Sunday, February 24, 2013
- CAIR-Missouri: (Muslims want to) prosecute internet speech against them. POOP! (iamacitizen.wordpress.com)
- Fat-Free Bacon That Won't Wreck Your Diet (weightloss.answers.com)
- #Bacon Brownies Are Coming To #CPAC2013 (missruth1021.wordpress.com)
- Homemade Maple Bacon Cupcakes (carlahanaco.wordpress.com)
Thursday, February 21, 2013
There is definitely a new winner in town this year for all of your home heating needs. That winner is a state-of-the-art pellet stove from Quadra-Fire.
Why is a Quadra-Fire pellet stove so freaking cool? Put simply, it is a better way to heat your home efficiently than the alternatives. First, Quadra-Fire pellet stoves offer the radient heat of a wood burning stove -- perfect for days where cold has invaded your family room! Second, a Quadra-Fire stove is more efficient than a woodburning stove. It is also cheaper -- by as much as 53% -- than a propane alternative.
Even better, if you act right now to buy a Quadra-Fire pellet stove, the IRS will pay you! That's right, the IRS will give you a 300 dollar credit on your taxes. This is because another advantage of a pellet stove is that it's eco-friendly; it reduces your carbon footprint, as seen in the infographic below.
Still not convinced? Well, maybe this will push it over the top for you. Through February 28, 2013, Quadra-Fire has authorized me to give away a free notebook to one lucky winner from the readers of this blog. All that you have to do is leave your email address and a short sentence about why you would like to own a Quadra-Fire pellet stove in the comments. If you're selected, I will email you instructions to receive your free notebook.
Don't wait and check out the links today! Also, follow Quadra-Fire on Pintrest, Facebook, and Twitter.
- Chinese Medicine Basics: What is Qi? (jonahewell.com)
- Qi Qi (sippingnpaintinghampden.wordpress.com)
- How wireless charging can drive near-field communications growth (networkworld.com)
Friday, February 15, 2013
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Here is my first comment:
OMG! Get the tin foil hats everyone! There's a conspiracy afoot!
Do you seriously believe that thousands of doctors and researchers, no matter how much money they're getting from grants and companies, would tell people to vaccinate their children if convincing evidence supported the idea that the vaccines were unsafe? Really? All of them across the board?
These doctors and researchers have kids. They're people, just like the rest of us. Most of them got into medicine because they want to help people and save lives. If you really think that all of these doctors and researchers are so heartless and cynical that they would just let people take vaccines while knowing that they are unsafe or cause autism, then lady ...you have problems.
- Teenagers behind biggest measles outbreak in 18 years (telegraph.co.uk)
Saturday, February 9, 2013
A few days ago, I wrote a blog entry titled "Clara Jeffery Is a Bitch". I originally wrote it because I was irritated by some comments that Jeffery, an editor at Mother Jones, had made on Twitter about the death of an ex-Navy Seal who was ambushed and murdered at a firing range. In her tweets, she seems to be taking ghoulish delight in the death of this guy and has no problem using his death as a platform to make snide comments about gun rights supporters. Here exact tweet read:
So much for good/talented guy with a gun being able to stop mentally ill guy with a gun.When I read the tweet and some articles about the story behind it, I fumed a little, wrote the blog entry linked above and posted it, and largely forgot about the incident. At least, I forgot about it until I checked my traffic feed the next morning and realized that, much to my surprise, my article had been retweeted by a contributing editor at Vanity Fair, Kurt Eichenwald. Even better, the article had provoked a flame war between Eichenwald and Jeffery linked here.
Without digging through the blows of a tedious (is there any other type?) Twitter flame war , the highlights of my blog post centered on Jeffery's objection to the word "bitch". She really didn't dispute anything else in the article, other than my use of that word. So, let me respond.
To my understanding, the word bitch is not all that offensive. True, it's not typically an endearing term, but it's a pretty commonly used term all the same. In my experience, people (especially girls) call each other bitch all of the time. Sometimes they even do it jokingly, as in a recent experience when one female friend of mine playfully called another female friend of mine a bitch for something she did to an ex-boyfriend.
To Jeffery's mind though, it seems the use of this term to refer to her and her actions was sexist. She even equates it's use with other pejorative terms like "cunt" and "slut". Without writing a diatribe about how I feel words have way too much power over people in our society, let me just say that I would never call someone either a cunt or a slut. This is not because I really think the words themselves are evil -- they're just letters on a piece of paper. However, I think the ideas behind them are troubling.
As for the word slut, I frankly don't care how many people a woman sleeps with. I don't care how many people a man sleeps with. As long as I don't have to step over them on the sidewalk on the way to work, it's none of my business.
