season rolled around again, and I was able to fill a duffle bag with a few cheap cartons of smoky treats during each visit. (I had to wedge them in, because I pack like a chick). But recently, the stash I'd built up from my last trip home in November was running low, and I was wondering what I'd do. So after some googling, I realized that Virginia had one of the lowest "sin taxes" on smokes around, and figured I might plan a trip there. (Actually, I had heard this before, but I have ZERO sense of direction, and didn't realize how close it really was). I made a few phone calls, and realized that the Rite Aids and CVSs there peddled cancer for $33 per carton. I also had a few coupons sent to me by the friendly folks at Marlboro (as part of their direct mail efforts I noted down in this post) that the local c-store wouldn't accept.
So this afternoon, I drove to another state, which it turns out was only about 30 miles away. Thank Zeus for the GPS though. I picked up 6 cartons of ciggies, and used two $4 off coupons and two $3 off coupons. I figure I used about $5 worth of gas, so all in all, I came out $123 dollars "ahead" for an investment of about an hour's time. I listened to Ron Moore's podcast for last week's awesome BSG (where he frequently drinks whiskey and "turns the smoking light on" so he can blow through a half a pack of American Spirits while recording it, which seemed to fit thematically with my journey) and all in all, it was a worthwhile trip.
So, to sum up: Thank you Virginny. Frak you Maryland state government. Thank you BSG podcasts. Thank you Marlboro.
Over the course of the summer, without regular supply runs to the south (or a Dharma drop) I did some research on how to cut the prices locally. I checked out ordering by mail from an Indian reservation, but that seemed like a pain in the ass, and the Feds regulate it such that you can't order by credit card, and I didn't feel quite right mailing checks or giving my bank account info to Chief Crazy Tumor. I finally found a local c-store that claimed "lowest prices in town!" and reluctantly shelled out $52 for a carton (but I got a free bic lighter!). Thankfully, football season rolled around again, and I was able to fill a duffle bag with a few cheap cartons of smoky treats during each visit. (I had to wedge them in, because I pack like a chick). But recently, the stash I'd built up from my last trip home in November was running low, and I was wondering what I'd do. So after some googling, I realized that Virginia had one of the lowest "sin taxes" on smokes around, and figured I might plan a trip there. (Actually, I had heard this before, but I have ZERO sense of direction, and didn't realize how close it really was). I made a few phone calls, and realized that the Rite Aids and CVSs there peddled cancer for $33 per carton. I also had a few coupons sent to me by the friendly folks at Marlboro (as part of their direct mail efforts I noted down in this post) that the local c-store wouldn't accept.
So this afternoon, I drove to another state, which it turns out was only about 30 miles away. Thank Zeus for the GPS though. I picked up 6 cartons of ciggies, and used two $4 off coupons and two $3 off coupons. I figure I used about $5 worth of gas, so all in all, I came out $123 dollars "ahead" for an investment of about an hour's time. I listened to Ron Moore's podcast for last week's awesome BSG (where he frequently drinks whiskey and "turns the smoking light on" so he can blow through a half a pack of American Spirits while recording it, which seemed to fit thematically with my journey) and all in all, it was a worthwhile trip.
So, to sum up: Thank you Virginny. Frak you Maryland state government. Thank you BSG podcasts. Thank you Marlboro.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Lost in the middle
Other than the occasional link and pithy comment in the weekly "potpourri roundup," I rarely blog extensively about politics here at TNRLM. Not to say that I'm not interested, as I have dozens of blogs and news sources that pour into my RSS reader, and I also keep up with newspapers (remember those?), magazines and virtually all the talking head shows on the cable news networks. I'm just disgusted by the two party system, since both sides have such firmly drawn and intractable positions, and I can't really identify wholly with either one. I used to live in a traditional "red" state, and now I live in a totally "blue" state, so how I voted in each in election didn't really matter in the big picture. I feel like what I think and want and believe doesn't have a voice -- at least one powerful enough to affect change -- and it's deeply frustrating. Every choice, whether it's for a representative, senator or president, is all about a compromising of integrity and selecting a lesser of two evils.
For example, (and I know these are broad strokes on the various positions) the Dems get a lot of things right. They want to ensure a woman's right to choose. They want to keep the superstition, supernatural and theocracy out of our schools and government. They're more hesitant to interfere in the business of sovereign nations (unless, of course, it's to give them more of our money). They don't look to a book of fiction to define who should marry and divorce each other, or adopt unwanted children. However, they're also hysterical about the "environment" and "global warming." They believe in quotas, affirmative action and tend to base things on gender, race and identity politics rather than pure merit (and let their guilty liberal consciences overcorrect for long-past transgressions). They're distinctly anti-capitalism and free market. They believe the most inefficient and ineffective organization ever created -- government -- is the solution to all the world's problems. They don't believe in holding individuals responsible for their own choices and decisions. They believe that government should fund (from money stolen from you and me) things that are better left to the free market. And most importantly, they create class/success envy, and consistently believe in punitive and escalating taxation and income redistribution.
