Caffeine consumption can affect the heart of unborn children throughout their lives

Here's a story that my significant other will not want to hear about.

Basically, consuming caffeine while pregnant risks creating life-long heart problems for the child.

Considering the degree to which some people consume soft drinks and Starbucks, we could be in for some serious heart issues in our future populations.

Good rule of thumb: Consume no unnecessary chemicals while pregnant. And no, caffeine isn't necessary.

Caroline Kennedy for Senator.

I'm in no position to have anything to say that could either hurt or help Caroline Kennedy in her bid to assume the interim appointment to New York's senate seat.

What I will say has more to do with personal attributes Ms. Kennedy possesses. I would also like to shine a light on the attitude of some in the press and in politics that is highlighted by this article questioning Ms. Kennedy's qualifications.

I'll do the latter first: Where do all these idiots get off thinking that they are somehow entitled to the Senate seat? Can someone please point out to me where it says in the Constitution that one must have paid dues in politics in order to receive the award of an interim appointment? I have serious concerns about such an attitude in a Democracy where an expectation is encouraged that one gets a political position based solely on time put in. It's contrary to American politics and this notion should be shed or at least pointed out as anathema to the American polity.

That being said: Ms. Kennedy has every qualification necessary for the office she seeks. With many of the idiots who get elected I think she'd bring a dose of idealism and integrity to the office. She would not owe anyone for her position, save the governor.

On to the former issue of her qualifications: Ms. Kennedy is smart, down to earth, and capable. After meeting her once, I can say from personal experience that she's without artifice and exactly the type of personality we need in elected office. She's honest and without hidden agenda. I don't think anyone can top her when it comes to being the ideal personality for the job. Unlike other senators, she carries herself with a modest self-assurance instead of an in-your-face narcissism.

I think Caroline Kennedy is the best choice because she is seeking the office for the good of our country.

Foreclosures tied to job losses.

About a year ago, many were blaming the rise in foreclosures on borrowers taking on more house and debt than they could afford. Typical of blame the victim mentality.

Now, it appears that job losses are responsible for 50% of all current foreclosures.

Who're you gonna blame now, when the victims of foreclosure are twice victimized, once by the job loss and then next by the loss of their homes and stability?

I've said it before: We must focus our attention on job creation and domestic infrastructure to stop the bleeding.

It's getting worse. Scrooge has come home to roost this Christmas.

Tesla may have sold us all an electric Edsel. Hope not

Those of you who know me obviously know that I'm a big fan of the Tesla Roadster.

Well, it seems that Tesla has fallen into the same trap many entrepreneurs find themselves in when building capital--Tesla has given in to making excessive claims for reliability and range on their Roadster.

Shame, shame, shame.

Here's video from youtube that shows what I mean.



I'm saddened by this. Tesla may have built false hope for an electric car all of us would want, but that we'd probably get pissed off at on the first trip.

The video is a little long, but I encourage you to watch it through.

False prophet is an idiot, but not as bad as those who believe him

In yet another stunning example of morons in the media...a self-proclaimed prophet in Utah says that Obama will never be president because riots will start before Christmas and that Russians will use it as an opportunity to nuke the U.S.

I don't know what's worse, the so-called prophet or those who listen and believe him.

I have a challenge for anyone who believes in prophets: If they are dead wrong, then you have an obligation to ignore them. Failing to do so makes you more of an idiot and you deserve all the ridicule that I'll heap upon you.

Here's why the "prophet" is wrong: Obama's approval rating is over 60% right now. Who the hell is going to protest? The other 40%? Not hardly.

I suspect the prophet is engaging in a little wishful thinking, informed in large part by his rural constituency and some latent racism prevalent in the rural and un-educated masses.

Fortunately, the rest of us don't need some nimrod who claims to have access directly to God telling us stuff that can't possibly be true.

If I'm wrong then it won't matter, but I'm willing to guarantee that I'm right. How can I guarantee that I'm right and the good prophet is wrong?

God rewards those who use their heads, not idiots who exploit fellow morons for some small measure of social power.

Keynes to the rescue...again. Out of the wilderness and into our hearts.

I've said it for a time now that we get out of our economic mess through government spending on infrastructure.

The New York Times offers a story about how the last time we faced such a big crisis and what economist got us out of it.

I love it that the laissez-faire types were all down on Keynes before the market meltdown, but now it's Keynsian policies we need to cure their profligacy.

Keynes had it right when he said government must step in and spend in order to overcome banks' and the public's fears about spending liquid assets (cash).

Now, it seems the old is once again new....the worm turns.

Iceland is a microcosm of the excesses of capitalism.

The story of Iceland's fall from Euro-Econo-Powerhouse to a country on the brink in such a short span of time should be instructive for those who advocate unfettered economic growth.

When the primary driver of an economy is unrestricted growth fueled by capitalism's only motivator, greed, then boom and bust cycles are the natural consequence.

Here's why I think unfettered growth is a problem for capitalism:

1) Growth is great when there is an unlimited potential.

2) When the potential reaches limits, then the contraction of the economy creates significant, broad-scale, economic disruptions.

Why do those issues create a problem for capitalism?

