With all the stories of rude coworkers, bosses and even friends on Crasstalk, it sounds as though we are surrounded by impolite children.
Across my Facebook page this morning comes an article originally written by parents.com about manners that should be mastered by a nine year old. Aside from the obvious please and thank you, it talks about being respectful, helpful and kind.
You’d think I’d have seen it coming. I mean, there were subtle hints along the way, but I had a good deal going so maybe I just decided to ignore them. Either way, it turned into a fiasco that ended with me moving out of the apartment in the dead of night. Continue reading
When I was working as a nurse in obstetrics everyone would comment, “oh how happy your job must be!” And it generally was, until things went badly. And then it was miserable. Nothing prepares you for the death or injury of a newborn and the grief of the parents and staff that follows.
Physicians and nurses may also fear a lawsuit – but hospital staff are rarely criminally prosecuted for their actions or inactions, but not so of home birthing midwives. Slate.com tells the story of Karen Carr, a midwife in Virginia charged with involuntary manslaughter in the case of a newborn who died under her care. She has pled guilty to two felony charges as part of a plea bargain. Continue reading
This takes Soon Cow to a new level. Scientists are genetically modifying cows to produce “Human” milk.
Before you know it, we will alter cows to gestate our offspring.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Both the book and its two movie counterparts have many perceived villains. But, when you think about it, none of them are actually villains in the first place. Slugworth, the obvious culprit, is actually just a moral test placed in the children’s way by Willy Wonka. You could also consider Willy Wonka a villain; but in the end he is just trying to find an heir to his empire. The true villain in the series is Grandpa Joe.
Not having a mom on Mother’s Day is like being newly single on Valentine’s Day.
You don’t want to be that bitter person… but you are.
You don’t want to resent other women for having a mom to love… but you do.
You wish you could stop feeling sorry for yourself … but you can’t.
I want to start by saying the case of Baby Joseph is heartbreaking.
This little boy, only fifteen months old, is suffering from a terminal illness. He’s going to die. His Canadian doctors said if the boy was taken off a ventilator at at his most recent hospitalization, he would die. Those doctors refused to perform a tracheotomy on him. So the parents started asking doctors in the US for help. The Children’s Hospital in Detroit was among those that said no. SSM Cardinal Glennon Children’s Medical Center in Saint Louis said yes.
Continue reading
Gurrls, Kay Martina here to lay it out for you with value and style. My sisters and I are ready to pour the “T” for you. Let’s start with Miss Marsha Dimes.
Marsha Dimes here, sweetie, to tell you all about the big mess in the skies. Did you think about flying on a plane any time soon? Well, be sure to send a coffee up to the air traffic controller’s office before you board the plane, miss girl, because they are gonna need it. The FAA’s decision a while ago to cut staff has laid some eggs which hatched in the form of air traffic controllers sleeping on the job. Girl, I know how it is. There I was, working my corner for my usual afternoon shift and then along comes Big Daddy to tell me I need to work the Republican Party headquarters on the overnight shift. Shoot. A girl needs her beauty sleeps before she’s going to party with those freaks. But no, Big Daddy says they want a ladyboy and pronto, so off I go to the hotel, and there they are, slavering away like they do. Oh lord, they move so slow! By the time any of them were ready to do anything, I had fallen asleep in the corner. Just like those air traffic controllers! And don’t you know not one of those selfish Republican bastards would share a bump of coke with me? Hmph. Serves ’em right they had to pleasure themselves on my while I napped. Well, enough about me, I’m gonna throw it to Miss Selma Babiesforcrack.
Selma in the house! I heard over in the UK that more than 80,000 people are on the dole (that’s what they call the unemplerments over there) and the reasons they give for not being able to work are hitting the bottle too hard, being addicted to drugs, or being overweight. Hey now, Amy Winehouse has the first two and she’s got a job, mmmkay? She needs to go on the TV and tell these lazy mofo’s it is time to get off the couch and into the streets. About being overweight, honey, you know there’s always phone sex work. Lots of lonely menz need a friendly voice to talk to and you don’t even have to leave your house. You don’t even have to be able to read for that job, just gots to have a filthy mouth. Stay away from the Orbit gum and you’ll do fine. Now here comes Natalie Attired, and she knows a little something about an oral oopsie.
Yes! Miss Natalie is ready to tell you about Maria Topp, who visited her boyfriend at his house and tried to bite off his balls, honey. Lorena Bobbitt called and said hey, I already worked this corner, miss thing. I’m not sure if this is a statement, her trying to tell him he’s got no balls, but maybe that’s where she was trying to go with this. Then again, it’s hard to tell someone they’ve got not balls when your mouth is full of their balls, so maybe her plan needed a lil more thought before she just went for it.
