POWIP Piece of Work In Progress

10Oct/093

World’s First Virtual Fish Case

A week or so ago, the 3rd Brother Collins, Tim, and his lovely wife Beth, gave the green light to launch the new St. Paul Fish Company website.

Pretty cool site, featuring "not-quite-right" design and the World's Very First Fish Case Cam and Oyster Bar Cam - where people can remotely view the freshest of seafood in the deli cases (side-by-side cams) and the oyster bar in action (one cam) in real-time. Very friggin cool.

They plan to add 3 more cameras in short order - one for the live lobster tank, one for watching feeding time of their giant grouper (who is the luckiest fish in the joint for sure), and one overlooking the dining area.

Tim is not only an awesome restaurateur and accomplished fish-monger of peerless quality, he is a brilliant marketer, and in many ways a futurist - and a fun client to have.

Anyway, hit Tim and Beth's site if you get a chance (during business hours of course). Follow St. Paul on Twitter - and of course - if you are ever in Milwaukee, let me know or just stop by the shop and tell them Dan and Enoch sent you.

Enoch_Root

AKA. Bobby Donn Brubaker (the most popular man in Mesa, AZ), the Umbrella of Terror, Jack Ketch.

Website - More Posts

Share
9Oct/095

Nobel committee: Hey, let’s immanetize this eschaton!

Damn I'm good!

Damn I'm good!

 

[photoshop courtesy of iOWNTHEWORLD.com]

Little noticed on a day when Obama was awarded the Nobel peace prize was a story about some who think he is more eminent than even that honor could demonstrate.  The AP reported yesterday that there is a sense among some of the African Bishops attending a meeting at the Vatican that the hand of the Almighty was involved in Mr. Obama’s election:

African bishops attending a Vatican meeting are speaking about the election of Barack Obama in divine terms—putting them very much at odds with many of their U.S. counterparts.

Archbishop Gabriel Charles Palmer-Buckle of Accra, Ghana said Wednesday that there was "a divine plan behind" Obama's election.

"It's like the biblical story repeating itself," he told reporters, citing the Old Testament figure Joseph, who after being sold into slavery in Egypt ends up becoming a top official.

If the intuition of these Clerics is correct, would that make the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops a den of heretics for opposing Obama’s health care program on the basis of it’s funding for abortion as well as the prospect of rationing?  I must note that not all Catholics oppose Obamacare, like the liberal organization Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good.  In fact, I have the ignominious pleasure of having the Bishop of my own diocese, Bishop William Murphy, chairman of Domestic Justice and Human Development for the U.S. bishops, as one that weights the social justice aspect of Obamacare above the overarching concerns of the USCCB:

Bishop Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., noted that the “we strongly oppose inclusion of abortion as part of a national health care benefit.” But he emphasized the priority the church placed on coverage for the poor, calling health care “not a privilege but a right.”

“Health care is not just another issue for the Church or for a healthy society,” he wrote. “It is a fundamental issue of human life and dignity.”

So what should I expect living on Long Island?  It’s easy to see the difference between the position of the Church as a whole, and the outlook of some of the senior Clergy that reconcile sacrificing a fundamental tenet of the faith in the name of social justice.  This is part of the mindset that leads some American Catholics to entertain the notion of a schism with Rome, especially among those who more heavily weight social justice concerns as professed in liberation theology; since the same liberation theology that some schismatics flirt with was declared a heresy by John Paul II-a position researched and validated by Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Ratzinger.

John Paul II disagreed. To make the church into a secular political institution and to see salvation solely as the achievement of social justice was to rob faith in Jesus of its power to transform every life. The image of Jesus as a political revolutionary was inconsistent with the Bible and the Church's teachings.

He didn't mean that the Church was not going to be the voice of the oppressed, was not going to champion the poor. But it should not do it by partisan politics, or by revolutionary violence. The Church's business was bringing about the Kingdom of God, not about creating a Marxist utopia.

[emphasis-ed.]

On a more secular level I tend to agree with Thomas Sowell:

After political crusades for "affordable housing" ended up ruining the housing market and much of the economy with it, many of the same politicians are now carrying on a crusade for "affordable health care." But what you can afford has absolutely nothing to do with the cost of producing anything. Refusing to pay those costs means that you are just not going to continue getting the same quantity and quality — regardless of what any politician says or how well he says it.

Where is the justice in the degradation of our health care system for the 85% of the public that is happy with their healthcare?  And, as a Catholic, why are leaders of the church advocating for such a system, especially when it violates our fundamental belief in a culture of life?  Whatever happened to “rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s”… etc?  It seems to me that these leaders aren’t rendering unto God that which is God’s.  And that is certainly a violation of their vows and beliefs; whether Obama is a beneficiary of divine provenance or not.

