Wednesday, November 22, 2006

From the, this is cool, but it's going to get really annoying really quick department:

The door to the stairwell nearest to me at work has started to squeak.

It's squeaking about five notes of Ravel's Bolero.

This is slowly going to drive me insane.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

They've instituted this at work, as part of our health plan, in an attempt to get engineers to eat healthier. The idea behind it being, they buy the produce in at the warehouse, and then ship it out to our offices, which they claim will shave 5-7 days off the time between the food being picked and used (since it won't sit at the store). I'm not certain it's going to work for them, today's first delivery had five packages sent to an office of 300. However, my pickup order today, which helps cover my share of work for Thanksgiving dinner did afford me the opportunity to say something I've never said before.

"Yes, I guess these are handsome yams."

Monday, November 06, 2006

Well, tomorrow I'm supposed to vote or something. I'm trying to contain my enthusiasm. I've described this election to people using by paraphrasing Ron Burgundy. "What, the Democratic Party crapped in my refrigerator and then ate a wheel of cheese?" Because that's about how I feel, to wit.

Governor: I don't figure Ed's in any danger, so I don't have to feel any guilt about voting for Swann. Since all I was asking for in this election was someone to hold Rendell accountable on the casino deal in Pittsburgh, and it looks like that got taken care of by rumors of Harrah's getting bought out. (Harrah's was the expected winner until that point, despite the fact that their plan would have done two things, further congest the Station Square area, while leaving the rest of the city untouched by modern commerce, and prove their campaign contributions to Ed were well spent. Suddenly rumors of them getting bought appear, and Isle of Capri's plan looks bloody sensational.) Not that I like Swann much (Scranton would have been a better candidate, but he's dogged by allegations of independent thought), but since I figure Rendell's pencilled in as VP timber, and our LG's most notable action has been going to veteran's funerals uninvited and bringing cameras to apologize for Pennsylvania's role in the war. (My one encounter with her was at the Adios, where she had come to the people to say she had been misquoted... on camera. The oddest bit of this was my turning to the next table, seeing former KDKA radio John Cigna, and having the moment when the two of us both looked at each other to say, "Do you believe this? No, you? No. Didn't think so. Well, then enjoy the racing. You too.")

Senate: About three years ago someone pointed out that you could run a cardboard cutout against Rick Santorum and it would win. I just wish the Democrats hadn't taken that so literally. I watched Bob Casey's run for the governorship in 2002, and I wasn't convinced the man existed except as a place holder for his father (the former governor, and the guy who saw his name used, against his permission, to get two other people named Robert Casey elected to state office. I wish I was kidding, but that's Pennsylvania.) I'm now stuck with three interpretations of what he will do in the Senate, none of which are particularly flattering.
- Inanimate Carbon Rod. Non-threatening, and will do nothing.
- Follow Rendell's lead. That's not going to turn me on at all.
- Follow his father's example. That is be culturally conservative to the point of driving the Democrats nuts. If this is the truth, I'm stuck between voting for a hard-core Catholic conservative who only will apply himself to social issues, or Rick Santorum. This is the Ron Burgundy moment for me: "I'm not even mad. That's amazing!" How can they manage to come up with a candidate that I can reasonably safely ignore Santorum's social positions, and consider it on a purely economic vote? (Please note, I don't want the Democrats driven nuts either, there's no spite involved in this. It's just if the results on one part of the platform are going to be identical, and counter to what I want, those need to be thrown out.)

I guess I'm ticked because I thought the plan was working out last year. Everybody (or at least I and Ed Rendell) figured Barbara Hafer was going to run on the Democratic ticket. She's had a better record of office holding than Casey, for a longer time, is a former Republican (she swapped in 2002 or 2003 when Kerry ran because she's friends with Teresa Heinz-Kerry), and has not been nailed on any corruption things. (Note: neither has Casey, and well, neither has Ed.) Nice bipartisan win-win. But she decided not to run late in the cycle. And now we're stuck with this. At this point, abstention is looking good. After all, do I like Santorum, not really. Do I like Casey, no, not at all.

Downticket: I hope someone is putting the ads up on YouTube for this year, because Pennsylvania has basically been more instructive for training a pitbull than informing the public.

Democrat ad, only slightly simplified: All you have to remember in this election is that I'm the Democrat. That is the Republican. [Image of elephant] Remember, I'm the Democrat, that is the Republican. [Image of elephant] You don't need to care who I am but I endorse this message.

No discussion of issues, no candidate mentioned beyond the small print. I think the elephant logo is running in sixteen districts. I'm more concerned because I think there were a couple places where people were running unopposed. I'm actually nostalgic for good old fashioned hideous black and white photography, and morphs into (Bush/Ted Kennedy/Mussolini).

I figure I'll just vote for whomever hasn't attacked anyone yet. Yeah, that probably means I'm just voting for the unopposed.