Divine Providence?

Check out this article about a man who says God ordered him to ram his truck into a woman's vehicle on a highway. He crashed into her vehicle while going more than 100 mph because God told him "she needed to be taken off the road."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28005693/from/ET/

The guy is undergoing a psychiatric exam.

Apparently, the DA does not believe in God. Why order psych exam for someone that is the vessel of God's word? Blasphemer! He must be ousted from office for doubting the word of God's messenger.

Or, that's my take on it since I'm supposed to believe GW is doing God's will, killing hundreds of thousands without having to undergo a psych exam. Interesting that GW can remove Saddam from the planet, and this driver was only trying to remove a person from the road. Yet, the driver somehow committed the offense that might be indicative of insanity?

I would hope that all the people that came out in defense of GW because he's a God-fearing man will also come out in support of the driver. The sheriff's spokesman even said God was with both of them to keep them alive after such a horrendous accident.

I anxiously await the response from the nut-jobs...

Karma is on a Roll

With a little bit of mayonnaise - dee-lish.

I had just settled in at a local watering hole to watch my Pack play the Vikings. A lady in purple walks by and yells "GO VIKINGS!". Not 1 second later, as she is passing behind me, I heard a loud thud/thunk. I turn to look and she's down on the ground. Apparently, she slipped on a wet spot on the floor. You do not want to anger the Packer Gods.

Within just a few days, karma sped up its delivery from 5 seconds to 1. Just think, if only cable companies could improve that much...

Karma Karamel

A bicyclist flies by in front of me today, tossing a Milky Way candy wrapper on the ground. I'm a little miffed by this. Someone once told me littering is bad, and I now believe it myself. My irritation did not last long, as the wind picked up and the bicyclist's hat blew off and onto the rain-soaked ground. It blew up to me, presenting me with choices:
a) pick up the hat and walk it to him as he circles back for it
b) let it go, laughing at the quick karmic payback
c) accidentally step on it repeatedly
d) cockpunch the bicyclist for littering, ignoring the hat incident
e) option (b) above, and write about it

Obviously, I chose (e), but wish I had chose (c).

The speed of payback reminded me of a time at a local bar years ago. A buddy of mine was making good time with a new acquaintance near the bathrooms. They were in plain sight of our table, so this amused us. Another buddy, we'll call him Rodrigo, decided to make a smart comment to them as he passed on his way into the bathroom. So, we watch as he leans in and needles them for promiscuous PDA and watch him walk directly into the women's room. 1/2 a second later he bolts out and into the men's room. One or more of us might have laughed so hard we had to go to the men's room.

114

That's my new way of ending the "nine eleven" era. For all the abuse of 9/11, and the defenses ("that's pre-9/11 thinking", "9/11 changed everything", etc.), I throw 114 or 11/4 out there as the new milestone date. If someone tries to continue the misguided thinking of the last 7 years, I will call that "pre-11/4 thinking". When they wonder what became of our country, I'll say "11/4 changed everything".

If we regain our status as an international moral leader instead of military leader, if we listen more than we speak, if we treat our own people with respect, if we treat the Constitution as something to heed, if we respect our fellow countries, we can point to 11/4 as the undoing of the post-9/11 crimes imposed by the Bush 43 administration.

With baited breath, I await Obama's actions in contrast to the death-spiral brought about by GW.

Change will still need to be managed - that will be harder than winning the election.

I Can Get An Iron, But...

I've been visiting hotels for 28 years. In all that time, I've never seen a shower/tub combo that anticipated the need for a good place for shampoo. There is no shower caddy. The soap dish is usually contoured and sloped to make sure the shampoo bottles slide into the tub. Would it be that much harder to have a little place for shampoo than it is to make a soap dish?

And where do you put the washcloth?

Idiot Costs Me Sleep

At 4:04am today, I hear my phone ringing. Normally, I wouldn't have heard it, but I got "lucky". It got me thinking that no one I know would call at that time if it wasn't an emergency. I pop out of bed and see I have 4 missed calls and one VM. All the calls were from a number I don't recognize. The message was something like "Micha-slur-ndy please please PLEASE call me back."