But, beyond domestic political considerations and questions of a coming schism, this talk of Obama’s ersatz divinity, or divine installation, coupled with the rising tensions, both nuclear and conventional, in the middle east is certain to make students of the Biblical book of Revelation perk up their ears; and ponder whether the action of the Nobel Prize committee was also divinely guided to assist the great pretender in his masquerade as the man who would bring about peace on Earth.  Or, are they wishfully heralding the coming workers paradise on Earth; utopia in the “age of Obama”.  Exactly which eschaton are they immanetizing?

Based on Mark 13:32, “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father”, so I tend to lean toward the secular implication; because too many people are on to the "Obama as divinity" shtick.  But you never know, I’ve been wrong before…

Share
9Oct/099

The 12 Labors of Obamakles

You all recall the 12 Labors of Herakles, the greatest of Greek heroes. Now that a demi-god walks among us, it's time for comparisons. Consider, and suggest, the 12 greatest labors of Obamakles.

I mean, holy shit, this guy's been in office less than a year and already he's proclaimed the awesomest National School Week EVAH!

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

Share
9Oct/0916

A Sneetch on Barack Obama

I have to admit: nothing changed my view of the actuality of American Politics more than when presented with the stunning lackluster choice we were presented with during the last Plesidential Erection cycle. Two completely worthless and unworthy choices were placed before us.

1) John McCain - I am sure John is an okay guy. And I sure appreciate his sacrifice and commitment to his country as it relates to Vietnam. Regardless of how tragic that particular war was, here was a man who fulfilled his obligation to the letter. But since then, John had done really nothing worthy of note. Unless of course, one is a fan of moderately conservative politicians.

2) Barack Obama - I am sure Barack Obama is an okay guy too. But really, I still can't name any accomplishment of his, either before being erected or since. I can name some awards he has been awarded - but, again, no accomplishments to date.

These were our choices. Pretty f*cking sad to say. I have tried, but can't find a worse pair of "options" to choose from. Bush/Gore came close - but either one of them, I can't believe I am writing this, could be heralded as amazing men when placed side-by-side with McCain/Obama. Not saying it would be me doing the heralding - but anyway.

The sorry-ass "choice" between Obama and McCain was perhaps the most stunning by-product of the fact that no one in their right mind would want to be president. I think in McCain's case it was a matter of momentum - why he was singled out. I can imagine the RNC union leadership sitting around thinking, "I think he would be an acceptable choice given the mood of the country. And, anyway, who the hell else do we have?" In the case of Obama, I can see the DNC heads saying, "I know we can't say it out loud, but here is an unknown, highly-charismatic orator... who happens to be black. Bonus points for us!" And the selection of each of these men points to just how deep the contempt for the electorate is.

So, it came down to "Old Bastard" and "The Hopey Changey One." I could barely stand rooting for McCain. He offended my sensibilities. But I could hardly support the One - a community organizer? "What the f*ck is that?"

But when Mr. Obama won the presidency, I was not at all surprised. The marketing of the product was, I must say, absolutely stellar. And I mean that sincerely. F*cking brilliant.

But chalking Obama's win up to clever marketing cannot explain his victory entirely. Americans are extremely savvy consumers. We are not unsophisticated consumers. And brilliant marketing only works to the extent the public is willing to "Believe" in the product behind the hype.

And after eight years of Bush, especially the last term of Bush, the public was desperate to believe. Hopeful for "change" - whatever it meant - and however it would be made manifest. Desperate, really. So, it was no surprise that Obama won whatsoever. Or it shouldn't have been, anyway.

Brilliantly packaged. Great label. Strong colors. Cross-gender appeal. Cross-racial appeal. Perfectly positioned on the shelf. Excellent distribution (available everywhere). And the price was right, too! Why... it was free! The tonic for all that ails!

How exciting to be one of the lucky ones to recognize its amazing restorative, preventative, and preservative qualities! In time, everyone would surely come to their senses! And when that time came, there would be I-told-you-sos all around. And the Sneetches who refused to hope and believe in the hope others hoped they might believe in too would apologize.

His appeal was real - the real mystique of any product that would cure all ills with a single spoonful. The how of how that tonic might work was never asked. In part because the alternative - cod oil - might or might not provide slight benefit - but everyone knows cod oil tastes like shit. So, on the one hand we had "Miracle Tonic" - on the other, "Cod Oil."

