The shuttle heads towards home this week. I truly hope they have no problems and make a completely normal landing. However, they cannot let a day go by without the environmental loonies making an appearance. For example, when Commander Eileen Collins looked out her window and saw this view:

What a damn load. That's a horrible abuse of one's position to put forward their own personal political agenda. It truly reduces my respect for that astronaut.

Posted by: Ogre at 09:01 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 125 words, total size 1 kb.

1 And just how do we protect the air, and keep the atmosphere from getting thinner? The only way I can think of is to stop sending idiots like this into space, where the oxygen that the shuttle's engines needs to burn basically get blow out into space. Besides that, we could combine the oxygen with carbon to make carbon dioxyde, but it isn't going anywhere.

Posted by: Echo Zoe at August 08, 2005 11:43 AM (K+h36)

2 Good idea! Tell this irresponsible lunatic to stop breathing and using up so much of our "limited" air.

Posted by: Ogre at August 08, 2005 11:58 AM (/k+l4)

3 What's political about observing facts? The picture you posted is not the image she was referring to. Go to NASA.gov and look through images of earth from space that'll back up everything she says.

Posted by: Randy Case at August 08, 2005 04:03 PM (LQJdM)

4 Yeah, shame on that astronaut for paying attention to science!

Posted by: BRD at August 08, 2005 06:18 PM (Eo+Qu)

5 I'm sure you meant, BRD, shame on that astronaut for trying to support a nonsense political agenda with almost no real evidence from factual science. It's ok, it was probably just a typo.

Posted by: Ogre at August 08, 2005 06:39 PM (L0IGK)

6 I am deeply troubled by someone calling herself BRD. It's too close to birdwoman. Too darn bad I didn't copyright. (*)>

Posted by: birdwoman at August 08, 2005 06:41 PM (Sc2Wh)

7 Only costs about $2.99 to file a copyright with the US Copyright office...

Posted by: Ogre at August 08, 2005 06:56 PM (L0IGK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I wonder if a single day has gone by in which there was NOT an increase in spending from Raleigh, NC. I strongly suspect there has not.

As I write this, "negotiators" from the House and the Senate are still meeting to attempt to create a budget for the state of North Carolina. No, they're not arguing about where to save money, only about who can spend MORE money -- for example, whether to raise the cigarette tax by 75 cents or only 40 cents.

They are meeting in back rooms, with absolutely ZERO public hearings. They will not allow the public to hear or know about the negotiations. The budget was supposed to have been done months ago. It's likely they'll not actually finish until October. And, as you might expect, it is ONLY Democrats who are allowed to do this negotiating. So 100% of the tax increase and utterly wasteful and irresponsible spending credit goes only to North Carolina Democrats.

While they are meeting and raising billions of dollars in NEW taxes and tax increases, the spending continues! Governor Easley just spent $75,000,000. Yes, with no budget in place, Easley just used an executive order and spent $75 million. There is no way to use the word "responsible" combined with "legislature" or "governor" in this state.

Oh, but the money was "for the children," so it's OK. Despite NUMEROUS increases in spending on the schools, including approving $300+ million in new lottery spending for next year, $500+ million in new funding from fines, and other untold millions in "normal spending increases," Easley saw the need to spend ANOTHER $75 million.

Folks, the schools in North Carolina should be lined with gold by this point. If you add up JUST the new spending this year on schools, spending on schools has INCREASED over $1,000 PER STUDENT. But it's for the children. And they won't stop the spending.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:45 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 326 words, total size 2 kb.

It's time again for the weekly "New Neighbor" feature. In this weekly post, I select one blog at random from the Evangelical Blogroll over there on the left and introduce the blog to you, my good reader, as best I can.

However, it may be time that Joe (from Evangelical Outpost) does an update. I know the blogroll shows up in a random order every time, and I like that -- however, it's getting harder and harder to find current blogs listed. For example, when I started browsing the blogs today, the first 28 on the list did not have a post in August. I know not everyone can update daily, but if you're not updating your blog at least once a week, you've got stale content, and, in my opinion, you're missing the point of blogging.

Well, that is what it is. Without further complaining, here's this week's New Neighbor:

Crossroads

This blog is more in tune for the Sunday version of the new neighbor feature. It's stated purpose is

Discussion of the theological direction in which the church is moving.