Great, a wrong number that doesn't recognize the voice on the VM message is not who he wants. The phone rings again from the same number and I answer.
Idiot: "Michael - it's Andy. I need you to come get me."
Pissed Off Bob: "This is not Michael."
Idiot: "Yes, it is."
POB: I'm not Michael, and there is no MIchael at this number."
Idiot: (mumble) "Fuc.." (click)

I kinda fall back to sleep grousing about the idiot. I wake find 3 more missed calls from the same number. How many times does it take for this clown to figure out I'm not Michael, he's got the wrong number, and he's not responsible enough to use a phone?

The only thing that gave me joy was that maybe the guy was in the drunk tank and had to stay over night because he doesn't know the number of any of his friends or family.

I sure hope he's not voting...

Some People

I was at my usual bar, when a old high school friend came up to me. I see him between zero and 2 times per year. We chat, he goes back to his group. A bit later, I'm enjoying some music on the jukebox when a woman that looked kinda familiar asks the bartender is she knows who sings the song on the jukebox. I overhear and thought I'd help out.

Me: It's Scandal.
Her: I think it's Pat Benatar.
Me: I know it's Scandal.
Her: I positive it's Pat Benatar.
Me: I put it in the jukebox - it's Scandal.
Her: Pat Benatar.
Me: I have the album at home, I just converted this song, "Goodbye To You", to mp3, and I put it in the jukebox. I'm pretty sure it's Scandal.
Her: No, I KNOW it's Pat Benatar.
Manager walking by: Oh Scandal...with Patty Smyth (but he pronounced it Smith).
Her: It's not Patti Smith.
Me: Scandal, featuring Patty Smyth.
Her: (wandering away) It's Pat Benatar...

Interesting - the more she was confronted with information, the more sure she was that it was wrong. She never contested that I DIDN'T put in the song, just that I didn't know who I had put in. This was extra funny to me since I had to type in "SCAND" to find the artist's available songs to download "Goodbye to You". I'm pretty sure I would have noticed I was typing in "PAT BEN".

A little later, I see the woman walking next to my old high school friend and remembered that she is his wife. That will be a funny encounter next time I see them together. I'm sure she did not recognize me then, but probably will in the future after that exchange.

A little more later, I put a Pat Benatar song in just in case the opportunity arose to point out what Pat Benatar sounds like...

The Market Works

My favorite pizza place (a block from my house) recently changed their closing hours. This, after a shrinking of their menu (sandwiches went bye-bye), seems odd. If you are struggling for business, being open less often merely reduces your payroll. And your revenue.

So, I know it takes 30 minutes to make a stuffed pizza, and 15-20 for an unstuffed. I conscientiously try to call with enough lead time to allow them to clean up before they close. But they didn't tell me the new hours. A few weeks back, I showed up late for a pizza only to find the employees EATING it. When I ordered the pizza, they asked for my phone number - the same one I've used for years - but never called to find out if I was on my way. Why ask for a phone number if you are not going to use it in that situation? When would they use it?

I was miffed, but got over it. Tonight, I was in the mood for a stuffed pizza, but was still ignorant of the closing time change. I called at 1:10 for a 30-minute pizza at a place that I thought closes at 2:30am, but in reality closes at 2am. I thought I was safe. Wrong. Only unstuffed was available. I groused a little, but ordered the thin stuff.

The more I thought about it, the more I was beyond miffed. I stroll in at 1:30:
Me: why I could I not get a 30-minute pizza at 1:10?
Stoner: we stop making stuffed at 1am (fully 1.5 hours before bar time).
Me: why?
Stoner: cuz we stop making them at 1am.
Me: I heard you, but that's not a why answer.
2nd Stoner: We need time to clean up.
Me: Then list your closing time as 1:30 so people know when you actually stop. Or 1.
2nd Stoner: You need to talk to Jim about that - he sets the hours.
Me: Should I call here during the day?
2nd Stoner: You won't get hold of him.
Me: Why?
2nd Stoner: He's never here.
Me: How would I get hold of him?
2nd Stoner (with Stoner's agreement): Don't know.