On the other hand, the Republicans get a lot of things right, too. Primarily, they believe in a free market economy. That people deserve to keep what they earn without the government taking it at gunpoint and giving it to others who didn't earn it. That hiring, firing and appointments should be based on qualifications, not on grievances that are hundreds of years old. That people and companies can come up with the best solutions, not government. That you can choose what school you send your kids to. But they're also equally frustrating and odious in they way that they try to legislate their version of morality. They want to create a theocracy, and control every citizen's life based on a group mythology that has ZERO basis in provable fact or science. They've recently strayed from strong defense and protection of national interests to a nation building interventionist policy. While they don't typically legislate based on pure quota and gender and racial identification, they do give excessive breaks and preferences to those who choose to spawn, instead of just worrying about the rights of individuals (no matter their sexual, reproductive or marital status). They believe the "6,000 year old earth" nonsense should actually be included as a viable option in textbooks.
So what's a guy to do?
Technically, I'm probably more of an objectivist, and am actually a card-carrying member of the Libertarian party (though they have their fringe elements that don't exactly jive with my worldview, either). So each and every election, I face the same dilemma of holding my nose and casting a vote for the party/candidate which offends me the least. In order to do this, you have to prioritize your needs and principles, which leads to a lot of internal anguish and disappointment. Always, my highest priority is reducing the excessive and progressive amount of money confiscated from me by the government and given to those who didn't earn it, or don't deserve it. And I can proudly say that I've never voted for a candidate who espoused raising taxes of any kind, on anyone. So I usually wind up voting for Republicans, even though their increasing fealty to the supernatural and fairy tales, and tendency toward legislating their version of morality (and restricting the liberties and choice of individuals) makes me want to vomit. It's a gut-wrenching Sophie's choice every election, and just makes me loathe the whole process and the puppets who participate in it. Why can't there be a D who is anti-taxation and who wants a limited government, but is intent on protecting individual freedom without excessive social engineering? Why can't there be an R who stops developing policy based on mythology and treating fiction as fact, yet still gets government out of the way and lets capitalism work unfettered? Sadly, I don't think I'll live to see the day when we have a candidate who is openly agnostic or atheistic, wants to abolish the current tax code in favor of a flat or consumption tax, protects a woman's right to choose, gives all citizens equal civil rights (no matter their race, religion, marital or sexual preference) wants a strong defense but eschews foreign intervention unless it specifically threatens our interests, and truly believes that the ONLY role of government is to protect the life, liberty and property of individual citizens.
Sigh. Didn't mean to get off on a rant there. But here are a few news tidbits for you to help the morning go down better:
Hybrid drivers get better parking spaces. Ye gods. "global warming" hysteria reaches new levels. I understand closer parking spaces for the handicapped. But for hybrids? Or mothers or chicks who are knocked up? Aren't these personal choices? Still, as long as individual companies do it willingly as a unique selling proposition or customer differentiation strategy, I'll support their right to do it, even if I personally find it stupid. However, if government starts the same shit, let's dump tea in the harbors.
I always though Victoria Jackson was kinda cute. I didn't realize she was insane. Did the "good book" reveal that C-List SNLers would reveal the anti-christ?
It gives me hope that a majority of Americans are now smarter than they were in 2004.
"Fair" = "punishing success" for some.
Quotes from the orchestrator of last weekend's flat-earth minstrel show. How does this crap enter the mainstream? Sigh.
Geeks apparently lean conservative. I think I agree with Catwoman.
Has Bush done anything right? Mostly an acknowledgement of correcting horrific initial mistakes, though it doesn't mention the REAL thing he got right: tax cuts.
For example, (and I know these are broad strokes on the various positions) the Dems get a lot of things right. They want to ensure a woman's right to choose. They want to keep the superstition, supernatural and theocracy out of our schools and government. They're more hesitant to interfere in the business of sovereign nations (unless, of course, it's to give them more of our money). They don't look to a book of fiction to define who should marry and divorce each other, or adopt unwanted children. However, they're also hysterical about the "environment" and "global warming." They believe in quotas, affirmative action and tend to base things on gender, race and identity politics rather than pure merit (and let their guilty liberal consciences overcorrect for long-past transgressions). They're distinctly anti-capitalism and free market. They believe the most inefficient and ineffective organization ever created -- government -- is the solution to all the world's problems. They don't believe in holding individuals responsible for their own choices and decisions. They believe that government should fund (from money stolen from you and me) things that are better left to the free market. And most importantly, they create class/success envy, and consistently believe in punitive and escalating taxation and income redistribution.
