I'm dealing with only 90% of my colon and 5 feet of intestine left while trying to maintain a cheery face/attitude on a everyday basis. Which, I've decided, on most days, I do. At the beginning of my new life I did not realize how grateful I would become for the opportunity to continue living and will see what the Creator has in store for me. * *BTW: shitz* - Just another way of saying crap, (noun), and is used to express anger or frustration or confusion or excitement etc... Take your pick
I can't believe the last thing I wrote was around the first of the month and that was weight statistics. I am tending to totally forget about this place and just blithely go on about my business doing basically nothing. I finally joined the "tweeter" band wagon. I guess I really do like my new phone. Hell, who would have thought I would become part of the I-Phone generation..... 2 funny. We also picked up an I-Pad 2. Sort of funny.. here we are, both of us in our 60's, and the wife is sitting there doing pintrest of the Ipad and me tweeting on the Iphone while watching tv at night. Damn politicians any way plus those friggin housewives... damn Andy any way. Hell, teenagers got nothing on us ! ! ! !
Ran across a funny article via Drudge.
Woman enters half-marathon, ends up winning full marathon by mistake
Last Sunday, Meredith Fitzmaurice had planned to run the half-marathon at the Run for Heroes in Amherstburg, Ontario. She hoped to do it as a test run. Then she was going to try to achieve a Boston Marathon qualifying time at a race in Detroit next month.
But on Sunday, she missed a turn for the half-marathon route, and ran the full marathon. And won. By accident.
DEER TRAIL, Colo. (UPI) -- The people of Deer Trail, Colo., will vote
in a special referendum Oct. 8 to decide whether the town of about 550
will issue hunting licenses for drones.
The proposed ordinance was written by and is being lobbied for by Phil
Steel, who said Tuesday he is concerned about the federal government's
efforts to set parameters for drones to fly in U.S. airspace, possibly
at lower altitudes than manned aircraft, The Denver Post reported.
"My intent is to encourage people to shoot back," Steel said. We've
lost our patience.
The Federal Aviation Administration has officially frowned on that
concept, warning shooting unmanned aircraft could result in
prosecution.
Steel has already started selling unofficial licenses that have a spot
for the Deer Trail mayor's signature. So far, he's had 60 buyers,
mostly from out of state and as far away as Australia, the Post said.
Steel's proposed ordinance would require the town, located about 55
miles east of Denver, to issue licenses for $25 per year to anyone who
speaks and can read English. License holders would be authorized to
shoot at drones flying below 1,000 feet over private property during
daylight hours.
Steel, who has set up Professional Drone Hunters Inc., a company he
says will be a vendor for governments issuing licenses, said Tuesday,
"It's a question of not whether licenses are going to be sold, but a
question of whether the town is willing to accept free money."
A wave of retirements by senior federal employees has begun rolling across the government as aging baby boomers who held on to their jobs during the economic downturn are increasingly calling it quits.
With retirement accounts on the rebound, many veteran workers are finding little reason to remain in government, especially at a time when agency budgets are being slashed, workers are being furloughed and morale is tumbling.
Graphic
About thirty percent of all executive-branch workers will be eligible to retire by 2016.
The number of executive branch employees retiring this fiscal year, which ends next month, is on track to be nearly twice the total who retired in 2009, according to government figures. And the rate looks certain to accelerate. In 2000, about 94,000 people age 60 and older worked for the government. Last year, the number was 262,000.
The exits are helping to bring down the size of the federal payroll and — where funding is available — could afford agencies the chance to hire younger workers with crucial skills. The retirement of clerks could clear the way for experts in cybersecurity and information technology.
But among those leaving are people with specific expertise that cannot easily be replaced — for instance, nuclear physicists at the Energy Department and a large cohort of air traffic controllers who were hired three decades ago. And with most hiring on hold, the departures are already reshaping agencies that cannot replace most of the retirees or mentor and train new executives.
There is no mandatory retirement age for most civilian federal employees. But retiring is looking ever more attractive, employees say, with their salaries frozen for three years by Congress and public service demonized by many politicians.
“It finally got to the point where I got disillusioned,” said Richard Swensen, 60, who retired from the Agriculture Department last year after 38 years. “You get weary of the bureaucrat-bashing.”
* * *
Today’s federal civil servants are much grayer than they were a decade ago. Their average age is 47, four years older than the overall workforce.
Retirements have fluctuated since the mid-1990s. The numbers surged when the Clinton administration offered early retirement incentives as part of a push to “reinvent government.” After the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2011, the government ramped up its hiring for national security positions, and federal payrolls swelled.
Baby boomers began trickling out in about 2005, but the financial crisis and deep recession that hit a couple of years later discouraged many from leaving. Departures from the executive branch bottomed out in 2009. They have been increasing ever since and are on track to exceed 80,000 retirements — about 5 percent of the workforce — by the end of the fiscal year, according to figures from the Office of Personnel Management. It’s already the largest outflow in at least two decades.
Thinking about some "stuff" this morning and I realized that I really am alone. Have I alienated everyone? I realize that being sick like I am means I now have nothing to offer...............Oh well. Should soon be over.