Issue number 1 is a fantasy. It is more wishful thinking than reality because unlimited potential is a myth. In essence, it sets people up for failure.

Issue number 2 sets the stage for socialism. Socialism is not always bad, it helps people weather a storm, but it can stifle future capitalistic development.

I've said all the above to say this: For capitalism to prosper and provide its fruits, then it must be tempered with some government oversight.

Government oversight is really the only way the public can put brakes on exploitation and the ever-present boom and bust cycles that unfettered capitalism brings.

We're now seeing a correction in the excesses of capitalism. It's not that capitalism is bad or wrong, just that too much of anything without some adult supervision results in imbalance.

Bettie Page passes away. Great loss,

It's a sad day. Pin-up icon Bettie Page passed away in California after suffering a heart attack.

You'll remember Bettie Page as the black haired pin-up who often did bondage photos in the 1950s.

For those of you interested, Bettie grew up in Nashville, Tennessee. She attended a local high school, Hume Fogg graduating salutatorian of her senior class. She was reportedly upset that she wasn't top of the class because that assured her a full scholarship to Vanderbilt.

Bettie did receive a full scholarship to George Peabody College (now a part of Vanderbilt) and graduated with a teaching degree. She taught school for a short time (I would have loved to been her student...). Bettie wasn't just a pretty face, she was smart and academically inclined, albeit with a Southern drawl.

Betty was from East Tennessee, but left because of an abusive father.

She married a few times and finally wound up in New York as a secretary. She did some modeling and finally met the man, Irving Klaw, who turned her into the icon we know today.

Time has a few photos of Bettie here.

Bettie was queen before plastic surgery, before botox, and before photoshop. She was a rare bird.
So long Bettie.

Too much cleanliness is a bad thing.

I follow the George Carlin philosphy on cleanliness, namely, if I get poop on my hands I wash, but otherwise I don't.

Carlin pointed out to humorous effect that when growing up he swam in the East River where people dump sewage. He swears he never got sick and the experience made his immune system stronger.

Well, it seems George was correct. Studies suggest that too much cleanliness actually makes allergies worse.

I couldn't agree more. I have a friend that carries Purell and washes incessantly when in public. It doesn't seem to work because he gets sick more than anyone I know.

Me, on the other hand? I get a cold or the flu maybe once every 3 years, if that.

I'd much rather pass up the regular dose of disease and if that happens because I don't sanitize myself to death, then goody for me.

Glad to be in America with an expansive view of liberty

When I read articles like this one I thank the stars that be that I live in America.

Why?

In America, wing nuts have the burden of proving why something should be banned. Those of us who advocate for an expansive view of freedom as opposed to some moral watchdog's limited notion of free speech breathe a sigh of relief.

America, despite all her faults, requires that wingnuts expose themselves to the public square and potential ridicule in order to push their agenda.

Transparency can never be underestimated as a valuable tool for freedom.

Intellectualism returns to the Presidency.

All I can say is: THANK GOD!

Pre-election prophecy about Cindy McCain's disdain for the working family comes to pass

Here's confirmation of what I warned about in the lead up to the election.

I told the story of Cindy McCain, as a shareholder of Anheiser-Busch, supported the sale of the company to foreign company InBev.

I warned that Cindy wasn't interested in helping working families since she supported the buy-out. Buy-outs must be paid for so job cuts are necessary to help finance the borrowing necessary to complete the purchase.

Well, I have been proven correct.

So, the McCains are not for the working families of American, just their own bottom line.

Shinseki choice highlights Rumsfeld's and Wolfowitz's ignominy

Here's a notable piece about General Shinsheki possibly getting a job in the Obama administration.

The General behaves with integrity and character and that serves to highlight the utter lack of integrity and character of his former boss Donald Rumsfeld and the latter's neo-con butt buddy Paul Wolfowitz.

Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were nothing but scumbags and they deserve the ignominy their loser asses will get.

Thank God I never voted for the man who so sacrificed his obligation to the country when he hired such incompetent boobs in the first place.

Whackos on parade: Fight to prove Obama is really foreign-born. Morons

Here's a story about pretext racism.

A group of whackos is attempting to derail Obama's presidency by having the Supreme Court declare him ineligible since he was born outside the U.S.

Every time someone points out the evidence showing Obama was born in the U.S., it is dismissed in favor of the conspiracy.

It's very difficult to respond to a conspiracy theory, not because the conspiracy is true, but because the conspiracy relies on faith, so any evidence to the contrary is dismissed, while evidence supporting the conspiracy takes on added importance.

Here's a problem for the conspiracy theorists: If they manage to win (which they won't) then John McCain has a similar citizenship problem, viz., he was born in Panama.

Between Obama and McCain, Obama has the stronger claim to U.S. citizenship since he was born in the U.S. to a native-born mother.

Family is what works for you, not some stupid ideal.

This story on Live Science reminds me of a discussion I had a few years ago with a friend of mine.

This friend is the same one who goes with the political winds. At the time, he was a Bush supporter and was advocating for the "traditional family" as promoted by the religious right.

His argument was that it's better for a child to have both a mother and father in the family unit. He noted that children are much better off that way.

