Bring the troops home! No, wait...what?

Remember Obama's campaign promises to "pull the US Military out of Iraq"? I know that many people were hailing him as the wonderful, magnificent guy who would Get Us Out Of War, and Get Us Out Of The Middle East, and Bring The Troops Home.

...

YEAH, RIGHT.

Obviously those people didn't think about the fact that Iraq does NOT equal the Middle East...even though the rest of us were thinking "um, hey, world's a big place, so's the Middle East...he's just gonna move 'em around."

Guess who was right?
Obama's planning on "pulling out of Iraq" and send more troops to Afghanistan instead. Here's the first round...and there's more to follow.
HOW does this man have a high approval rating? Seriously? I weep for our country.

Weekly Webness - the Uncyclopedia

Everyone's seen online encyclopedias. Heck, one of the most popular sites out there is Wikipedia - a user-editable online encyclopedia.

Now, thanks to someone's delicious sense of humor (actually, a LOT of someones), we have the UNcyclopedia. Sort of an...anti-Wikipedia, if you like.
It's also user-editable, but...well, check it out.

Their page on Shiny Things is a fun place to start.

Synodical Nonsense

The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod is currently in dire financial straits. They are removing missionaries from the mission field due to lack of funding...and yet, the Synod has decided that it's absolutely necessary to spend thousands of dollars on a frivolous lawsuit trying to "protect" a trademark that they abandoned in 1999.

In reality, what they're doing is trying to restrict Issues, Etc. from saying anything that's not Sanitized By Synod.
Please, anyone who's reading this and is a member of the LC-MS, go here http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/trademark/ and let the Synod know what you REALLY Think of this.

Heroes

see more puppies

An interesting take on the gun-control issues

Randy Cassingham of "This Is True" has a blog, where he posts comments, long essays, and so on related to his "This Is True" feature. I thought this weeks' was especially interesting, since he elaborates on the gun-control issue.
He gives a good (if brief) history of guns in the United States, explains WHY we think the way we do about guns, and what the Constitutionalists (and the Supreme Court) have ruled regarding the Second Amendment to the Constitution. He also gives a few thoughts on "guns in church" and WHY the NRA won't accept gun restrictions. He uses the smoking bans as an excellent parallel to the "slippery slope" of gun-control.

Check it out; it's definitely worth the read.

Weekly Webness - iGoogle

Have you tried iGoogle yet? You create a username (or login with your Gmail username) and you can customize your Google page! Themes, plugins, widgets, and even an RSS feed reader is available to you. Check it out - and check out the cute puppy themes.

Happy whatever day!

As seen on the Straight Dope Message Board

"If your place of worship could serve as a zeppelin hangar and has smoke machines, light shows, soft rock music, a coffee bar, a jumbotron with satellite uplink, and a noticeable lack of theology, then you are engaged not in worship, but in a suburban horseshit social club/fashion show. Here's a nickel. Go find a real church."

Amen, brother. A-freaking-men.

Weekly Webness - Cranky Customer

The flip side of the Customer Service coin should be told, too: Cranky Customer. Check out some of the tales of BAD customer service.

You can subscribe by email here, as well - or by RSS feed.

Mythbusters - blowing crap up

Love this video. Unfortunately I don't get the code to embed it so you'll have to follow the linky.

Linky.

Weekly Webness - Not Always Right

Fed up with stupidity? Ever worked in Customer Service? Want some funny stories? Then Not Always Right is the site for you. They feature stories of people in Customer Service demonstrating that the customer is NOT, in fact, always right.

Added bonus: if you like the site, you can get the stories emailed to you!

In The News

In the news today, they discussed the Obama Spending Bill. Apparently, the Senate has given up de-porking the one that came to them from the House, and is now going to vote on one THEY came up with instead, that didn't have Obama pushing it.
Obama has made a statement saying that he's not averse to pruning out the unneeded stuff in the bill, but that his "stimulus package" must be approved soon because after all, his priorities are to quickly get tax relief for the middle class and job creation out there to us, the poor American Sheep.
Scuse me, Mr. Obama, which part of your stimulus package is about "tax relief for the middle class" or "job creation"? Is it the National Endowment for the Arts rider? The global warming research? Carbon-capture demonstration projects? No, it's not about tax relief, job creation or even "economic stimulus" to the American public. It's about railroading a bunch of pet projects through with the TITLE of "economic stimulus" and hoping that the Congress will be so afraid to look bad by not passing a bill labeled "Economic Stimulus" that they'll agree to anything. But, as one Congressman said, "The American People are figuring out what this bill is. It's not a Stimulus Package - it's a Spending Package."
Yes...yes we are.

Also in the news, they're also voting to delay the digital-TV rollout another 4 months. Evidently some people aren't prepared yet, so Congress wishes to give them 4 more months to prepare for it. Because, y'know, the MEDIA BLITZ of "get your digital converter or get cable or a dish by FEBRUARY OF 2009" for the past year and more wasn't enough. Apparently if they have been ignoring the warnings, news reports, and heck text scroll and crawlers plastered all over their favorite shows EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. for the past year, giving them four more months to ignore the crawlers will make a huge difference, they will see the Error Of Their Ways and purchase a converter box.
Two thoughts on this:
1) Television is not a RIGHT. Get over it. If you can't watch your precious precious Oprah and Maury after the switch, then go buy a damn converter. Missed out on the coupons? Tough weasels - you had over a YEAR to apply for one of those, too. Sucks to be you. Listen to the radio. I'm sure Bob and Tom will fill all your intellectual needs.
2) The people who are not prepared by now, absolutely won't get the message in another 4 months. Some people simply won't bother until they are forced to by circumstance. Why screw up the people who are counting on those extra frequencies to be available in two weeks just for the sake of people who have been willfully ignoring the warnings, news stories, crawlers, etc. for the past year? The extra 4 months won't make a difference to them - they'll continue on, fat and happy, until their analog signal goes away. And then they'll either do something about it or learn to live without.

Relationship Bank

I was just reminded of this, and since it was so helpful I thought I'd post it so I didn't lose track of it again.

Kev once told me about a concept he'd run across called the "Relationship Bank" (or Emotions Bank, whatever). The counselor likened interpersonal relationships to banks:
Every positive interaction / emotion with someone meant they made a "deposit" of Good Feelings in their "Relationship Account" with you.
Every negative interaction / emotion with someone meant they made a "withdrawal" from their "Relationship Account".
Obviously, we need to keep our accounts in the POSITIVE with other people we want to get along with.

Granted, it's rather a simplistic -- and slightly mercenary way -- to look at relationships on the surface, but I think it's actually a solid and valid way to evaluate your relationships with people.
Have I been "depositing" or "withdrawing" lately from my friends? If I'm "withdrawing", have I "deposited" enough prior to this that I have a healthy balance to draw on? If not, maybe we're not as close as I thought, and I should be more careful about my "withdrawals" from them.
And that other person over there, who's doing nothing but "withdrawals" from me - do I know them well enough to allow this? Do they have enough "on balance" to do that, or are they taking advantage of my good nature? (Okay, stop laughing now, it's a hypothetical question, not one I'm asking myself. I said STOP LAUGHING.)

It's interesting how many "friends" really turn out to be nothing of the sort when evaluated this way - especially those made over the Internet. How much do you know about these people, anyway - these faceless, pseudonymous people who type at the world in general on their computer?