So, how nice of them to recommend that I talk to a person that, for all I know, doesn't exist. At best, he's just not reachable ever.

I'm just guessing, from all my previous experience, that as you get closer to bar time, drunks think more about that last unneeded meal of the day. Staying open until just before the drunks are loosed on the town seems odd. Might as well close at midnight.

This reminds me of a deli (also near my house) that had a nice selection of hot items for lunch. They kept them around until 5pm and then put them away. This bewildered me: the slowest time for food is between lunch and dinner. If you are going to not have food available for dinner, why have it available between 1 and 5pm? Or, if you have food still available at 5, why put it away? People on their way home might actually give you currency in exchange for food items in a semi-warm state. That place closed shortly after making that policy.

I wonder how long my pizza place will be there. Reducing access to the product seems like an odd way to stay in business.

In the day of 24-hour everything, these visionaries foresee a day when you can never find their product available. I guess that's one way of creating artificial demand: give the perception that your product is rare and hard to get.

Muddled Management Model
(updated minutes after original posting)

Ever work in a place where employees generally agree something should be done in management ranks, but nobody in the management ranks is clear who should do it? I call that the Muddled Management Model. Defined as:

* lack of clarity of roles prevents accountability
* no "change anxiety" since nothing really changes
* attempts to fix the model are unsuccessful since the people being fixed don't agree on who has authority to fix them.
* ample opportunity for micro-management, since no time is spent on larger issues
* same discussion, different meeting
* passion about work is discouraged in order to prevent passion from reaching the upper tiers

How does this happen? Lack of vision and attention to coordination of management actions are my favorite theories.

What can you do? Survive. There are worse places to work. And there's always a chance a new top leader will appear and clarify responsibilities.

Charter Can Suck My A$$

For the last 3 weeks, my home internet service (provided by Charter) has been painfully slow. Not only for my laptop, but for my niece's laptop, too. Due to Charter's unreliability on good days, I've learned the tricks for resetting the modem and my wireless router. This often helped for a very short period. After a while, I got tired of this and called Charter for my routine discussion with them. That was 2-3 weeks ago. We restarted the modem and router. They asked me to verify speed at speakeasy.net/speedtest. Resetting raised the speed from around 400kbps to around 4000kbps. Yay.

Of course, that didn't last long and we limped along for a while (mostly because I wasn't home much and she didn't complain often to me). I could get 400kbps through the router, but nothing with a direction connection from the modem. On Wednesday, I called again. Same routine, except the agent said speakeasy.net is meant for DSL and I should use speedtest.net. Great. The speed was not improved by the reboots, and I could not get direct connectivity. The agent concluded that I needed an upgrade of the router firmware and there was a problem with my comm port. And that it effected both laptops because of spyware because we probably had the same computing patterns. I pointed out a 19-year-old woman and a 43-year-old man probably weren't using the same pattern. Since the router is 7 years old, I thought I'd buy a new one instead of upgrading the firmware (the agent said he's not as rich as me to be able to afford that).

I buy the new router, and guess what, it cannot find connectivity to the internet. I take the router and laptop into the office and get it configured and prove that it does work and the comm port on the laptop works. Once I get home again, no dice. The old router barely works (400), but the new and direct connection to either laptop is a failure.

Today, I call Charter to complain about the modem. I explain the repeated pattern, the repeated calls. The agent tells me I've only called once about the problem. I point out that today is also a call... The Wednesday agent never logged the call. Bastard. We reboot and connect direct from modem to laptop. Speed was checked by speakeasy.net/speedtest (nice consistency) as 4800. I told the agent this proved nothing because that's exactly what happens every time before the speed goes away. I said that with multiple laptops, and multiple routers, the problem points to the modem. Agent says then it's the cable. I counter that 3 cables varying from 8 years old to brand new have been used and it doesn't matter. She countered that I need to leave the laptop connected to the modem for several hours/a good part of the day. Then they can monitor. But their records show the modem has never dropped. I pointed out my complaint is not between the modem and their server, but between the modem and my laptop.

