Probably not thinking what you think I’m thinking.
I've begun taking night classes at the local community college. Last night as I was walking across campus toward class, I passed a young woman who was wearing a shirt baring her midriff. Dangling just below her shirt was a small silver pendant which caught the light of the setting sun and flashed as she walked. Well, of course some shiny, flashing object is going to catch my attention and I spent a moment wondering if it was attached to a belly button ring or perhaps suspended from a chain around her torso. That was when I realized I couldn't actually see her belly button. It was hiding under her shirt. My next realization was all the flesh I was seeing must then be between her belly button and the top of her pants, which—damn, her pants are slung low—was a remarkable amount of exposed flash, especially for Utah, and that was awfully brazen of her to be so provocative in her dress, but she is rather pretty, so what the hell: "You go, girl."
The brain being what it is, this all went through my mind in a second or two. It was long enough, however, for the young woman to notice that my gaze was focused on her midriff. I finished my analysis of her bare flesh and glanced up at her face to find her wearing a knowing sort of smile. I went ahead and smiled back all the while thinking, "Oh, honey. If you only knew."
Mob Psychology
Why is it so hard for people to comprehend that driving bumper to bumper is counter-productive?
Hero retires citing stifling liability and rising insurance costs.
It's probably not an unreasonable assumption that most of you have seen The Incredibles. The plot rested on the fact that superheros had been sued out of a job by people who resented that their rescue had not be affected with zero injury and/or property damage. I'm sure we all giggled at a seemingly absurd premise. I mean, come on, who would really sue Superman?
Today over at Gay Orbit, Michael Demmons posts his recollections of a first hand account of conditions at the superdome he recieved from a couple who managed to flee New Orleans. In his post a couple of observations were made and questions raised, namely:
- Margaret and George heard a train moving outside the Dome on a regular basis. If it could go places, why couldn’t they be in it? The temp in the Dome was about 93. Surely people could survive a couple hours in a boxcar.
- Cargo planes were flying supplies into New Orleans and leaving empty. Why?
- Margaret, several times, had volunteered to help out with people who were hurt. Every time, she was denied because she had no paramedic training. All she was asking to do was to help clean wounds and maybe lend a hand. Permission denied.
- Fisherman, sailors, and others were coming into New Orleans with their boats and offering to take people out of the city. They were being denied because a.) FEMA had it under control and b.) Two “qualified people” had to be on each vessel to act as a rescue boat. What a crock!?
Much has been made of the bureaucratic nightmare that is FEMA. To sane people using common sense with a modicum of decency these events seem appalling and nearly criminal. Not allowing people to provide simple service seems beyond callous. But think about it people. What is the mentality of the bureaucrat? C.Y.A. Red tape exists for one purpose, to make sure that no one can come back and blame (sue) some functionary for dereliction of duty, malfeasance, negligence, ad nausea. Who's fault is red tape then? Is it the bureaucrat's who's just trying to protect his job/ass(ets)? Or is it the fault of a wildly litigous society, always anxious to blame someone else for their woe and extract their pound of flesh?
So cargo planes were leaving empty. Why? Um, no seat belts? The pilot flies through some rough air and someone gets bruised, broken or even killed. Do you think the fact that he was trying to rescue people from Hell is going to stop some opportunist from suing the company operating the aircraft? Nope.
How far fetched does the premise of The Incredibles sound now?
Tragicly stupid, but not surprising.
Apparently the levees built around New Orleans were not designed to withstand a hurricane the size and strength of Katrina.
However, [the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers] noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and couldn’t handle the ferocious winds and raging waters from Hurricane Katrina, which was a Category 4 storm when it hit the coastline. The decision to build levees for a Category 3 hurricane was made decades ago based on a cost-benefit analysis.
OK. You build a city on the coast, seven feet below sea level and you are going to skimp on man made structures designed to keep the water out? Cost benefit analysis? Are you kidding me? Well, I hope the millions you saved a few years ago makes you feel better about the billions you're spending now to clean up the mess.
Reminds me of a sign my typing teacher had up in her classroom back in high school. "If you don't have the time [or money] to do it right, when are you going to have the time [or money] do it over?"
This is a priceless bit of commentary:
...it is in the interests of the political classes to keep their pork and it is in the interests of the antiwar left to frame this as a choice between Baghdad and New Orleans. That should not be the choice. The choice should be between the highway bill, ag subsidies and the like. The Don Young Highway should at least be renamed to the "Go Suck Eggs New Orleans Highway."
Hat tips to: Balloon Juice and Andrew Sullivan