Miss Frieda Fondle with some loser news for you people — failed actor and right wing nut job Dwight Schultz, former host of a podcast called “Howling Mad Radio,” reports that our President is going to force him to change his gender. Hmm. Let’s see. This child had a very minor part on Star Trek: The Next Generation in the 90’s. And after that? Um, he’s off the radar. So then he does his podcast and lord knows what that is but it sounds like something that Big Daddy charges a lot of money for. So mister freaky deaky says this: “Sometimes when I listen to this administration and I look carefully at the people who have been appointed, I don’t wonder whether or not someday they’re going to be knocking on the door saying, ‘You know, it’s time for your sex change. You got it. It’s in your health care bill. It’s going to make things a lot easier. I promise.’” I don’t know why he thinks that the health care reform bill, which the Republicans totally stripped down and made useless, is going to pay for anything. For reals, okayy? Shoot. You know I can’t get assistance for a pair of heels or a wig hat, I don’t see how this no-talent whiny chile thinks he’s going to get anything out of the feds.
Last up is Miss Sheesa Beehatch, talking about The Donald and his roadkill toupee. Lord, what’s under his wighat? He thinks he can make a run for President as a Republican. A few short years ago, he was all about paying off the deficit, raising taxes, taking care of people. Now, he’s a teabagger, a birther, and he says no more government hand outs, and seriously, no raising taxes on people who have money, mmmkay? I, Sheesa Beehatch, am here to call shenanigans on this. The Donald is just drumming up ratings for his loony fake celebrity show on TV. Carpetbagger. Shooz. He’s a Johnny-Come-Lately, and by that I mean I doubt he has come lately because look at him!
Okay, that’s all the “T” we’ve got for you today. Be sure to pay attention next time when we talk about crazy drunk Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and his shexsay dance moves. Oh shoot, hon, here they are right now.
Sources: BBC News, Yahoo News, OnTop Magazine
Why do you hate me?
I mean, you’re lucky I saw you. Happily cruising in the bike lane in along 34th Avenue in Queens, watching warily, as I usually do, for cars that don’t bother to signal before pulling out from parking, or people who open doors without looking, or drivers who think the bike lane is a passing or turning lane—you stepped out from between two parked SUVs, in the middle of block, not looking at oncoming traffic, holding the hand of a little girl who was clutching a wrapped birthday present.
Thank God I’d just gotten my bike tuned up for spring, complete with new brake pads. I can stop on a dime. You stepped forward. You stepped back. That made it difficult to ride around you.
So I said, “Excuse me.”
This uncorked a fury inside you. You screamed at me, throwing F-bombs like Mellissa Leo at the Oscars, yelling about how you had more right to be here than me, how I don’t own the street, how I need to leave him alone, how I should go and lose some weight (you lost five points for creativity there, buddy).
New Yorkers are angry at people who ride bikes. Let’s explore why.
First off, bike lanes take away room for cars. There’s no getting around that. Bike lanes take away driving lanes in some cases, and parking spaces in others. It’s interesting that everyone agrees we need to encourage less driving in the city, but no one wants to give up their cars.
That’s the least of the problem. Biking’s problem is that the major cycling advocacy groups have no clue how to win over the public.
Some suggestions:
Cycling advocates need to back cops when they hand out tickets for cyclists committing traffic violations. You want to be treated with respect, helmet-people? Well, start earning it. You’ve got to stop at red lights. You’ve got to yield to pedestrians. You’ve got to stop wearing headphones while biking. Make sure your bike is equipped with the reflectors and bells and lights required by law. Don’t argue with the police officer who stops you for not stopping at a light. She’s only doing her job. When a police officer is directing traffic, his directives also apply to you—not just the cars behind you. Don’t ride on the sidewalk. When the street is too dangerous, dismount and walk. When Central Park is crowded, slow down. This ain’t the Tour de France. In other words, act like adults.
Next: Use that record of law-abiding good behavior to demand from your city representatives that police go after drivers who make conditions unsafe for everyone—other cars, pedestrians, and cyclists. When was the last time you saw someone make a full stop at a stop sign? Stop for a pedestrian in a crosswalk? Use signals on a regular basis? That this driving behavior is allowed to continue unfettered in this city is outrageous.
Can we just get rid of Time’s Up and its ilk? There is a difference between persistence and aggression. Groups like Time’s Up push aggression, hoping to shove bike lanes and bike infrastructure into place. No one likes change to be shoved at them. Present. Sympathize with the opposition. And be willing to compromise. More can be done with talking than with fighting.
Don’t respond to fire with a container of gasoline. When the conservative population in Willamsburg got upset about a bike lane there—largely, it was alleged, because women rode bikes in “immodest clothing” (I wonder how my bike tights would be taken there) the hipsters organized a protest which involved them riding their bikes naked. Turns out it was too cold to ride naked, so the group largely backed out, but that’s not helping. Cyclists came off as a group of entitled brats with a complete lack of respect for everyone around them. That’s not to say the conservatives were right. But it would have been very easy ride onto high road, rather than the low.
Lastly, play nice. Let a car go past you. They’re faster. And heavier. Let an old lady cross the street. Remember this isn’t a race. Realize you’re not the only person on the road. And don’t yell back at peckerheads.