I let her know that we was not listening to me, and she proceeded to tell me how I was wrong about my diagnosis. She kept talking even when it was my time, or she interjected in the middle of my talking time. I snapped and asked did I get connected to "Argument" or "Customer Service"?

The agents said that if I connect to the router again, I'd have to start all over by calling them and then leaving the laptop connected, or call the router's support to diagnose the modem problem. I asked why it's the router company's responsibility to diagnose Charter's modem problem? How could they do it if Charter cannot?

We went round and round about this for 15 minutes. I told her that my next step is to take the modem to Charter and find a new provider. I said "how about I check the speed again?" Guess what, speed was down to 2800 in a span of 20 minutes. And guess what more? I didn't connect the modem to the evil router. The agent got silent and said she had to test something. She put me on hold saying a tech supervisor was looking at the situation. After 10-15, I tested a couple times and it was down to 1635. Obviously, the modem is just fine...

The agent came back and said they are seeing connections being dropped inside the modem. I was stunned. How could it be the modem? I thought the agent(s) ruled that out. I thought it was everything else's fault but Charter's modem. I was nice and didn't say I TOLD YOU SO. The agent said they need to schedule a technician to stop by and look at the modem. The agent said she'd make sure the technician brings a modem. I said that would be fantastic.

The agent asks if there's anything else she could help me with and that was the end of the call.

No apology, no acknowledgment that I was accurate in my diagnosis. But, wow, her voice was that of a humbled person. I'm sure Charter's scripts clearly state never to apologize to a customer because the customer might feel they are entitled to something.

I'm out $60 and a butt-load of my time and we finally get to the heart of the matter.

Charter is a short-timer at my place. Now, which other evil corporation shall I get in bed with?

TP Barnum

Yes, that's TP, not PT. PT was the guy attributed with saying "there's a sucker born every minute". Well, the cheap-ass toilet paper lobby found their suckers in those that order the crap for campus buildings. Instead of normal toilet paper, all stalls seem to be converted to the non-absorbent, narrow, non-perforated giant roll encased in a plastic, high-security dispenser.

I'm sure the price per foot is lower, and there was some deal on the dispenser purchase, but what a classic case of penny-wise and pound-foolish. Using this new tissue (suitable only for gift wrapping) is an experience in inefficiency. Not only does it take more footage to do the job, but it takes more time. Time that some of us are supposed to be devoting to producing value for the campus. What are the odds that staff, spending more time in the closing moments of their deposit, will stay late to make up that time? Not bloody likely. Digging the roll-end out of the dispenser is a treat. Getting the right length on the first try is rare, so there are multiple attempts to get a sufficient thickness built up. Because the roll is narrower, to get the same volume as before requires more footage. Because its non-absorbent, even more footage is needed to make sure the effort was worthwhile.

So, how many complaints are lodged? Probably somewhere less than 1. Who wants to be known as the person having trouble taking care of business? And it's not like there's an anonymous comments card handy. Unless you want to write it on the TP since it's not suited for its intended purpose.

Wipers of the world unite!!!!!!

Election Strategy

So, I was chatting with my sister blogger at FemmeFare and it seems like Obama's special voting bloc is comprised of hipsters and young, occasional voters. McSame is counting on the racist bloc. So, in an effort to improve Obama's odds, how about we lobby to have hipster and campus bars closed on the Monday before the election, not opening until 8pm the day of the election so his bloc won't be nursing hangovers or drinking all day and forget to vote. Conversely, redneck bars can remain open all night long and into the day.

Think about it. Wouldn't it be nice to hear Republican faithful crying for 4+ years about how the election was stolen?

Courteous To Whom?

On a short 8-minute drive to work today, I saw two applications of courteousness that left me scratching the bald spot of my head. For those that don't know me, that's the top-most portion.