I would also never call a woman a cunt. I just don't like this word. Also, I don't understand the insult behind it. It's similar to me screaming down the street at someone, "You're such a vagina." No woman is a vagina, though all but a few genetically anomalous women HAVE vaginas. Further, whether or not a person has a vagina is largely inconsequential to how I view that person, possible dating scenarios excepted. Having or not having a vagina doesn't affect a person's disposition typically -- or how idiotic this person's tweets are -- so, why would I even bring it up in a debate?
On the other hand, bitch is a perfectly legitimate criticism. As I understand it, the word bitch has come to mean any woman with an ill-temperament or bad personality. To me, this describes perfectly describes my perception of what Jeffery's personality must be like in person when I read her tweets. I suppose I could have titled my post "Clara Jeffery is an Ill-tempered and Hateful Person", but the term bitch has a certain je ne se qua. So, I called her a bitch.
I stand by that analysis. Clara Jeffery, you're a bitch.
Furthermore, based on her reaction and pseudo-offense to my calling her a bitch, I can also conclude that she is a major drama queen. I mean, nobody spends that much time and energy arguing someone down on Twitter over being called a bitch or any other insult. When people insult me on Twitter, I just block them and move on with my day. I don't devote dozens of tweets and several hours to calling them out on it. I have better things to do. So, with that in mind, let me point out the following.
Clara Jeffery, you're also a drama queen. Get over yourself. Go find a hobby or something.
As a side note, according to my traffic feed about 500 people have read my original analysis of why Jeffery is a bitch. That's probably 490 more people than would have read it had she not started the flame war on Twitter.
So, thanks for the free publicity I guess.
- Clara Jeffery is a Bitch (futuretwit.com)
- Kurt Eichenwald doesn't give a damn about offending anyone, apologizes for not calling Clara Jeffrey a bitch (twitchy.com)
- Mother Jones editor dances on Chris Kyle's grave to argue for gun control (twitchy.com)
- When Twitter attacks: how trolls use social media to silence (sfgate.com)
Friday, February 8, 2013
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
In response, Jeffery tweeted the following:
So much for good/talented guy with a gun being able to stop mentally ill guy with a gun.I just wanted to say that Clara, you're a bitch.
I am not sure exactly where I stand on gun control in this country. It's a complex issue. I do that a reasonable solution to reduce gun violence would be nice. I don't find most of what is being talked about by gun control advocates to be reasonable.
However, just the idea that someone would tweet out the sentiment that Jeffery tweeted ... it tells me everything I need to know about her personality and disposition.
So, Jeffery, the next time someone dies in a horrific car accident, are you going to make some snide comment like, "I guess seat belts really don't save lives after all?"
There is a line for good taste. Jeffery crossed it. She's a bitch, and she needs to be called out.
- Mother Jones editor dances on Chris Kyle's grave to argue for gun control (twitchy.com)
- Left Uses Kyle Murder to Push Gun Control (breitbart.com)
- Observations (genomega1.wordpress.com)
Friday, February 1, 2013
Mazda turned to the farm to power its latest race car entries at the 2013 edition of the Rolex 24 Hours of Daytona.
Three Mazda 6 sedans were on the starting grid for the annual endurance race that went from January 26th to January 27th. Each Mazda 6 was powered by a new Skyactiv-D clean diesel engine. The race car version of the Mazda 6 used a bio-diesel fuel capable of producing more than 400 horsepower and 450 lb-ft of torque from the engine.
Going to the racetrack offers a chance for experimentation and the fuel used in these Skyactiv-D engines was no exception. The bio-fuel powering these race cars was an organic goop made from a mixture of chicken fat, beef tallow and pork lard.
You read that light. The same ingredients found in a typical fast food hot dog are now a fuel source for race cars.
It makes for an interesting moral dilemma if, for example, you encounter a vegan race car driver. Do they refuse to race in a car using animal by-products as fuel? Do vegans or vegetarians boycott watching the 24 Hours of Daytona altogether? Do any racing fans hail from that dietary demographic in the first place?
The funny thing is the slaughterhouse inspired bio-fuel burns much more efficiently than typical gasoline. When injected into a Skyactiv-D engine, it burns 25 to 30 percent less fuel than a gas-powered race car over the same distance.
Louisiana, which is famous for find all sorts of novel uses for animal parts, is home to the refinery that produces this unique bio-fuel. Dynamic Fuels produces 75 million gallons of synthetic diesel each year made from a blend that includes Tyson Foods animal by-products. Dynamic Fuels is planning to sell this fuel to the public eventually at $5 per gallon.
When this bio-fuel hits the market, you can contact Reedman Toll, a top Philly Mazda dealer, to test drive a Mazda 6 fueled by the remains of chickens, cows and pigs.
Who knew farm animals could feed your family and fuel your car at the same time? They have all sorts of wonderful uses that give vegetarians everywhere unending nightmares.