On the other hand, the Republicans get a lot of things right, too. Primarily, they believe in a free market economy. That people deserve to keep what they earn without the government taking it at gunpoint and giving it to others who didn't earn it. That hiring, firing and appointments should be based on qualifications, not on grievances that are hundreds of years old. That people and companies can come up with the best solutions, not government. That you can choose what school you send your kids to. But they're also equally frustrating and odious in they way that they try to legislate their version of morality. They want to create a theocracy, and control every citizen's life based on a group mythology that has ZERO basis in provable fact or science. They've recently strayed from strong defense and protection of national interests to a nation building interventionist policy. While they don't typically legislate based on pure quota and gender and racial identification, they do give excessive breaks and preferences to those who choose to spawn, instead of just worrying about the rights of individuals (no matter their sexual, reproductive or marital status). They believe the "6,000 year old earth" nonsense should actually be included as a viable option in textbooks.
So what's a guy to do?
Technically, I'm probably more of an objectivist, and am actually a card-carrying member of the Libertarian party (though they have their fringe elements that don't exactly jive with my worldview, either). So each and every election, I face the same dilemma of holding my nose and casting a vote for the party/candidate which offends me the least. In order to do this, you have to prioritize your needs and principles, which leads to a lot of internal anguish and disappointment. Always, my highest priority is reducing the excessive and progressive amount of money confiscated from me by the government and given to those who didn't earn it, or don't deserve it. And I can proudly say that I've never voted for a candidate who espoused raising taxes of any kind, on anyone. So I usually wind up voting for Republicans, even though their increasing fealty to the supernatural and fairy tales, and tendency toward legislating their version of morality (and restricting the liberties and choice of individuals) makes me want to vomit. It's a gut-wrenching Sophie's choice every election, and just makes me loathe the whole process and the puppets who participate in it. Why can't there be a D who is anti-taxation and who wants a limited government, but is intent on protecting individual freedom without excessive social engineering? Why can't there be an R who stops developing policy based on mythology and treating fiction as fact, yet still gets government out of the way and lets capitalism work unfettered? Sadly, I don't think I'll live to see the day when we have a candidate who is openly agnostic or atheistic, wants to abolish the current tax code in favor of a flat or consumption tax, protects a woman's right to choose, gives all citizens equal civil rights (no matter their race, religion, marital or sexual preference) wants a strong defense but eschews foreign intervention unless it specifically threatens our interests, and truly believes that the ONLY role of government is to protect the life, liberty and property of individual citizens.
Sigh. Didn't mean to get off on a rant there. But here are a few news tidbits for you to help the morning go down better:
Hybrid drivers get better parking spaces. Ye gods. "global warming" hysteria reaches new levels. I understand closer parking spaces for the handicapped. But for hybrids? Or mothers or chicks who are knocked up? Aren't these personal choices? Still, as long as individual companies do it willingly as a unique selling proposition or customer differentiation strategy, I'll support their right to do it, even if I personally find it stupid. However, if government starts the same shit, let's dump tea in the harbors.
I always though Victoria Jackson was kinda cute. I didn't realize she was insane. Did the "good book" reveal that C-List SNLers would reveal the anti-christ?
It gives me hope that a majority of Americans are now smarter than they were in 2004.
"Fair" = "punishing success" for some.
Quotes from the orchestrator of last weekend's flat-earth minstrel show. How does this crap enter the mainstream? Sigh.
Geeks apparently lean conservative. I think I agree with Catwoman.
Has Bush done anything right? Mostly an acknowledgement of correcting horrific initial mistakes, though it doesn't mention the REAL thing he got right: tax cuts.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
"It must be weird, not having anyone cum on you."
That, my friends, is a quote from that cinematic classic, Showgirls. (of course, I'm also sure that line has been uttered frequently about 1,996 miles east of the movie's setting). I'm starting this "news roundup" off with that because of the rumors percolating that our most recent ex-president and wannabe "first gentleman" has been schtupping Cristal Connors herself, the liptastic Gina Gershon. Both Bubba and Gina vehemently deny it, of course, and I have absolutely no problem with it, since he's not doing it in the people's office nor on my nickel. If being a chubby, bitter and opinionated know-it-all scores you points with Ms. Gershon, perhaps I should give her a call. Here's the original Vanity Fair article that caused all the commotion, and it's interesting reading.