Of course, I objected saying that was bullshit because a child just needed at least one loving parent and the particular shape of the family was immaterial.

He kept to his guns. I pointed out that I grew up in a single parent household and for the right to impugn my single parent upbringing was rather insulting. I, for one, don't see myself as deficient or a scourge to society because my father wasn't around.

He tried to demur, but it was too late to remove that foot from his mouth.

All this points to the utter stupidity of imposing ideals onto people. People rarely meet ideals, but that's what makes us so interesting---we don't fit into neat little conceptual boxes.

Idealized concepts are like cotton candy: Their cool to look at, but they are too much when you get into it.

Bush: Neo-Hooverian

This op-ed sums up pretty much what I think about Bush and the economy.

Bush has been true to his trickle-down philosophy in the bailout. He chose to provide financial help to the marge corporations, the well-connected, and the well-heeled (although not so well-heeled as well-connected currently).

The problem with trickle-down economics is that it doesn't work. The current economic fiasco should finally put the nail in the social darwinism of corporate welfare.

The best approach, in my opinion, for bailing out the economy should consist of pumping money toward the lower end of the socio-economic level.

Why would this work better than the current screw-up?

The poor are less likely to save and more likely to spend any resources directed their way. Considering that one-third of our economy depends on consumption, we should encourage that consumption by giving resources to the those most likely to consume.

Who would that be? The poor.

The trickle-down approach has failed and it cannot nor should it be resuscitated.

Of course the rich will have to suck it up and actually participate in this economy that has provided them with such largesse.

Bush isn't a neo-con, but a neo-Hooverian.

Let's give it rest.

AFFECTATION ALERT!!

One of my biggest pet peeves is affectation.

What is that? Well, it's where someone presents themselves in a way so as to appear somehow superior, when in fact they're being full of crap.

(You'll note that I'm watching television)

While watching "Everyday Italian" I noticed the host mispronounced a couple of words. I wouldn't normally think it a big deal except that her mis-pronunciations were obvious and intentional.

I really like this show and I think the host has an engaging style, but she got on my nerves with her pronunciation of the words "bechamel" and "pancetta".

The host is Italian, so of course the argument will go that she probably knows how to pronounce "pancetta". I disagree. I speak English and I mispronounce words all the time, so for a native Italian who grew up in SoCal, I think she's being affected.

Anyway, she pronounced "bechamel" like this: bee-sha-meel.

That's obviously incorrect. It's pronounced: bay-sha-mel.

It's real simple.

She pronounced "pancetta" like this: pahn-chee-ta.

That's also incorrect, even in Italian. It's pronounced pahn-chay-ta. Look it up.

This little diatribe may qualify me as a prig or an idiot, but I don't care. It's the little annoyances that I hate.

Scientists develop a way to eliminate batteries by using sound waves. Awesome!

How's this for a cool idea? Powering small electronic devices by harvesting sound waves from the environment.

Using plain old basic research and good old fashioned scientific principles, scientists have managed to devise a plan that could virtually eliminate the need for batteries.

The benefits are enormous: No toxic waste, no buying of replacement batteries, lower overall cost of operation.

Cool stuff. I want it now...

Britney Spears documentary a vacuous piece of nothing.

My significant other has this morbid fascination with reality television. So, when she decides to watch some trainwreck on T.V., I'm forced to watch it also.

Last night, MTV aired the Britney Spears documentary. I use the word documentary loosely because it had few features of a documentary; it resembled a p.r. video.

Here's what I learned about Britney from Britney:

1) Britney is sad.

2) Britney hates the paparazzi.

3) Britney loves her kids.

4) Britney likes to drive around.

5) Britney wants to go out without being followed by cameras.

6) Britney likes to work.

That's about it.

MTV chose to up the stakes before the show by displaying a text prologue saying "Nothing was off limits, what we see is the real and raw truth."

That load of bullshit was designed to give people the impression that we'd be watching a real nitty-gritty, hard-hitting documentary where all warts and foibles would be on display.

The problem with nothing being off limits is that someone must actually ASK the appropriate questions. No one did.

Now, don't get me wrong. I feel sorry for Britney. I think she's been unfairly maligned as a result of her life circumstances.

This so-called documentary was nothing but a load of crap that provided no more information than what was already out there.

In essence, a total waste of time and footage designed to be an hour long commercial for Britney's record label.

MTV was punked.

They tried to convince their viewers to buy the bullshit to cover their butts for passing off some asinine puff piece as real television.

Can't we go back to the days when MTV was actually about music?

Opposition to gay adoption is opposition to child welfare--plain and simple.

Here's an article that highlights the real agenda behind the push by some groups to deny homosexuals the right to adopt children.

There is absolutely no evidence that children suffer any harm from growing up in a family consisting of a homosexual parent. ZERO!

To advocate keeping a child in foster care just because some people have issues with homosexuality is to put one's agenda ahead of what's best for children.

Any group that advocates denying homosexuals the right to adopt to protect the children is nothing more than bigotry and is not really in the best interest of the children.

Too many children need loving and stable homes. To ignore a whole population of willing and capable potential parents on the grounds of sexual orientation is morally outrageous.