The blog is clean, fast, and well-designed. There's very little in the tons of add-ons that so many blogs (myself included) seem to find and plaster all over their front pages, slowing the page loads. But it's quality reading and the content is clearly the primary and sole focus there.

The biggest single recent feature of the blog (it's been running since June 2004), is a 22-part series on revival history. Each post is a long one, so this one will give you a lot of quality reading if you're interested in the history of revivals from 1610 to the present day. No, I'm not done reading it, but I will finish it this week.

Next up, she's started a new series about outsourcing, planning to follow the latest editorials in the New York Times. Good luck, I can't stand that filth from such people who hate God and America.

So, if you've got some time, why not head on over and read a new blog today?

Posted by: Ogre at 12:12 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 403 words, total size 3 kb.

The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog. The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog. The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.

But after the quick brown fox jumped over, the lazy dog moved quickly. The lazy dog ran after the quick brown fox. The quick brown fox discovered that it was not as quick as it thought it might have been. The formerly lazy dog quickly closed the distance between it and the not-so-quick fox as the chase continued.

The quick brown fox ran past Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Turkey Lurkey, and even past his cousin, Sly Fox. The lazy dog, now panting profusely, continued to get closer and closer. The quick brown fox hopped on the alligator's head for a ride over the river. Still the lazy dog followed.

They continued over the hills and through the woods. The race went down the path and the quick brown fox took a shortcut that his half-brother suggested through the woods that led past grandma's house. The lazy dog fell behind a little while traversing the thick undergrowth of the woods.

On the other side of the forest, the quick brown fox ran through the brier patch. Brer rabbit waved as first the quick brown fox, then the lazy dog, sped through his brier path. The briers slowed the quick brown fox, but the lazy dog continued.

Past the brier patch, the quick brown fox ran up the hill. At the top of the hill was a well that had recently been abandoned by Jack and Jill. With nowhere else to go, the quick brown fox stopped and turned to face the lazy dog. He bared his teeth at the lazy dog, hoping that it would turn him away.

The lazy dog stopped, panting from the long chase. He paused to catch his breath, watching the quick brown fox the entire time. Finally, the lazy dog said, "Why did you jump over me?"

(Based on a suggestion by Nonny of Anonymoses for this week's Tarheel Tavern.)

Posted by: Ogre at 03:29 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 349 words, total size 2 kb.

1 And I thought this was just you practicing your typing skills until the last line.

Posted by: vw bug at August 06, 2005 05:25 PM (+hmVQ)

2 Success! I wonder if anyone else made it past the first 3 sentences...

Posted by: Ogre at August 06, 2005 05:30 PM (L0IGK)

3 Sorry Ogre, you get an F. It seems your fingers had a mind of their own and forgot that they were supposed to be memorizing how to type "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog." Everyone wrote fun stuff this week! I feel badly that my post got so deep and serious!

Posted by: Erin Monahan at August 06, 2005 09:28 PM (0Ea9a)

4 But my "F" is for Fun, right?

Posted by: Ogre at August 06, 2005 11:40 PM (L0IGK)

5 [Wet blanket] The actual line from the typing exercise is: "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog." Need to get the "s" in there. [/Wet blanket]

Posted by: Harvey at August 07, 2005 02:07 AM (ubhj8)

6 And once again someone picks up on the little semi-hidden nuances that I slip into my posts. Good catch! I NEVER thought anyone would see that one.

Posted by: Ogre at August 07, 2005 09:05 AM (L0IGK)

7 Ogre, shoot me an e-mail some time, I need to some help with a technical issue on my blog. Basically I have a FOUR THOUSAND PLUS word post, so I would DEFINATELY like to put in the "extended entry" tags, so that I don't have to bore everyone with it. Talk to you soon.

Posted by: Smoke Eater at August 07, 2005 12:25 PM (68YeG)

8 I'll send you the instructions in email Smoke Eater -- they're online at http://ogresview.blogspot.com/2005/04/blogger-extended-entry.html

Posted by: Ogre at August 07, 2005 05:49 PM (L0IGK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I'd like to take just a moment to point out some of the fine advertisers who have elected to advertise on my blog. I am reminded of commercials I saw as a kid that always ended with "found only at quality stores." I wondered why they did that, and I soon realized it was actually to convince stores to carry their products! So I'll point out a few fine quality advertisers that I know.

These advertisements appear at completely random intervals between posts here at Ogre's place. Just follow the green drainpipe from one post to the next and there will be a couple random ads that appear with the drainpipe.

