New Yorker cartoon formula exposed!
Click here to view the formula.
"Freedom of speech makes it easier to pick out the idiots."
By thinking through these questions, you can best decide whether you should visit MTV's alternate reality … or just keep channel surfing.
BLOGGER'S NOTE: I'm not telling you what or how to believe. I just don't want these important life decisions to be made for you. Know what the myths are in your own life. That is how you'll be able to mature and grow in the way that'll make you proud of your life years from now.
Your certified letter dated 12/17/97 has been handed to me to respond to. You sent out a great deal of carbon copies to a lot of people, but you neglected to include their addresses. You will, therefore, have to send them a copy of my response.
First of all, Mr. Ryan DeVries is not the legal landowner and/or contractor at 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan - I am the legal owner and a couple of beavers are in the (State unauthorized) process of constructing and maintaining two wood "debris" dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond. While I did not pay for, nor authorize, their dam project, I think they would be highly offended you call their skillful use of natural building materials "debris." I would like to challenge you to attempt to emulate their dam project any dam time and/or any dam place you choose. I believe I can safely state there is no dam way you could ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic.
As to your dam request the beavers first must fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam activity, my first dam question to you is: are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers or do you require all dam beavers throughout this State to conform to said dam request? If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, please send me completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam permits. Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws annotated.
My first concern is - aren't the dam beavers entitled to dam legal representation? The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay for said dam representation - so the State will have to provide them with a dam lawyer. The Department's dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event causing dam flooding is proof we should leave the dam Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than harassing them and calling them dam names. If you want the dam stream "restored" to a dam free-flow condition - contact the dam beavers - but if you are going to arrest them (they obviously did not pay any dam attention to your dam letter-being unable to read English) - be sure you read them their dam Miranda rights first.
As for me, I am not going to cause more dam flooding or dam debris jams by interfering with these dam builders. If you want to hurt these dam beavers - be aware I am sending a copy of your dam letter and this response to PETA. If your dam Department seriously finds all dams of this nature inherently hazardous and truly will not permit their existence in this dam State - I seriously hope you are not selectively enforcing this dam policy, or once again both I and the Spring Pond Beavers will scream prejudice!
In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their dam unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green, and water flows downstream. They have more dam right than I to live and enjoy Spring Pond. So, as far as I and the beavers are concerned, this dam case can be referred for more dam elevated enforcement action now. Why wait until 1/31/98? The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then, and there will be no dam way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them then. In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention a real environmental quality (health) problem: bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the dam beavers alone. If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your step! (The bears are not careful where they dump!) Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam office.
Stephen L. Tvedten
Cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt.
A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll of 609 adults taken September 5-6 shows:
The 13% who say this is all President Bush's fault (the hurricane tragedy, that is) is basically made up of that group of people who would blame a sneeze or a case of hay fever on Bush.
So, what does this poll essentially say?
This country does not blame this on Bush. The troubles began and continued primarily because of the strategies (or lack thereof) of the New Orleans and Louisiana local and state government levels.
13% said George W. Bush is "most responsible for the problems in New Orleans after the hurricane"
18% said "federal agencies"
25% said "state and local officials"
38% said "no one is to blame"
6% had no opinion.
29% said that "top officials in the federal agencies responsible for handling emergencies should be fired"
63% said they should not
8% had no opinion.
10% said George W. Bush has done a "great" job in "responding to the hurricane and subsequent flooding"
25% said "good"
21% said "neither good nor bad"
18% said "bad"
24% said "terrible"
2% had no opinion.
8% said federal government agencies responsible for handling emergencies have done a "great" job in "responding to the hurricane and subsequent flooding"
27% said "good"
20% said "neither good nor bad"
20% said "bad"
22% said "terrible"
3% had no opinion.
7% said state and local officials in Louisiana have done a "great" job in "responding to the hurricane and subsequent flooding"
30% said "good"
23% said "neither good nor bad"
20% said "bad"
15% said "terrible"
5% had no opinion.
Federal money that was intended for improving the levee system was, in one instance, allocated toward refurbishing a Mardi Gras fountain. The money simply didn't go where it was suppsoed to go. There is a specific board that governs each levee system in Louisiana. That board for the levee that broke needs to be held accountable.
To blame President Bush for that lack of correct use of federal funds would be similar to blaming every crime committed in this great country of ours on the President.
"There was a shoplifting crime committed today, why didn't Bush stop it from happening. I want a commission to look into this!!!"
Yeah that was over-the-top, but it illustrates my point. Blame Bush? Nah-uh.
I guess even though the Democratic Machine & the Mass Media is trying to generate blame against Bush, it just isn't working. Apparently, we're a country of people who are smarter than they realize -- or more intelligent than they take us for.
Check out this link for more information on how to be smart in protecting yourself against phony scams that play off as genuine donation routes to help the victims of the hurricane.
Here are some other links with quality info regarding Katrina, updates, needs, et al...
How the Technical Community Can Help: Part One / Part Two