First, a long stop light had piled up two lanes of waiting vehicles for a couple minutes. A trash truck arrives at a driveway in the middle of the lines just as the light turns. I knew what was going to happen, and it did: the vehicle just short of the driveway lets the truck in. How nice. Except the inconvenience to a host of vehicles in both lanes (since the truck couldn't turn just into the near lane). The flow of traffic was disrupted and some of the vehicles that had "did their time" did not get through the stop light. The good of the one outweighed the good of the many... The trash truck could have pulled out after waiting only 20 seconds. And it would not have been stopped at the light, as it was turning right before the light. The "courteous" person had a negative effect on several drivers, and provided only a slight benefit to one.

I know, if we were all more courteous, this would be a better place, but it's not an absolute. This beneficiary of this kind act didn't need it: not struggling, not infirm or elderly, or an emergency vehicle. Have you ever sat behind the courteous person at a 4-way stop and wonder how the person ever gets anywhere? Two cars from each of the other directions go and you are still honking to get the courteous person to consider YOU. That's the best part of courtesy for these people: only those in front of you are worthy of it.

The second situation was a vehicle stopped suddenly to allow another vehicle to merge in. Unfortunately, another vehicle was speeding up to get through an amber light at the intersection right behind the courteous driver. The trailing vehicle had to lock 'em up to avoid rear-ending the nice driver. Sure, the trailing driver should not have sped through the intersection, but this highlights that we have responsibilities to all around us, not just the ones we see ahead of us. There are times to be courteous, and there are times to do the predictable thing for public safety purposes.

Grrrr....

Making a Difference

I was just in a meeting where many leaders of the organization were debating a topic, and this had me baffled. Not the nature of the topic - I got that part. I couldn't understand why they were even having the discussion. The heart of the matter was: one piece of data was not being reported in advance of the final status of that piece of data, and we need this data so we can make a difference in peoples' lives. The only problem is that the final data status shows it makes no difference whether the data came in early or not.

20+ people thought they made a difference, or could have, yet the data shows otherwise. Instead of facing the facts that effort did not yield results, the debate raged about getting the advance data. This led me to wondering why these people did not turn their attention to an area where they MIGHT make a difference. A couple theories came up:
A) It's easier to pretend (and even believe) you make a difference than to actually do it;
B) Gut feelings overrule data - the people KNOW they are making a difference;
C) It's easy to believe that I'M making a difference, while others are dropping the ball, so the data disguises the real impact of MY effort.

Examples:
A) Congress, those that love the status quo
B) GW Bush
C) Most activists

Obviously, I'm making some generalizations, but my point is we rarely monitor for the effect we hope to have. For those really want to make a difference, sometimes the effort is the reward and the result gets lost. For activists, I think it's a way to stay positive since results so rarely follow close to the activity. Think how long it took for: women's suffrage, civil rights advances, and legalized abortion. Think how long it's taken for universal healthcare, and we aren't there yet.

What I wonder: could activists have a faster and more profound impact if they monitored their effort-result propositions and adjust to increase results?

Obama 58%, Clinton 41% in Wisconsin

Close race, eh? What? You think a 17-point margin is not close? Well, the political prognosticators were calling it even one day before the primary. One poll had Obama with a 5 point lead, another had Clinton with the same. The margin of error was +/- 3% or so, so they called each a tie.

Graciously giving the benefit of the outside range to the poll that predicted Obama, it would have shown 51% to 39%. That's 12 points. That poll could not even entertain the POSSIBILITY that there would be a 17-point spread.

You know, maybe these pollsters aren't looking at the right things, or asking the right questions, or talking to the right people. Or, the pollsters too-confidently think they have great insight and don't inspect their own processes.

I think they are trying to influence the results and/or provide employment for themselves. Releasing any "data" will influence a few people to change their behavior ("why bother voting", "damn! I have to vote to change that!", etc.). Showing a race is close will more likely have the candidates and media coming back for more polls. But showing a race is lop-sided will make it look like there is no longer any drama. Fewer polls are done just to show a huge gap in opinion.

Exit polls were wrong in 2004, and pre-election polls failed in the Wisconsin Primary. Time to stop wasting our time on speculation. Actually, that time has long passed. Now it's time to run the pollsters out of town on a rail. But not before we poll the populace on whether we should first use tar and feathers.