First up is the Overstock.com site. The Overstock site is quite interesting. It's not some kids in their garage that put up a site (well, OK, I don't know that, I suppose they could be...) -- they're professionals and they've been advertising nationally. The site has, well, everything. They have big-name brands at good prices. If you're shopping for something, why not check them out and see if they can get it to you for less?

Another quality advertiser here is Link Grotto. This one is a little different in that it's a place that provides, as you might have guessed from the name, links! They have tons of different types of things, many of which you might not find anywhere else -- but they're just providing the links to the providers. I mean, where else will you find links to Mr. Beer Home Brewery's Beer of the Month supplies?

In addition, you'll find BlogAds for various different blogs, also randomly scattered between the posts. Currently, Cao's Blog appears there -- a top-notch blog with very current information and some humor mixed in. I read it every day. You'll also find Stop the ACLU -- a blog that's dedicated to stopping communists in the ACLU from ruining this country. Very good stuff there, and well-researched. If you want to advertise your blog here, it's cheap!

You'll also find a few books listed with links to Amazon. This is where I put really good books that I've recently read or that I'm reading. I'm working on finding time to get reviews of them up as I post them, but I just haven't found the time yet. Don't worry, if you see a book link listed here, I assure you it's a good one!

Lastly, way in the upper right hand corner you might have noticed this button:

Posted by: Ogre at 01:03 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 3 kb.

Islamic terrorists want you dead. Either you convert to their religion, or they want to kill you. CAIR wants Islam to be the ruling power in America. While you are reading this, they are planning your death. Don't forget that.

You can plan for peace all you want, but as I was recently reminded on the comments on Social Sense (comments by G), Islam tried in the past to take over the world, but they were scattered by the crusades. They are trying again and until the world realizes THEY WANT YOU DEAD, we can't stop them.

Posted by: Ogre at 09:52 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.

Everyone who's been around a bit in the Blogosphere knows the definition of "instalanch." Now, however, after Evil Glennn's takeover at NASA, we can now expect numerous puppylaunches:

Posted by: Ogre at 08:55 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, I've finally gone and done my shooting for the e-Postal Handgun Match #1. The official results? I stink. Next time I'm using a shotgun.

The first round I fired one of my favorites, and a gun I'm normally really good with - a Makarov 9mm (9x1 . It's small and thin, so I usually use it as my primary carry gun - I can take it pretty much anywhere. My results (20 shots at 10 yards):

(Click to Enlarge)

Yikes. This was my SECOND try. I knew others said it would be hard, but damn. I thought I'd get 10 for sure. My score? 5. The first time I only got 3 of the damn flies. Bleh. Well, at least all 20 shots are in the paper, I suppose.

Next up I tried my .357 Magnum. Big cannon of a gun with massive recoil. Tons of fun to shoot, of course. I love the "deer stopper" ammo -- .357 magnum overstuffed with powder -- huge flames literally shoot out the sides of the gun about 2 feet on each side. I thought using a larger bullet might up my chances:

Nope. Same thing: 3 flies on the first round, 5 on the second. Again, all rounds in the paper, so if you're charging me, I think I'm still going to hit you, but man this was hard. Fun! But hard!

So anyway, I'm submitting my massive scores to the match master for official scoring. I can see a last place coming up soon...but if you haven't tried this, go read the rules and give it a shot!

Posted by: Ogre at 04:01 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, it's Friday afternoon and time for some cat blogging!

It's hot here. So hot that I thought the cat had just passed out while I was walking past. He seemed rather annoyed at the flash:

Posted by: Ogre at 12:01 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I know when Frisky is sick of the camera when he keeps his eyes closed no matter what.

Posted by: Laurence Simon at August 15, 2005 09:52 AM (uBCxH)

2 No, no, he's just RESTING, you see....

Posted by: Ogre at August 15, 2005 10:48 AM (/k+l4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I have mentioned before that the role of the Senate in confirming Supreme Court nominees is to simply determine if they are qualified to be judges. The Democrats continue to want to apply litmus tests to judges, specifically, any judge who does not support Roe v. Wade 100% is absolutely NOT qualified.

However, the actual qualifications for a judge are much simpler than even that. To be qualified, a judge must be capable of upholding the Constitution and must understand that the role of a Supreme Court Judge is to simply interpret the Constitution -- nothing more. Judge John Roberts has proven that he cannot do this.