But the problem is that Obama, the product ensconced in the beautifully-considered and easy-to-use, resealable and child-proof packaging, is not so great - near as I can tell. It is precisely what I thought it was. What I suspected it was. Not to say Cod Oil would have been any better. One can even argue that the placebo value of the tonic that is Obama is preferable to anything Cod Oil might have provided. And certainly, I agree. Four years of Cod Oil - yuck.

But I refuse to drink the tonic. And those that do drink it in - religiously - are coming to find that their bones still ache - they are still balding - they are still suffering from migraines - and they aren't any more attractive today than they were before the magic elixir.

So, in the end, when they push the heaping mountains of exoskeletal shimmer into the landfill, this Sneetch will not laugh or even cry. Just shake his head and line up, like all the other beach-imprisoned saps, once again at the machine of Sylvester McMonkey McBean.

Enoch_Root

AKA. Bobby Donn Brubaker (the most popular man in Mesa, AZ), the Umbrella of Terror, Jack Ketch.

Website - More Posts

Share
9Oct/0913

Obama recieves the Nobel prize for hope-n-change. [Note by Dan]

As Dahlhalla already noted, from the AP comes word that Obama has been awarded a Nobel peace prize.  I didn't know there was a category for hope-n-change, or for not actually accomplishing anything! 

The stunning choice made Obama the third sitting U.S. president to win the Nobel Peace Prize and shocked Nobel observers because Obama took office less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline. Obama's name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.
[snip]
The Nobel committee praised Obama's creation of "a new climate in international politics" and said he had returned multilateral diplomacy and institutions like the U.N. to the center of the world stage. The plaudit appeared to be a slap at President George W. Bush from a committee that harshly criticized Obama's predecessor for resorting to largely unilateral military action in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
[snip]
Rather than recognizing concrete achievement, the 2009 prize appeared intended to support initiatives that have yet to bear fruit: reducing the world stock of nuclear arms, easing American conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthening the U.S. role in combating climate change.

[emphasis-ed.]
So it appears that this award is less about Obama's actual accomplishments and more about his committment to the trans-national agenda as well as not being Booooooosh!; very nuanced criteria indeed. Or, maybe it's a consolation prize for the snubbing by the IOC, or a recognition of him diminishing American power abroad as well as moving our domestic government in a  direction that is more palatable for the Euro-socialist dominated Nobel committee.  The article says it is unclear who nominated him for the prize; maybe Al Gore, Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez, or Ahmadi-Nejad?  What's certain is it appears to be more of an honorarium than anything, and suspiciously seems designed to enhance his domestic popularity at a time he most needs it. I know I'll be called a hater for questioning the timing and intent, but it smacks of the UN and the "one -worlders" meddling in our domestic politics.  I guess it was easier than doing so on behalf of freedom in Iran...

As always, the British newspapers don't pull any punches:

Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.

Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.

[emphasis-ed.]

Considering the title of the article is, "Absurd decision on Obama makes a mockery of the Nobel peace prize", you can get an idea of just how phony this comes off, even in the enlightened global community.

Dan's note: Lots of people are upset about this, but I think it's friggin' hilarious, and I'm also pleased about all the money I'm saving on acid, even though this attitude appears to make me an asshole.

UPDATE: Predictably the Democrats are breathlessly denouncing any and all who would not be ecstatic about Obama's Nobel award, or any who might point out the seemingly political and contrived nature of it.  In fact, they lump those who do in with terrorists! and...wait for it...The Taliban !?!

“The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists - the Taliban and Hamas this morning - in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize,” DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse told POLITICO. “Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize - an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride - unless of course you are the Republican Party.

“The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It’s no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it’s an embarrassing label to claim,” Woodhouse said.

Wow. I guess they didn't get the memo from the White House that the Taliban are no longer terrorist, but moderates. The quote is from a site that will not be linked here at POWIP, so instead I'll point you to Cap'n Ed's thoughts on it as well as Ace's; both of whom link to the source of the official DNC quote. The only question I have for Mr. Woodhouse would be, does that make Peter Beinart, certainly no knuckle-dragging wingnut, also on the side of the Terrorists?

I had always thought the way these things worked was that you helped bring peace or democracy to some corner of the globe first, and then you won the Nobel Prize. But this year, the Nobel Committee has turned that logic around: It clearly likes what Obama is trying to do: on nuclear disarmament, climate change and Middle East peace—and so, in a “preemptive” strike, it’s giving him the award now, in hopes that doing so will boost his chances of success later. It’s an interesting idea. Perhaps next they’ll start giving Oscars not to the people who have made the best movies of last year, but to the people who have the best chance of making the best movies next year. After all, once you’ve already made the movie, you no longer need the encouragement.

