Although I’ve been working at this location for several months, I guess now it’s finally open.
Today Kim and I saw the film 28 Days Later. It was pretty cool… very creepy. Why is it worth mentioning here? Oh yes, it continued the streak of films with man ass. Probably also worth highlighting… this movie went another step forward and included full-frontal male nudity. I knew this movie would be scary, but I had no idea…
I don’t know what you were doing last night, but I was home on the computer watching the Red Sox win 25-8. I think you know it’s a bad sign when the first inning takes 50 minutes, you use three pitchers, and the opposing team scores 10 runs before a single out is recorded.
Other notable and hilarious statistics: Johnny Damon was a homerun away from hitting for the cycle in one inning.
It’s articles like this that really do get on my nerves. I hope this article didn’t intend to be a serious piece of non-biased journalism (at least it points out the fact that the source is a “liberal think tank”). The article basically says that a new government policy is going to cost 8 million people their overtime pay.
A few notable quotes:
…it would cost 2.5 million salaried employees and 5.5 million hourly employees their right to overtime pay.
The proposal could also cause workers to work longer hours, since the Labor Department doesn’t put any limit on the number of hours per week an employee must work
Now, if someone could point out where in the constitution it says people have a “right” to overtime pay I’d love to read more about that. Also, if someone can point out where under these new regulations it says employers CAN’T continue to pay overtime, that would be interesting to see too. Oh yes, and personally, and I hope for each person, I don’t want or need the government telling me how many or few hours I can work per week.
What is really happening here -I hope- is that we’re seeing less intrusion into our lives from the government. Not to drag the minimum wage argument in, but it’s virtually always the case that when the government keeps it’s nose out of what an employee and employer agree on for wages, the number of jobs available increases. When the government (who is supposed to work for us) stops telling the private sector they have to pay $X, the market can agree on what the correct price is (typically lower) and can afford to offer more jobs based on supply (of employees) and demand (for the products/services). The wages settle to equilibrium and employees will continue to gravitate towards jobs where the demand is higher.
The article itself is picking up on a possible outcome of a given policy and calling it a negative thing simply because some people may get paid less. Well let me phrase it another way: government is undoing the wrongs that it has done. It is stepping back and letting the private sector determine what is right and fair.
The supreme court ruled a Texas law banning sodomy unconstitutional.
I support this decision, as well as all other decisions that keep the government off people’s asses (badump-cha!).
Nothing like a little drug-induced research…
A police spokesman said: “The suspect and victim were trying to demonstrate their belief that this type of protective vest could withstand a knife attack. Obviously that was incorrect.”
This weekend I saw The Hulk, and also re-watched Old School on DVD. What do these movies have in common? Well, the same thing it seems virtually all movies have in common these days: scenes involving a naked man’s ass.
I don’t know or understand if this is a trend in film, but there was a while there where somehow every movie I saw in the theatres had a scene like this. Solaris, 8-Mile, About Schmidt, Narc, even the f’n Matrix Reloaded. I don’t know what audiences these scenes are appealing too, although I do have a few guesses.
I just received this link from Handspring via e-mail. The new Treo 600 does look very cool. I’m still up in the air on what the optimal cell phone/PDA combo will look and feel like. The tradeoff between having a big screen and a compact device seems to be insurmountable.
The idea for Fox’s new show “For Love or Money” has an interesting enough premise that I’ll probably watch it. It meets my two criteria for a solid reality TV show: a high likelihood of sex and a good shot at tears. The two most entertaining things to see on reality television is someone having sex, and someone crying/fighting (and if they took place at the same time, the show would probably be award-winning). Although I still think the best combination of these two elements was on the short-lived Love Cruise, probably the second best display was on Temptation Island (the original) which seems to be surviving the test of time.
This show probably won’t be as good when it comes to crying and fighting, but for a million bucks you’d better believe there will be some sex. Oh wait, maybe there will be a chance at some fighting:
The network on Monday said it would continue to air the reality series “For Love or Money,” despite discovering that its star hid the fact he left the U.S. Marine Corps after being disciplined for groping a female officer.
…Campos rushed into the woman’s room and grabbed her breasts. The woman said she struck Campos in the groin with her knee, causing him to enter the woman’s bathroom and vomit.