He has said in response to some cases that the Supreme Court's decisions are "settled" and "have become law." This means that he will never, ever vote to overturn any previous supreme court decision -- he thinks that the Supreme Court MAKES laws. He is wrong.

He also ruled that the federal judiciary can go into a state and overturn laws that do not conflict with the Constitution in any way, shape, or form. If the people of a state make laws that he does not agree with, he believes it is within his power as a federal judge to force the people of the state to change their own laws. He is wrong.

Ann Coulter says he's another Souter (ultra-left wing judge hostile to freedom and the Constitution), and I think she's right. He is not qualified to be on the United States Supreme Court and President George W. Bush should withdraw his name and present someone who will do the job properly.

Posted by: Ogre at 10:36 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I am not sure I agree entirely. He is not a strict constitutionalist, true. But we just can't know how he will rule. He doesn't even know until faced with the situation. He may drop out anyway, what with the times digging into the adoptions of his children.

Posted by: Oddybobo at August 05, 2005 11:16 AM (6Gm0j)

2 I'm saying that he has ALREADY ruled this way. He has already said these things. He believes the role of the Supreme Court is to MAKE laws. That is just wrong. He has ALREADY ruled that amendments to state constitutions, passed by the people of that state, can be rather simply overturned by a federal judge who doesn't like them. That is WRONG.

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 11:25 AM (/k+l4)

3 Oh I agree that he has been wrong in his rulings on state's rights. You are correct in pointing out how he has already ruled. But too, he is correct that the rulings by the Supreme Court have become law. That is different than saying the Supreme Court makes laws (if only semantics). The Supreme Court, all the courts, make law. Each time they hand down a ruling it becomes precedential to lower courts, or in lay terms - the law. Right or wrong, that is what it is.

Posted by: oddybobo at August 05, 2005 12:12 PM (6Gm0j)

4 Only a lawyer would use that reasoning If it's wrong, I'm going to say it's wrong, and it will always be wrong, no matter how many people want to say that's the way it is. The Supreme Court DOES NOT make laws. That's what the legislature does. The judges interpret laws and DO NOT make them. I know you know the difference I'm talking about here, but I don't think Robert's does -- that's what bothers me the most.

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 12:59 PM (/k+l4)

5 Did you expect me to use any other reasoning? I can't help it, it's the evil lawyer in me Don't get me wrong, I wanted a strict constitutionalist there. Me to be exact.

Posted by: Oddybobo at August 05, 2005 01:12 PM (6Gm0j)

6 And I voted for you, too! Twice.

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 02:07 PM (L0IGK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Let's hope so.

According to WorldNet Daily, a group called Christians for America is calling for Congress to investigate the ACLU's abuse of the American legal system and their widespread use of frivolous lawsuits after the ACLU sued the state over subway searches.

Good for them.

Look, the random subway searches are crap. They're pretty much worthless. They'd be a whole lot better if they did risk profiling. But they're not unconstitutional. And the ACLU doesn't care. The ACLU supports terrorists because they ARE terrorists.

The ACLU uses threats to get their way, and their way is to support anything anti-American. Yes, Congress, investigate. Use RICO against them, too.

Posted by: Ogre at 07:36 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.

Today begins the annual "Sales Tax Holiday" in North Carolina. Well, it's not really a holiday. And you can only save a little money, but hey, a penny saved is a penny earned, right?

From August 5th to August 7th, consumers pay no sales tax on allegedly school-related items. Clothing, shoes, some other items less than $100, and personal-use computers are all exempt from sales tax. While I'm not sure why we can't get that exemption expanded to 365 days a year, for some, even having the holiday is a problem.

The people at Wilson Daily complain that the holiday occurs too early before school starts. They whine that when the legislators moved the school start date to the end of August, they didn't move the tax holiday. This is yet another publication that complains whenever government doesn't get more or spend more. Me, I go clothes shopping this weekend every year -- and it's when I normally buy a new computer, too.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:42 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.

So what "rights" does the ACLU (Association of Communist Lawyer Urics) actually support while claiming to support civil rights? I read this week that they support the right of people to force other people to slave for them and to provide them with the house they desire. They support individuals being forced at gunpoint to purchase things that other people desire.

In this case, the ACLU wants taxpayers to pay for people who want "to live with friends in a small house or apartment and have my own room," despite that person being unable to purchase or rent the house or apartment on their own.