Speaking of the campaign, here's an absolutely hilarious clip from the Daily Show that pefectly encapsulates my feelings about the primaries, (of which I've watched entirely too much). Hillary Widmore, indeed.
Gallup's early look at the McCain - Obama matchup. Interesting graphs. It would seem Obama's core supporters are blacks, singles, people who don't go to church, people who have a post graduate degree, young'uns, and people who don't make enough money to worry about the government stealing it from them. I fall into a couple of those categories, but I don't have a dog in this hunt, as policy-wise, both candidates offend my sensibilities. The first, and most important, litmus test is always who is going to stop confiscating my personal income. After that, it becomes an exercise in holding your nose and pulling a lever, though sadly, here in the middle of socialist country, my vote probably won't add up to much.
Funny newspaper headlines.
I guess I don't have to worry about my joints anytime soon.
A scathing critique of celebrity campaigns against children's vaccines. "University of Google" is just too pithy and laugh out loud funny not to appreciate. And of course, you're going to get cogent scientific analysis from a pair best known for talking out of his ass on film and showing her taco for money.
"Investigative journalism" done by a former pitcher unequivocally proves a carpenter has risen from the dead, and that Jesus can really get you a better sneaker contract.
Scott McClellan fesses up for Catwoman.
Speaking of the campaign, here's an absolutely hilarious clip from the Daily Show that pefectly encapsulates my feelings about the primaries, (of which I've watched entirely too much). Hillary Widmore, indeed.
Gallup's early look at the McCain - Obama matchup. Interesting graphs. It would seem Obama's core supporters are blacks, singles, people who don't go to church, people who have a post graduate degree, young'uns, and people who don't make enough money to worry about the government stealing it from them. I fall into a couple of those categories, but I don't have a dog in this hunt, as policy-wise, both candidates offend my sensibilities. The first, and most important, litmus test is always who is going to stop confiscating my personal income. After that, it becomes an exercise in holding your nose and pulling a lever, though sadly, here in the middle of socialist country, my vote probably won't add up to much.
Funny newspaper headlines.
I guess I don't have to worry about my joints anytime soon.
A scathing critique of celebrity campaigns against children's vaccines. "University of Google" is just too pithy and laugh out loud funny not to appreciate. And of course, you're going to get cogent scientific analysis from a pair best known for talking out of his ass on film and showing her taco for money.
"Investigative journalism" done by a former pitcher unequivocally proves a carpenter has risen from the dead, and that Jesus can really get you a better sneaker contract.
Scott McClellan fesses up for Catwoman.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Why didn't Ralph Nader investigate the Flintstone's car for being "unsafe at any speed?"
It seems that people are taking fictional shows a little t0o seriously. No, not the so-called "reality" shows (which strangely, were affected by a potential writers strike. Hmmm.), but fictional shows with fictional characters. 24 had been getting a lot press lately, with political pundits from across the spectrum weighing in on how Jack Bauer (yes, I know that he's not real) and his information extraction techniques have affected everything from morale to current interrogation methods.
Hey, I get caught up in the wonders of my Tivo just like the next couch potato. But here's a newsflash for the government: IT'S JUST A FUCKING TV SHOW.
Since we're already going down this route, here are a few other things that could use some investigation and consideration:
Census Department: why the population continues to grow despite the ubiquitous presence of serial killers (Dexter, all the CSIs, Criminal Minds).
AMA: why it's never Lupus (House).
INS: do genetically altered humans qualify for citizenship (Heroes, The 4400).
American Bar Association: why can't cases reach trial and get a verdict in 44 minutes (Law and Order).
NTSB: why haven't you found Oceanic 815 (Lost).
NEA: First, Sterling Sharpe then Michael Irvin. Can you please do something about Shannon Sharpe?
Hey, I get caught up in the wonders of my Tivo just like the next couch potato. But here's a newsflash for the government: IT'S JUST A FUCKING TV SHOW.
Since we're already going down this route, here are a few other things that could use some investigation and consideration:
Census Department: why the population continues to grow despite the ubiquitous presence of serial killers (Dexter, all the CSIs, Criminal Minds).
AMA: why it's never Lupus (House).
INS: do genetically altered humans qualify for citizenship (Heroes, The 4400).
American Bar Association: why can't cases reach trial and get a verdict in 44 minutes (Law and Order).
NTSB: why haven't you found Oceanic 815 (Lost).
NEA: First, Sterling Sharpe then Michael Irvin. Can you please do something about Shannon Sharpe?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