I like Barack Obama as much as the next liberal, but this is a farce. He’s done nothing to deserve the prize. Sure, he’s given some lovely speeches and launched some initiatives—on Iran, Israeli-Palestinian peace, climate change and nuclear disarmament—that might, if he’s really lucky and really good, make the world a more safe, more just, more peaceful world. But there’s absolutely no way to know if he’ll succeed, and by giving him the Nobel Prize as a kind of “atta boy,” the Nobel Committee is actually just highlighting the gap that conservatives have long highlighted: between Obamamania as global hype and Obama’s actual accomplishments.

[emphasis-ed.]
Make sure to read the links for more reactions from media outlets and pundits on both sides of the political spectrum.

UPDATE II: For a more humorous take on the matter I suggest diving into the comments at the Hostages that accompany this funny post.

UPDATE III: Too good not to check! EddieBear at doubleplusundead UNLOADS! on DNC communications director Woodhouse's risible remarks.  This is a great rant so make sure you read it all!

Who the fuck are you to throw around the "President's Critics=Traitors" bullshit after the eight years of stupidity, where your side defended and praised rooting for DEFEAT AND DEATH IN A FUCKING WAR, just to score political points? Who the fuck are you to claim that I, as a critic of Obama, want to see this country suffer, while your side treated every lost job, flag-draped coffin, stock market drop, or uptick in oil prices as a chance to start measuring the drapes in the Big Boy Office? Who the fuck are you to sit there and smugly claim that satire and mockery of the President no longer is justified, after what you said and did for eight years? And who the fuck are you to tell me that my exercising of my First Amendment Rights puts me in league with people who torture and kill, shoot rockets at schools, behead people just for earing too short of a burqa, and burn little girls with acid if they want to learn how to read? I would say a comment as foolish as the one you uttered was beneath contempt, but since you already have to look up to see contempt, I guess that is an upgrade for you.

It gets better, trust me!

UPDATE IV: Don't miss these photoshops by Slublog, inspired by this prize awarded to the O!nce ...

UPDATE V: And, as usual, Doc Zero knocks the hide off the ball as he jacks it out of the park.

Obama was given the Nobel Prize, not because of anything he has done as President, but because of what the committee thinks he will do. His achievements are as non-existent now as they were on the day he was nominated. His agenda, however, is clear. He spelled it out in that insipid speech he gave to the United Nations a few weeks ago. Speaking as the leader of the indentured world, he made it clear that he plans to dim the lights on an America in decline, and humbly step aside as the post-American century begins. That’s why he won the Peace Prize. The Nobel committee has long seen the United States as the greatest threat to world peace, and the man who plans to bankrupt and disarm it has earned their admiration.

Another must-read by the Doctor.

UPDATE VI: The mustache of truth, justice, and the American way, John Bolton, restates my earlier intuitive assertion that this award was politically motivated. Based on his long foreign affairs experience and credentials, and the agreement of our independantly arrived at position,  I'd say that my gut instinct was pretty good; affirmation baby! sweet, sweet affirmation.  Cap'n Ed has the video here.

Share
9Oct/098

Mass of Miscellany

because it's Friday.

*

um, okay...I was more excited when my friend's dad won a few years ago.

*

Jeb Bush speaks of acne, fashion (kinda) and responsibility.

*

Now you can really be bluffin' with your muffin (and freak out the neighborhood) for a mere 25 thou.

*

Speaking of La Gaga, she talks about her monsters (and 8 new songs), but I'm more obsessed with this.

*

I love the idea of this site, but I'm a braggart like that.

*

Watch a little live-action footage of the hot hott hawttie who shared a girl with Letterman.

*

You could for reals not run if you wear these John Galliano muthas from the Fall 2009 collection:

galliano

The Italian pianist version of the Christian Bale freakout.

*

Heidi Montag wants to introduce you to a rare book she discovered (don't miss the comments).

*

Speaking of fine literature, I personally recommend a nice bonnet-ripper.

*

Because I'm sure to sneak in at least one Glennie link per week, here's something adorable.

*

If you want to see some cool-kid stuff, go here!

Dahlhalla

Dahlhalla is a professional troublemaker and classical musician living in New York City. Schooled in Seattle (with Liz Mair), and college-d in San Francisco (where she played with the Grateful Dead once, no joke). She truly lives the plots of several telenovellas on a daily basis. Yeah. Just ask any anonymous blogger you know. Currently dating her way through the former Bush Administration, Dahlhalla is gathering enough material to hopefully post more than once every other month. But until then…OMG SHOES.

Website - More Posts

Share
8Oct/097

David BlahBlahMan

The National Enquirer wants you to believe that David Letterman's fans are stunned that he had sex with a bunch of interns or something, and that his outraged wife didn't know what a bag of scum he was, yadda yadda.