At issue is the state of IL who is providing healthcare, a place to live, food, clothing, and a myriad of other things for some people who are physically incapable of doing so themselves. Keep in mind, this is the state that is providing these things at NO cost to the patient. And the taxpayers of the state and the rest of the United States ARE PAYING FOR THESE THINGS.

But that's not good enough for the ACLU. The ACLU thinks that these people are entitled to whatever they want. If they want a house, YOU should buy them a house. And if YOU don't pay for that house, you go to jail (taxes).

I was always taught to not look a gift horse in the mouth. If you're getting something for free, you have ZERO right to complain. If you don't like the thing you're getting for FREE, get up off your lazy ass and get something else. Or, if you cannot get up and get something more, TOUGH. I'm sorry that people are physically disabled -- that doesn't grant them ANY right to my labor.

The ACLU is not based on freedom or civil rights. Instead they support communism. That's what this request is -- a redistribution of wealth from those who work to those who do not work. The ACLU reveals their intentions in this lawsuit when they specifically complain that IL is the 10th richest state, but "ranks near the bottom in it's efforts." In other words, in the mind of the ACLU, the more you have, the more that should be taken away from you to make everyone equal -- that IS the purpose of the ACLU, no matter what you might hear from their lying lawyers.

This has been a part of the Stop the ACLU Blogburst.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:02 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 414 words, total size 3 kb.

1 And all this time I thought ACLU meant "Anti Christian Lawyer Association! But at least they are consistent statists. I just wonder when they have taken everything there is from those who produce who will they turn on next?

Posted by: NOTR at August 04, 2005 07:06 PM (izx0t)

2 Great post Ogre. Rumor floating around that I need to research is ACLU NC fighting Bible in Court room...seems trying to get the Koran in just wasn't enough. I'll try to find out more.

Posted by: Jay at August 04, 2005 08:20 PM (BKqRl)

3 Bravo, let em' have it. I say boycott them..

Posted by: Virtualloop.com at August 05, 2005 12:09 AM (vR+eQ)

4 Once again, very informative. learned more than I thought, that I'd thought I knew. (*,,,*)(b.t.w...you might want to check your mail! (sent something time-sens!)

Posted by: Mensa B at August 05, 2005 05:03 AM (TOHVc)

5 NOTR -- then they will collapse, just like communism has everywhere else it's been tried. I'm afraid we may be alredy too late to stop that vicious cycle. Jay, I know they're working on putting the holy book of lies (Koran) in courtrooms, but I haven't heard of them trying to get the Bible out. That's not going to go over too well in this state. Maybe they should try it so more people will see their real purpose. And Virtualloop - boycott? It's going to take a lot more than that to stop these well-entrenched communists that live off the government teat. Thanks, Mensa B!

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 07:03 AM (/k+l4)

6 Hey now, quit rubbing in I live in the United Illinois Socialist Republic.

Posted by: Contagion at August 05, 2005 09:03 AM (Q5WxB)

7 I'm not so sure The Socialist Republic of Illinois is so United...

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 09:57 AM (/k+l4)

8 Gotta start somewhere Ogre..

Posted by: Virtual loop at September 05, 2005 02:18 PM (vR+eQ)

9 How about ending somewhere?

Posted by: Ogre at September 05, 2005 03:24 PM (L0IGK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

In case you weren't watching, current news outlets are reporting that Harvey is getting ready to blow the entire island of Bermuda. more...

Posted by: Ogre at 01:20 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.

I was speaking with a friend of mine yesterday afternoon, and he had a good idea -- we need some detectives. He suggested we should start the investigation, and he's quite sure that Bud Selig, President George W. Bush, and the U.S. Congress would be very happy (and likely to pay a lot) for us to solve this mystery.

We have GOT to find out who it is that's running around the country injecting people with steroids! I think if we track Rafael Palmeiro's steps, we can find out where he's been. Is he being injected in public, when someone brushes up against him in a crowd? Perhaps someone is sneaking into his house at night and shooting him up while he sleeps.

We now have Jason Giambi who has said he didn't take them, but then told a federal grand jury he did take them. Jason says what's happened to Palmeiro is "an unfortunate thing." Add Ryan Franklin, the 8th violator of Major League Baseball's steroid policy, and now we're sure there's a conspiracy.