State trooper was so disgusted that woman lied about visiting dying father to avoid speeding ticket that he tracked her down and arrested her at home
Carley Williams was pulled over for speeding in New Hampshire on Friday and told the state trooper she was rushing to her dying father's side
Sympathetic Trooper Christopher Cummings let her carry on - with only a warning to slow down
The trooper checked out her story and discovered she had lied
He went to her home two days later and arrested her
By James Nye PUBLISHED: 20:36 EST, 6 August 2013 | UPDATED: 08:43 EST, 7 August 2013 A New Hampshire cop was so incensed when he realized a 'distraught' woman had lied about speeding to reach her dying father that he made a point of going to her house and arresting her. Carley Williams, 28, was pulled over by Trooper Christopher Cummings after she was caught speeding down the Everett Turnpike at 82 mph in a 65 mph zone at 9 p.m on August 2nd. Letting her off a ticket on Friday because she told him that her father was down to his dying breaths, Cummings was stunned to discover that not only had she manipulated him, but that her father had died five years ago.
Manipulative: Carley Williams (left and right) escaped a ticket when she told a state trooper she was speeding along a turnpike to reach the bedside of her dying father. This was untrue and the state trooper caught up with her two days later
Tears: Carley Williams allegedly played on the good-natured troopers emotions to escape her ticket on Friday
Pulled Over: Carley Williams was arrested on Everett Turnpike (pictured here) in New Hampshire doing 82 mph in a 65 mph zone and lied to a state trooper to escape punishment
'I'm pretty used to people trying to bend the truth to get out of speeding citations, but this woman preyed on my emotions as a human being,' Christopher J. Cummings, the state trooper who made the arrest, toldABC News today. 'She told me her father had stage four cancer, that he was breathing only six breaths a minute, and that she was trying to make it to the hospital before he passed,' said Cummings.
Williams told Cummings that her father was at Catholic Medical Center in Manchester and she wanted to see him before he passed away. 'I was parked along the turnpike with my radar unit when I saw the vehicle traveling 82 mph in a 65 mph zone,' said Cummings. 'I took her driver's license and asked a question that I ask everyone I pull over. I asked if there was an emergency.'
Collared: New Hampshire State Trooper Chris Cummings went to Carley Williams home in Nashua to arrest her and confront her with her lies
Totally accepting of her 'emotional' story, Cummings returned her license and told her to move on, albeit slower. 'There was a good act that went along with it,' said Cummings. 'She seemed pretty emotional. It made me believe that this person was legitimately telling me the truth.' However, just before he sent Williams on her way, he asked for her father's name. 'I called the hospital where Williams told me her father was a patient and asked if he was there. They told me he wasn't,' said Cummings toABC News. Taken aback by this, Cummings looked up Williams and her father and discovered that her father had died in 2008. 'I was upset,' said Cummings, 'For someone to lie about their deceased father just to get out of a speeding ticket was pretty upsetting to me as a person.'
No Special Treatment: Lt. Christopher Wagner said that he supported his trooper especially when he was lied to. Upon further investigation, Cummings realized that Williams was driving with a suspended registration so he headed over to her house because that in itself was a misdemeanor.
'This wasn't personal, it was a matter of law. The violation happened in my presence, so I made the arrest,' he said to ABC News. Traveling to Williams' home on Sunday he brought a copy of her father's obituary and confronted the 28-year-old. 'She came out of her house, looking bewildered, and I told her I wanted her to explain something,' Cummings said. 'She looked at the obituary I had and immediately said it wasn't for her father but that it was for her uncle.' However, once he arrested her for the suspended registration, Williams confessed everything. She was charged with speeding and driving with a suspended registration and is due in Merrimack Circuit Court September 5th. 'While the N.H. State Police is sympathetic to personal emergencies,our primary objective is to protect life and property through the traditions of fairness, professionalism and integrity,” police said in a written statement. 'Within reason, individuals will be allowed to continue during emergency situations when we can ensure the safety of the individuals involved and the general public. Circumstances such as this one, however, will result in the appropriate action taking place.'
Just amazing that I have lived this long and even been able to gain weight. The statistics are just amazing ! ! Should I just stop? Will need to ponder..
Since I just have a tendency to just put junk here I thought about just discontinuing this page. BUT when I read this story this morning I thought I was going to throw up. It really made me that sick. In my opinion, I thought the members of the KKK were folks that had no problem spreading their hate filled program but they don't even compare to this hate filled organization, Military Religious Freedom Foundation. I'm surprised the Southern Poverty Law Center does not list them. Absolutely disgusting. Just check what they are trying to do to an Air Force Chaplain. Makes me sick to my stomach. Check this out:
Military Censors Christian Chaplain, Atheists Call for Punishment
In the next few hours and days you'll likely be inundated with analysis and commentary and solemn expressions of outrage or joy about what the acquittal of George Zimmerman means -- to the nation, to its rule of law, to its politics, to its racial divide, to its deadly obsession with guns, to Florida's ALEC-infused justice system, and to probably 100 other things I can't list off the top of my head. This is what happens when a verdict comes down in a high-profile criminal trial -- when life or liberty are on the line and the country is split, and angrily so, upon the wisdom and the justice of the outcome.