BFD. Caveat emptor. He's scum. He's pretty up front about it. Deal with it.

You need any more help, you just call me, Dave, you scumsucking pig. Love ya!

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

Share
8Oct/0913

Lessons Learned in 4WD

While slipping, sliding, and slogging through the snow and muck yesterday, I realized that there are a few life/career lessons that a four-wheel drive adventure can teach.

  • One of the most important things you can do is keep your momentum.
  • Vehicles coming downhill have the right-of-way because they have the least control. If YOU are the one coming downhill, just do your best to stay straight and ride it out-it can't be downhill forever.
  • Sometimes you can't make it on the road you're on. You just have to hit reverse and try another way.
  • There are still places in this world that don't get cell service. Be prepared for the eventuality you'll have to go it alone sometimes.
  • Some hills are just too steep and slick the first time. Roll back down and get a better run at it.
  • Everyone gets stuck at some time or another but you can't just quit and crying won't unstick you. (Yes, I've tried both and neither worked.) Sometimes you just have to buckle down and do some shoveling.
  • It's okay to do crazy things once in a while. There's a strange amount of satisfaction in it.
  • Always have four things: chapstick, a way to start a fire, toilet paper, and the faith that no matter what, you'll survive.

If you're happy with this, please don't read the rest of the post...

...In the interest of full disclosure, I feel the need to add one more lesson: put on your tire chains. That's what they're for. Don't let dad tell you that you don't need them or mom tell you, "I think you can make it with just chains on the back if we break a trail." Trust your instincts and chain up! Or else you might, say, get stuck. Then have the Rubicon get stuck coming to unstick you. Then have the truck get stuck while the Rubicon is winching out. And then have mom put the chains but no chain tighteners on the front tires and so when she drives to unstick the truck, the chains whip around and cut your brake lines. And then while you're driving the Jeep with no brakes, the unstuck white truck, the Rubicon, and the backhoe, the backhoe gets a flat tire. So you get to drive home in the snow and fog with the truck, the Rubicon, and the Jeep-with-no-brakes.

And if you're really lucky, the person sitting next to you will say, "Isn't this fun? What an adventure!" and mean it 100%.

Falahime

Falahime Blah blah blah, Wyoming, blah blah, massage therapist, details cars, used to sell beer, blah blah, hunts big game. That’s about all there is to me; I’m pretty simple.

Website - More Posts

Share
8Oct/0932

The unbearable banality of being Charles Johnson.

Vanderleun has dedicated this hilarious piece on CJ and his photography to R.S.McCain on the occasion of his birthday. It is Iowahawk funny, and as Gagdad Bob noted, "...might be the finest piece of insultainment I've ever read." [emphasis-ed.]

So, hats off to Vanderleun and Happy Birthday to R.S. McCain!

Share
8Oct/090

Is expansion of the house a cure for Congressional ills?

In keeping with Dan's anger and dissatisfaction at the current congressional state of affairs, I would like to present a tantalizing option to address that situation offered by NRO's Jonah Goldberg.  Essentially, he argues that the House of Representatives needs to be expanded for both equality in congressional district size as well as being a means to make the Representatives more directly beholden to the citizens from their districts.

In Federalist No. 55, James Madison defended the proposed Constitution’s apportionment clause despite its widespread unpopularity. The chief complaints, according to Madison, were that such a small Congress would become an “unsafe depository of the public interests”; that the districts would be too large and diverse for any politician to “possess a proper knowledge of the local circumstances of their numerous constituents”; and that such a tiny House would have the net result of attracting elitist types whose aim would be the “permanent elevation of the few on the depression of the many.”

So how big were these liberty-threatening districts? How tiny was the potentially oligarchic House? The districts had no more than 30,000 people, yielding 65 representatives. Under today’s apportionment system, the “ideal” congressional district is 700,000 people, with some districts reaching nearly 1 million. Montana, with a population of 958,000, has just one representative, but each of Rhode Island’s two districts has about 530,000 people.

There is, of course, an important principle here, and if all of Montana’s residents were black, it would be easier for everyone to see it. Montanans’ votes don’t count as much as Rhode Islanders’ — in fact, a Montanan’s vote only counts for about three-fifths of a Rhode Islander’s. That America’s slave population was counted by the same ratio under the original Constitution is usually cited, rightly, as one of the document’s greatest sins.

[emphasis-ed]

Read the whole thing.  Although it might be difficult to enact, or more accurately repeal the law mandating the size of the house, much like term limits, you never know what may catch on; especially with a population fed up with Congress as a whole!

Share

Switch to our mobile site