First things first: Nuclear Power is a tricky issue. I don’t expect to solve it in a short article and some snarky comments. Nonetheless, it’s one of the key issues confronting countries around the world as their existing power stations age and (in many cases) as their demands for energy grow, especially in developing countries like China and India.
Second things second: It’s important to look at this issue (like any issue) logically and not with emotional knee-jerk reactions.
What I mean is this. If I show you this picture:
and ask whether cats are cuddly and cute or vicious killers who must be controlled, you’ll at least be conflicted.
If I show you THIS picture:
and ask whether cats are cuddly and cute or vicious killers who must be controlled, I know your answer.
If I ask you what you think of nuclear power after you’ve just seen this:
well…..
But what if I showed you
and asked you whether you want a few hundred more of these going up around the world in the next decade, or whether you would prefer some power stations which don’t use coal or oil or gas and which don’t emit greenhouse gases?
For further amusing and scary information on the way this kind of emotional manipulation can be used in surveys, I highly recommend this classic Yes Minister clip:
Moving on:
What are the advantages of nuclear power? Well, that’s easy, we’ve cited some of them above:
1. No greenhouse gas emissions, or other noxious substances which contribute to acid rain, smog and other air pollutant.
2. Doesn’t use traditional fossil fuels and we don’t seem to be in danger of running out of uranium any time soon.
3. Already commercially viable and practical, and indeed very efficient, for use on the scale of providing power to millions of homes and businesses.
1 & 2 are the advantages over traditional fossil fuel power stations. 3 is the advantage over renewable energy sources apart from hydro power. Naturally, if we could just rely on solar power and wind power for all our energy needs, we would do it. It can’t be done yet. For now, it’s a 2 horse race. Perhaps we’re talking a stop-gap measure for only 5-10 years, maybe we won’t have renewal energy on a practical scale until vicious war halves the population. But every year, more power stations must go up around the world to meet demand, and we’ve got to decide what we want them to be NOW, not in 10 years (or after Thunderdome).
What then are the disadvantages?
1. If a nuclear plant goes bad, it will contaminate the surrounding land beyond habitability forever (until cleaned up, if it can be cleaned up, which will take decades).
2. If a nuclear plant goes bad, it may release radioactive particles into the wind and water which spread far beyond the immediate area, making the health damage more than just a localized issue.
3. Nuclear energy may not produce air pollutants, but it does create noxious waste of another kind which must be stuck somewhere. The more nuclear energy used, the more waste produced and the more secure faraway places we must find to stash the radioactive waste.
4. Risk of uranium fuel sales being diverted into weapons manufacture, or at “best” a “dirty bomb”.
To counter this, one could say: these are all manageable risks. If you don’t mess up running your nuclear plant (and hundreds of such plants around the world, for decades, have run without melting down), 1 & 2 don’t matter. if you can successfully store and partially recycle your radioactive waste (which, so far, has been managed by all nuclear countries), 3 doesn’t matter. If you keep proper security, 4 doesn’t matter. The problems with fossil fuels, on the other hand, cannot be stopped. Fossil fuels will run out, and when you burn them they release tons of air pollutants.
The trouble with that argument is of course, that ignoring Chernobyl, partial meltdowns and major leaks have occurred in the United States, the United Kingdom and now Japan. Few countries are not subject to major earthquakes or floods or other disasters which can affect the safe operation of plants despite all the safety precautions. And now we’re talking about rolling more of the things out in an era of lowest-price-wins construction tendering, in developing countries who haven’t had 30 years of experience to iron out the teething problems, in countries where a $10,000 bribe to divert some uranium isn’t chickenfeed but instead enough money to set a family up for life.
My personal belief is that most if not all nuclear power accidents have occurred with old technology (even the Fukushima reactor at the center of the present crisis is a very old one built to lower safety precautions than are now in use, and which was already overdue to be decommissioned). Countries can safely use nuclear power as a stopgap for renewable energy, and must do so to buy time to get greenhouse gas emissions down, but they should heed the lessons of Fukushima about doing anything on the cheap or taking anything for granted, and if wealthier countries need to chip in a bit to ensure others do it properly and don’t leave nuclear power plants to be built by the President’s brother-in-law and staffed by men paid $1 a day, then they should realise it’s in their own collective self-interest, less a fallout cloud sweep across their borders.
But on the other side, I can see how this will only create a permanent and huge hoard of nuclear waste, to be stored effectively forever, a long-term problem to be managed long after greenhouse gases have been brought under control, and that my idealistic dream of countries acting responsibly in this day and age is overly optimistic, and that fossil fuel power plants are a necessary way of playing it safe, the lesser evil to avoid the catastrophe of nuclear meltdowns.
Or maybe we should just accept global warming is inevitable and plan for how to survive that, not how to shuffle deckchairs on the beach while the tide is rising?
Your thoughts, upon reaching the end of this lengthy post, would be appreciated.