Someone, or some group, possibly connected to the medical field, with access to steroids, is obviously going around, in secret, and injecting these baseball players with steroids. Why? That is the big unknown. We're not sure yet if it's a conspiracy to bring down MLB, or if it's targeted at certain players. Advance copies of NYTimes articles seem to indicate that they blame Bush.

Posted by: Ogre at 09:02 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I too fear for the future of MLB. Whoever is targeting these poor souls is a monster... no, a demon! Have any of them seen a light in the sky? Just working on a theory...

Posted by: That 1 Guy at August 05, 2005 01:24 AM (Yi65j)

2 We don't know anything about who these monsters are. Investigations have commenced. We've got someone following Rafi 24/7...

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 07:13 AM (/k+l4)

3 I for one think it's Barry Bonds going around injecting others so he doesn't look as bad. Either that or its the flies in my office.

Posted by: Machelle at August 05, 2005 01:33 PM (ZAyoW)

4 Barry Bonds is doing what to the FILES in your office?

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 02:08 PM (L0IGK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The NC Senate may have (completely accidentally) done something right. Believe me when I say that these events are few and far between -- and the horrible, irresponsible, reckless, idiotic, freedom-hating, bureaucratic, draconic things they do FAR outweigh the few occasional things they do right. But heck, when they do something right, I want to mention it.

In this case, they have actually passed a proposed law that would at least increase the "cap" on alcohol content on beer in North Carolina. It's still not great, as they should just completely remove the damn "cap," but an increase to 15% from the current 6% is at least a slight improvement.

Of course, there's still those that are opposed to it, and it has to pass one more reading in the Senate (and get past the govn'r) before it will be law. Senator John Kerr (D) thinks that this measure will "expose young people to alcohol that would make them legally drunk with just a small amount." I guess Sen. Kerr would rather you drink a lot to get drunk. Hey Senator, change that moronic law that makes you "legally drunk" after one sip!

Sen Don East (D) thinks it will cause more accidents. He doesn't say how. I'm thinking it will cause more traffic jams at the stores as people enjoy a slight bit of expanded freedom and choice in their beers. In addition, there will quite likely be more breweries that will open up and employ people. Heck, I'm seriously considering a career move there.

To show you how long it's taken and how horrible the current law is, take a peek at Pop The Cap -- a website that's been running for almost 3 years trying to get the 70-year old 5% law removed. Oh and the reason for that 5% law 70 years ago? Because businesses complained that there were afraid their employees might come in drunk Monday.

Posted by: Ogre at 05:01 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 331 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Wow! I've never even heard of a 15% beer! All I've ever seen is the 5 and 6%. Interesting. I don't see why beer should have a limit of alcohol content when there are liquors out there. I mean, drink a rum and coke instead, whats the difference? I mean besides the obvious taste difference...point is you could drink something else that does have higher alchohol content, why not let it be beer?

Posted by: Jay at August 04, 2005 06:49 AM (BKqRl)

2 The difference, at least in North Carolina, is that ALL liquor is 100% regulated and run by the state -- NO ONE can sell liquor except the state. If this law passes, individuals will be able to sell the increased alcohol content beer. The state sees this as cutting into their racket (of course it really isn't).

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 07:03 AM (/k+l4)

3 Pa is much the same. We have independent beer distributors, but the state runs the liquor racket. Lifting the cap sounds good to me! mmmm. beer!

Posted by: Oddybobo at August 04, 2005 08:34 AM (6Gm0j)

4 The highest alcohol content I've seen in a beer, that I can remember, is 14.1%. The ban is stupid, and the fact the state has that much control over alcohol is stupid. Remember, I've argued the constitutional right to get drunk!

Posted by: Contagion at August 04, 2005 08:45 AM (Q5WxB)

5 I only remember one thing about PA's really, really screwy beer laws. I was there one night on business. I wanted to have a beer or two in the hotel with my pizza. However, I was not permitted, by law, to buy a six-pack of beer from the beer store. They were forced to only sell entire cases. I'm sure most of you can imagine what I did -- I promptly bought an entire case of beer and packed what remained to take home with me. What a really, really foolish law.

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 08:57 AM (/k+l4)

6 And I do remember, Contagion, and I couldn't find any legal holes in your argument! I thought we learned via prohibition that the state needs to get completely out of all businesses associated with alcohol. Unfortunately, there's way too much money in it for them to get out of the business, especially in places like NC where they literally run the entire hard liquor business.