To me, on its most basic level, the startling Zimmerman verdict -- and the case and trial that preceded it -- is above all a blunt reminder of the limitations of our justice system. Criminal trials are not searches for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They never have been. Our rules of evidence and the Bill of Rights preclude it. Our trials are instead tests of only that limited evidence a judge declares fit to be shared with jurors, who in turn are then admonished daily, hourly even, not to look beyond the corners of what they've seen or heard in court.
Trials like the one we've all just witnessed in Florida can therefore never fully answer the larger societal questions they pose. They can never act as moral surrogates to resolve the national debates they trigger. In the end, they teach only what each of us as students are predisposed to learn. They provide no closure, not to the families or anyone else, even as they represent the close of one phase of the rest of the lives of the people involved. They are tiny slivers of the truth of the matter, the perspective as narrow as if you were staring at the horizon with blinders on, capable only of seeing what was not intentionally blocked from view.
Of course the deadly meeting last year between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman had at its core a racial element. Of course its tragic result reminds us that the nation, in ways too many of our leaders refuse to acknowledge, is still riven by race. The story of Martin and Zimmerman is the story of crime and punishment in America, and of racial disparities in capital sentencing, and in marijuana prosecutions, and in countless other things. But it wasn't Judge Debra Nelson's job to conduct a seminar on race relations in 2013. It wasn't her job to help America bridge its racial divide. It was her job to give Zimmerman a fair trial. And she did.
So the murder trial of George Zimmerman did not allow jurors to deliberate over the fairness of Florida's outlandishly broad self-defense laws. It did not allow them debate the virtues of the state's liberal gun laws or its evident tolerance for vigilantes (which we now politely call "neighborhood watch"). It did not permit them to delve into the racial profiling that Zimmerman may have engaged in or into the misconduct and mischief that Martin may have engaged in long before he took that fatal trip to the store for candy. These factors, these elements, part of the more complete picture of this tragedy, were off-limits to the ultimate decision-makers.
What the verdict says, to the astonishment of tens of millions of us, is that you can go looking for trouble in Florida, with a gun and a great deal of racial bias, and you can find that trouble, and you can act upon that trouble in a way that leaves a young man dead, and none of it guarantees that you will be convicted of a crime. But this curious result says as much about Florida's judicial and legislative sensibilities as it does about Zimmerman's conduct that night. This verdict would not have occurred in every state. It might not even have occurred in any other state. But it occurred here, a tragic confluence that leaves a young man's untimely death unrequited under state law. Don't like it? Lobby to change Florida's laws.
If we understand and accept these legal limitations -- and perhaps only if we do -- the result here makes sense. Purely as a matter of law, you could say, it makes perfect sense. Florida's material, admissible, relevant proof against Zimmerman was not strong enough to overcome the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The eye-witnesses (and ear-witnesses) did not present a uniformly compelling case against the defendant. The police witnesses, normally chalk for prosecutors, did not help as much as they typically do. Nor was there compelling physical evidence establishing that Zimmerman had murderous intent and was not acting in self-defense.
The case was "not about standing your ground; it was about staying in your car," the prosecutor cogently said during closing argument. But in the end, under state law favorable to men like the defendant -- that is, favorable to zealots willing to take the law into their own hands -- Zimmerman's series of deplorable choices that night did not amount to murderous intent or even the much more timid manslaughter. The defense here wisely understood that and was able consistently, methodically, to remind jurors that prosecutors had not adequately explained (or proved) how exactly the altercation started and how precisely it progressed.
Without a confession, without video proof, without a definitive eyewitness, without compelling scientific evidence, prosecutors needed to sell jurors cold on the idea of Zimmerman as the hunter and Martin as the hunted. But when the fated pair came together that night, in those fleeting moments before the fatal shot, the distinctions between predator and prey became jumbled. And prosecutors were never able to make it clear enough again to meet their burden of proof. That's the story of this trial. That explains this result. That's why some will believe to their own dying day that George Zimmerman has just gotten away with murder.
Maybe yes and maybe no. Technically speaking, the fact that Zimmerman now has been found not guilty under Florida law of the crimes of second-degree murder and manslaughter does not necessarily exonerate him in the world beyond the court. It does not mean that he is not culpable. This is and can never be a case where the defendant can proudly proclaim his innocence at some later date. But today's verdict, the unanimous result of six women who worked through their longest day to deliver the word, does mean that after 18 tortuous months, this tragic story now can move on to whatever comes next.
And what comes next, surely, is a wrongful death civil action for money damages brought against Zimmerman by the Martin family. That means another case, and perhaps another trial, with evidentiary rules that are more relaxed than the ones we've just seen. And that means that a few years from now, after Martin v. Zimmerman is concluded, we'll likely know more about what happened that night than we do today. That's the good news. The bad news is that no matter how many times Zimmerman is hauled into court, we will never know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about what happened that terrible night.
