Take One: .2 hours equals taking the laundry out of the washing machine and placing it in the dryer

Take Two: employing someone to take the laundry out of the washing machine and placing it in the dryer, at $10.00 an hour; no longer .2; at that rate would take two hours, so, let’s even it out at $20.00 for that job

if I am motivated and can get the laundry out of the washer and into the dryer in two minutes or less, I can then sit down and bill at $200 an hour, which grosses me $90.00 an hour

Again, it appears worth it for me to do the housework myself

Are you kidding me?

Really, Thanksgiving is a time for giving thanks?

Why is it that then most of us have turned it into a microcosm of all that is wrong with the world?

Here we go, pre-Thanksgiving….

how does it line up in your house? in your family?

Got to tell you, don’t know if it works this way in your camp, but in our family, holidays start the period of war……….who is doing what and who isn’t? Who is cooking, who isn’t? who is paying the food bill? who hates who? Did she wear the wrong dress? did she not bring the right dish? did he not sit on the couch and be able to spit out the right football stats?

Where are we and what are we doing? That’s all we want to know, how have we come to the consequences of our collective decisions?

What is the role of complaints on daily interaction?  Do they serve to free someone of their problems, or are complaints simply a precursor to enabling?

I don’t know.  I never have.

I know that when someone calls me and launches into their problems, they have not taken a moment to first think of what perhaps mine could be, nor do I share, because to be frank, they don’t want to hear.

So, what makes them think I want to hear their complaints?

Admittedly, there is much to learn, let alone figure out how 3.0 of the Web will work.

Here’s a term:  Google Bombing.

We read an interesting article, how Google is used by politicians or would-be politicians.

Reportedly, “democratic blogger Chris Bowers” started the advent of “Google Bombing”.

“A Google bomb thankfully has little to do with the kind of bombs that are dropped in Iraq. It is an attempt to influence the ranking of a Google search. Google’s algorithms rank a page higher if the sites that link to that page use consistent anchor text, or visible text in a hyperlink. If a large number of sites link to a page in this way, then the page has been Google bombed. The result is that a Google search of a politician or a proposition will return unfavorable or more favorable information in the first few results, depending on the bombers’ preference.”

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ZDM/story?id=2626377

We get it now, (we think), the tolerated use exception to copyright infringement.  Why tolerated?

It brings views.

Views bring sales.

Sales bring money.

None of us can live in 2006 without money.

The long and the short of it is that Esquire Magazine, endorses Menendez.

If we understand correctly, it is that Mr. Kean has spent his efforts saying Menendez is corrupt, and Esquire has pointed out how the Prosecuter himself pointed out how Mr. Menendez helped the investigtion.

We are not quite sure how that balances on the scale of justice, none of us, save Mother Theresa, are free of mistakes (yes, there are others, we use Mother Theresa as a shining example); and perhaps, it should be noted that Mother Theresa herself would not be so interested in yesterday as in today and tomorrow.

Do we want politicians who make their foundation somene else’s alleged shaky past?

The last post, regarding Kean and Menendez, asked a very reasonable question: is the Republican party free of alleged corruption? Mr. Kean extols the negative list of Mr. Menedez’s alleged actions; yet, we continue to ask, what does Mr. Kean positively propose to do for N.J.?

While we live in this country of divided lines, it is not enough to point out the bad that has been done or has been perceived to have been done by certain candidates, it’s time to start saying what a candidate truly can accomplish.

Fireworks went off in Sugarland, and that is a place not recently known for the pure sweetness of its politicians…………………..

Local papers report: “Hudson County native fights to keep seat in Nov. 7 election” (Hoboken Reporter: ok, ok, gotta get deeper and closer to the source in this, gotta get into Hudson County and see what the Hudson County Resident is going on about)

Where does Menedez live now? Hoboken.

Where was the garbage to be? Jersey City.

Ok, “Hudson County Resident”, one point for you. So why then is the forecast that the Republican hold is slipping away? Could it be that despite Wikepedia statistics on Mr. Kean, that somehow the statistics and smear campaign are still not enough? That even garbage smells better?

Menendez is credited with things too you know, more money for more trains, or more rails, same difference, (separate but equal, right?), and hey, he got to help get his hands on money for Port security…I don’t know, but I think that ranks. And how about helping those Senior Citizens, (and yes, they apparently get younger all the time, regardless, they are “Seniors”), get health prescription assistance?

Did you know that some of Hudson County’s Democrats have gone to jail on corruption charges? Kean believes this is a big campaign issue. Is that the same as saying the Republican party is free of criminal and/or corrupt politicians?

and this site: http://www.bluejersey.net/

can you shed some light?

Believed to be the first reported criminal case in America, the Associated Press is reporting that a father is on trial in Georgia, having been accusued of circumcising his daughter and the mother discovered it a year later. The parents are not now married.

So not so fast, the Dad an immigrant from Ethopia says he did not and would never do that.

Is this a case of he said, she said? A consequence of ill feelings following divorce? Will anyone ever really truly know?

What is at stake is in the mind of America, a young girl went through a brutal and creul process. Regardless of who did this to the young girl, will the impact of culture prove to mitigate what is otherwise considered to be, in this country, a horrific crime?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/27/female.circumcision.ap/index.html

Law has always been a distinction between words. The English language is replete with words that sound the same, are spelled the same, but woe for you if English is not your native language.

So is civil union truly the same as marriage? If it is, why is NJ having such an issue and giving the lawmakers six months to find the proper words?

A civil union is a legal partnership agreement between two persons. They are typically created for same-sex couples with the purpose of granting them some benefits that are found in marriage. Civil unions were made to try to appease same sex couples. They are given very limited advantages compared to married couples. The amount of advantages vary within the state but their rights aren’t nearly equivalent to married couples. Some jurisdictions, however, also allow entry by opposite-sex couples. Unions that are similar to or synonymous with civil unions include civil partnerships, registered partnerships , and domestic partnerships. Some jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, have unions that on the paper are similar to marriage, while some only allow minimal reciprocal benefits. Many people are critical of civil unions because they say it creates a separate status that’s unequal to marriage. Others are critical because they say it is introducing same-sex marriage by using a different name.

A marriage is a relationship between or among individuals, usually recognized by civil authority and/or bound by the religious beliefs of the participants. The fact that marriage often has the dual nature of a binding legal contract plus a moral promise can make it difficult to characterize.

A married couple can be called each other’s spouses, and spousal is used as a legal term for the marital relation. A royal married couple are consorts.

In one form or another, marriage is found in virtually every society. The very oldest records that refer to it speak of it as an established custom. Despite attempts by anthropologists to trace its origin (and test the hypothesis of primitive promiscuity), evidence is lacking.

In Western societies, marriage has traditionally been understood as a monogamous union, while in other parts of the world polygamy has been a common form of marriage. Usually this has taken the form of polygyny (a man having several wives) but a very few societies have permitted polyandry (a woman having several husbands). [1]

source://en.wikipedia.org/

The question remains: separate but equal? And is there equality if there is a separate “class”?