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 08:58 AM (/k+l4)

7 I've heard of cities getting their own monopoly on the sale of alcohol, but I didn't know there are entire states that do that! I'll add that to the 73,213,454,423 reasons I already have NOT to ever move to NC.

Posted by: Echo Zoe at August 04, 2005 09:56 AM (K+h36)

8 I know both North Carolina and New Hampshire both have total monopolies. I don't know how many other states do. I remember New York doesn't because we used to play the alphabet game while driving around New York, and you always looked for the liquor store signs so you could get "Q,R,S, and T" all at the same time.

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 10:10 AM (/k+l4)

9 I am glad to see that the State of North Carolina is moving toward bills like this instead of increasing taxes. One step that I would take in South Carolina, if given the oppurtunity, is get rid of the annoying airplane bottle liquer law (no "free pour" is ridiculous). If you haven't had the luxury to have a drink in South Carolina: you have to pay by the mini-bottle (it's annoying to say the least). Also, Ogre, Georgia passed this same Bill on beer last year. Great post.

Posted by: Michael R. Churchill at August 05, 2005 08:49 AM (6SS8d)

10 When you look at the reasons behind these laws, they are really silly. I mean, they actually passed this law because businesses thought their employees would come in drunk to work on Monday too much! Talk about an outdated law! It's like the silly law that requires you to bring your own bottle to some places. What's the point in that?

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 08:56 AM (/k+l4)

11 Washington state also has the state own and run all the liquor stores. As for the Alcohol % cap, it's not only stupid, but by keeping at a 5% or 6% you're missing out on some really good imports. I've seen a "beer" that was 18%, but in actuality it was barley wine.

Posted by: Graumagus at August 05, 2005 05:10 PM (G1IXe)

12 Imports AND brand-spanking new microbrews. SBA, can I have a loan, please?

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 05:21 PM (L0IGK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

So earlier tonight I tried to get on the internet. I turned on my computer and tried to connect. My web browser, instead of being my normal home page (this blog), was a large black space with a green flashing line in the upper left corner. I wondered what in the world it could be. Then there was a clicking noise and I saw the following appear on the screen:

WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLAY A GAME?

I typed the only logical answer, "YES." The screen then typed out:

HOW ABOUT GLOBALTHERMONUCLEAR WAR?

I thought about it moment and then typed, "NO, THANK YOU."

The computer responded:

HOW ABOUT A NICE GAME OF CHECKERS?

Since the computer seemed to be responding to me, I tried something a little more advanced and typed:

NO. TAKE ME TO HTTP://WWW.OGRESVIEW.MU.NU

It was then I noticed all the keys appeared in capital letters. I checked the caps lock and noticed it was NOT on. The computer continued:

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT COMMAND. PLEASE ENTER A VALID INSTRUCTION.

The flashing green cursor flashed at me. I tried again:

OPEN A WEB BROWSER
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT COMMAND. PLEASE ENTER A VALID INSTRUCTION.
IEXPLORE.EXE
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT COMMAND. PLEASE ENTER A VALID INSTRUCTION.

I was starting to get annoyed. I went another route:

HELP.

WHAT DO YOU WANT HELP WITH?
THE INTERNET.

PLEASE TYPE YOUR COUNTRY NAME.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

I'M SORRY, THE COUNTRY YOU ENTERED, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IS NOT RECOGNIZED. PLEASE TRY AGAIN.
AMERICA.

SORRY, CURRENTLY AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE INTERNET TO MAKE UP FOR THEIR WARMONGERING AND WHILE THEY ARE PENALIZED FOR USING THE INTERNET TOO MUCH. INSTEAD, KENYA HAS BEEN GIVEN 1 CREDIT FOR YOUR ATTEMPT TO USE THE INTERNET. ONLY AFTER KENYA HAS RECEIVED 1,000,000,000 CREDITS WILL SERVICE BE RESTORED TO AMERICA.

LOGOFF.

Naturally, I did what any internet user would do -- I called my ISP. The phone call went something like this:

ISP: Hello, Stupid Phone Services, How are you being doing today? How may I be directing your call?
ME: I'm having some trouble connecting to the internet...
ISP: (interrupting) You mean the unternet?
ME: No, the internet.
ISP: I'm sorry, we are no longer permitted to allow connections to the internet, via governmental order. All our internet requests are now directed to the UNternet.
ME: Unternet? What's that?
ISP: Well, it's sort of like the internet...except they don't allow Americans to be using it.
ME: What?!?
ISP: I am being saying, it is being the internet, but no Americans are allowed.
ME: So where's the internet?
ISP: I do not know, I am in India.
ME: -----
ISP: Is there anything else that I can be doing for you today?
ME: How do I get access to the Unternet, then?
ISP: You must move from America.
ME: Thank you, come again.

