October 15, 2009

Random Thoughts

Schadenfreude alert: I'm feeling it for all the young people who voted for Obama who are going to have to pony up for health care. Let them make t-shirts: "I voted for Obama and all I got was higher health care premiums and a surge in Afghanistan". A bit wordy, I know. Would only fit on obese youngsters who no doubt will eventually be taxed punitively for their weight. Rue the irony. Sucks to be around when the empire's fallin' 'eh? (On the other hand, it may be better to be young than old when it's falling.)

Only in the la-la land of Big Gov't would it be logical to extend a huge government program (Medicare) via cuts in that huge federal program (i.e. the famous 'waste, fraud and abuse').

Proof that people my age are coming into media power arrives in dribs and drabs, like the fact that Fox & Friends played Cold as Ice by Foreigner and had the lead singer on the show. Two of the shows hosts are in their mid-40s. Then there's also the fact that there are two new best-selling books about the 1975 baseball season: Game Six, which is about the sixth game of the World Series, and The Machine about the Big Red Machine of that year. I'm figuring the two writers are in their mid-40s.

One of the things the Internet gives us is the ability to look at personal phrases and see if anybody else ever thought them. Such as the alliterative phrase if non-standard English "scrimping and scraving". Indeed they have.

Amy Welborn tweets/twitters: "Going to B&N for change of scenery." Ahh... I can picture retirement now: a netbook, Bob Evans, free Wi/Fi, and me writing and reading away while eating pumpkin pie*. Or at Barnes & Noble sipping a civilized cup of coffee and drinking in the bookish atmosphere.

Michelle Malkin called Ariana Huffington a "provocateur", which seems a bit like Bob Marley calling someone a pothead. Although in fairness to Michelle she's no Ann Coulter. I have to give credit to Ariana and some of the others on the left who are criticizing Obama for staying in Afghanistan. I figured the Left's anti-war talk would dry up like eczematic skin after Obama got elected.

I always recall Jeff Culbreath of "Stony Creek" linking to an article about how women wearing pants leads to more lust in men than those wearing skirts. I thought that was crazy talk - it seemed counterintuitive considering that skirts show more skin and the old saying goes "skin to win!". Certainly if the skirt is above the knees then they are more lust-inducing, but personal empirical evidence shows that indeed females wearing form-fitting pants (and what other kind are there?) are 57.2% more likely to induce lust.

* which reminds me of the ol' song John Anderson song (speaking of those in their mid-40s) Swingin':
There's a little girl, in our neighborhood.
Her name is Charlotte Johnson, and she's really lookin' good.
I had to go and see her, so I called her on the phone.
I walked over to her house, and this was goin' on.

Her brother was on the sofa, eatin' chocolate pie.
Momma was in the kitchen, cuttin' chicken up to fry.
Daddy was in the backyard, rollin' up a garden hose.
I was on the porch with Charlotte, feelin' love down to my toes.
and we were swingin' (swingin')
yes we were swingin' (swingin')

Little Charlotte she's as pretty as the angels when they sing.
I can't believe I'm out here on her front porch in this swing,
Just a swingin' (swingin')


Tom said...

When presented with some concluding statistic, my first inclination is to say, "Show me the data."

In this case, I should probably make an exception.

TS said...

A fine call as there'd be a 57.2% chance it'd be a source of scandal. (Tautology alert?) :-)

Tom said...

Okay, see, I can't not now think that this means the data shows a 0% likelihood of induced lust with skirts. And should I be asking for variances, or confidence intervals? Just what is your methodology, sir?

If you were to guess from the above that statistical claims of uncertain provenance play no small role in my professional life, you would be right.

I have on a filing cabinet in front of my desk a home-made motivational poster, featuring this image and the caption,

"I ask again, where is your data."

TS said...

95% confidence interval. :-) That image reminds me that one of my co-workers has the phrase "let's torture the data until it confesses" up in his cube.

Darwin said...

Must one really decide between attractive women in skirts and attractive women in pants?

There is beauty in diversity, I say.

TS said...

I agree Mrs. D! Diversity is good. I've taken a keen interest in your discussion over at Betty Duffy's place. Enlightening.

I tend to think the whole "dress modestly" cause is overrated. We see where it leads (burkas) and that's just wrong and unCatholic. That said, I do think at Mass modesty is particularly appreciated.

Darwin said...

Actually, this is Mrs. D, so my interest is more direct and aesthetic.

But I agree that was an interesting thread the Mrs was on. :-)

I suppose we do make things hard by being fairly similar, and one of the few co-blogging couples in the cath-o-sphere.

TS said...

I'm prenaturally confused by where Darwin starts and Mrs. Darwin ends, or vice-versa, so I'll just say that whoever was talking at Betty Duffy's place was the one I saved for next week's "Spanning the Globe". (Although I do wish bikini guy would wear a prairie dress! :-))

Darwin said...

Argh. I'm an idiot. Mean to write "this is Mr. D" and somehow wrote "Mrs. D".

Perhaps I just have a strong subconsious desire to confuse you.

This is Mr. D.

The one on Betty Duffy's thread was Mrs. D.

Sigh... They weren't kidding about the two becoming one.