Take It To Them

Why do the Dems allow the media and GOP to define the way we talk about national defense and terrorism? Those bold enough to say we should not be in Iraq are accused of being pro-terrorism (see Chris Wallace's recent interview with GW). What's the response? Am not!!! Wow, strong stuff.

Reminds me of the old trap question to ask a politician: "When are you going to stop beating your wife?" You cannot answer the "when" without admitting that you do beat your wife. The only way to respond is to avoid the trap by taking it to the questioner.

The Dems need to attack the media and GOP by asking why they are unwilling to consider solution s to fighting terror that do not include sacrificing the very Americans we want to keep alive. Why has the current administration surrendered the moral high-ground in order to prove they are morally superior?

King Pyrrhus of Epirus defeated the Romans twice, the latter in 279BC. Afterwards, he commented that one more such victory would utterly undo him. Hence, the phrase "Pyrrhic victory". How much more of this success at fighting terrorism with the military, with torture, with spying on Americans, can we take? What will we have left of what we cherished?

The question "what price freedom" does not mean "what freedoms do we give up to retain life". It means "there are some risks and costs to being free, but we understand and appreciate their significance". We do not compromise our ideals because of the risks to the citizens. Dictatorships and totalitarian regimes arise from the government's intention to protect, and advance the fortunes of, its citizens at all cost. Every country in which that has happened witnessed the approach, and the citizens confidently said "it can't happen here". And it did. The majority of 1990's Americans would not have foreseen the day of waterboarding and warrantless tapping of citizens' phones. Yet here we are. There are actually average Americans now convinced those are necessary activities.

So, what will we allow in 5 years if we continue on this path? We have yet another chance to stop the slide, but it cannot be done with "am not!!!!". It cannot be done by having more of our soldiers killed in the vain hope of outlasting "the enemy" in a war of attrition.

Hmmm...maybe the Anti-Choice crowd merely wants to create more future soldiers. Why is the potential life more important than that of the 20-year-old soldier? Let's take it to the media and the GOP and press them on their disregard for the lives of the people standing between them and the so-called enemy. Show the voting records of the hawks and ask them why they don't make personal sacrifices for the war effort? What have they cut back on so that soldiers in Iraq can have more supplies, more armor and a better chance of surviving? How many of these ghouls have seen significant increases in their personal wealth during the war?

Ask GW: "how can you smile and laugh in public when our soldiers are dying in Iraq because of your decisions? Have you no empathy for those in the line of fire?"

Take it to them.

Never Be A Condo President


Being a condo president is a thankful job, but still not worth it. Lots of responsibility, lots of time wrapped up, and all you can hope is that maybe, just maybe, over 50% of the residents will be kinda happy with what you do. Imagine how many things go wrong with a single-family structure. Multiply that by the number of units in the condo. That's about how many times you'll hear about issues in the building. And the same number of opinions on how it should be handled.

The only people that should be condo president are those that were forced to retire early and still have lots of energy and are looking for something to do. But not someone that just wants something to control, since everyone loses then.

Gotta Be On The Winning Side

I see this in politics and at work - people changing their vote or their opinion so that it is on the "winning" side. No candidate will win without votes. It starts with yours. In 2004, no one could tell me how Kerry got the nomination, other than to say "he had the best chance of winning". In the 70's, TV coverage of early voting in eastern states caused voting changes in western states. If a candidate was losing, people would vote for the opposition or not bother to vote. What the hell is wrong with people? Voting for the candidate you like sends a signal to other potential candidates. Voting for someone you don't like just to be on the winning side creates the pile of crap we call the 2008 candidates.

In the work place, people will change their professional opinion for fear it won't be chosen as the path. Dissent is the only way good decision makers can weight the options. Keeping an option secret guarantees it will not be chosen. If co-workers think less of you because your idea was not acted on, that's their problem, not yours. Speak up respectfully and things will be fine for you, and maybe even much better for everyone.