* click *

Then I simply started up my OWN damn Linux machine and connected to the shadow internet that's in place for just such emergencies. So, how was your day?

(This has been an Alliance Precision Guided Humor Assignment.)

Posted by: Ogre at 09:06 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 527 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Connecting to the UNternets these days can be a real pain in the butt. Especially if you are on wireless in a hotel, on the road, and your tech support's first language is "terrorist". They can be OH, so "uncooperative" to say the least ;-)

Posted by: Gun-Toting Liberal at August 03, 2005 09:59 PM (Er9BL)

2 I bet the UNternet really would be like that, except more expensive, especially to Americans.

Posted by: Fitch at August 03, 2005 10:04 PM (Hn838)

3 I've heard terrorists get a discount when using the unternet...

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 05:15 AM (L0IGK)

4 Greatings Professor Ogre. How about a nice game of Chess? I love War Games.

Posted by: Contagion at August 04, 2005 08:49 AM (Q5WxB)

5 Contagion, I think your age is showing (since you actually recognized that archaic reference).

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 08:59 AM (/k+l4)

6 IEXPLORE.EXE? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Echo Zoe at August 04, 2005 09:53 AM (K+h36)

7 Ah, another good catch!

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 09:56 AM (/k+l4)

8 I don't think War Games is that old a reference, right? I just know about it cause I used to think Matthew Broderick was cute. (Save Ferris!)

Posted by: Jody at August 04, 2005 01:52 PM (IEpte)

9 I'm pretty sure that's from the 80s...but that's not old now, is it?

Posted by: Ogre at August 04, 2005 02:44 PM (/k+l4)

10 Kenya!?!? What, both of their computers can connect now? Go figure. I know, I know. Kenya is a highly developed, technologically capable....blah...blah...blah. It was funny.

Posted by: maybeso at August 04, 2005 06:09 PM (f088i)

11 And, yes, I loved the War games reference. So I am an old fart who can remember way back to the Eighties.

Posted by: maybeso at August 04, 2005 06:10 PM (f088i)

12 But it's all relative right? 80's isn't old...plus I was really really young in the 80's... Sooo I guess it depends, if you remember watching the movie as an adult, you might be a bit on the higher side of old...but if you're like me and watched it while a toddler (or something like that), you're not old at all

Posted by: jody at August 04, 2005 11:21 PM (OSJdh)

13 Kenya? Hey, it's not Norway! Right, Jody, 80's not old...SURE it's not. You just keep repeating that...

Posted by: Ogre at August 05, 2005 06:59 AM (/k+l4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

In case you haven't had enough of the carnivals for this week, here's two more that I like that you should go have a read.

First up is the Carnival of Liberty #5 over at Owlish Mutterings. A good compilation of articles outlining what freedom REALLY is and where it's going.

Next is the Carnival of the Clueless, a collection of articles that really point out total absurdity and people who really, really, really don't know what planet they're on. And yes, most of them are politicians.

Oh, and in case you forgot, head on over and read Humor for Dreaded Wednesday.

Posted by: Ogre at 03:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.

This week's Christian View Symposium asks about this news story about medical RFID chips.

Each week over at Cross Blogging, you can find a new question in the Christian Views Symposium category. Once again, you do not have to be a professing Christian or anything else to answer the question! The questions are often thought-provoking and interesting -- feel free to join in each week with your own answers on your own blog or in the comments at Cross Blogging.

The questions, based on the news article linked above:

Would you want this chip implanted in you?
Do the benefits outweigh the privacy concerns?

Posted by: Ogre at 12:00 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 562 words, total size 4 kb.

Steven Vincent of In The Red Zone blog was just assassinated in Iraq.

Mr. Vincent had reported in the corruption of the Iraqi police force, and now he's paid the ultimate price for exposing the truth. He was killed by radical Shiite mulsim terrorists. Kat has more details. How's that "religion of peace" working out for you folks who STILL believe that lie?

Posted by: Ogre at 10:00 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.