Take out the Trash

That would be awesome if all websites did this for one day. You'll need to use a browser other than Internet Exploiter to see the page behind the warning. "Sorry, you'll need Internet Explorer to view this page." How many times have you non-IE users seen that and just screamed at someone's or some organization's idiocy?

Lord knows Microsoft would try this if the roles were reversed. Heck, they did one better; they bundled their POS browser with the OS which, in turn, they've managed to force the big vendors install on every PC they sell. So if you haven't done it already, take out the trash.

I wonder...

Congress(wo)man hits police officer versus cabinet member staying on the job: which story would get more press if a few things were changed? Let's say Rick Santorum was accused of punching a Capitol Hill police officer. Calls for his resignation would abound and the press would have "__ days to Santorum's censure and resignation" countdown clock going. If Cynthia McKooky were Defense Secretary, would calls for her resignation be front page news if she were staying on the job? We know the answer.

I don't get (well I do because of the politics involved) why Rumsfeld is in the news. A few people want him removed and it's BIG NEWS when Bush says he's staying. Really, wouldn't the big news be if Bush fired him as opposed to Bush not firing him?

So it goes with the MSM. They ignore stories about a congress(wo)man who strikes* a law enforcement official but it's "breaking news" when some people say they don't like the job Rumsfeld is doing. The MSM has once again proved its bias.

*CNN.com called it a 'scuffle.' If it were Santorum they would call it a 'beating.'

Taxing

Tax time is here and the papers have published what the President and V.P. earned, paid in taxes, and donated to charity. Dick Cheney and his wife donated nearly seven million of the eight million dollars in income from book royalties to charity in 2005. Remember, Republicans are stingy, mean, and do nothing to help the disadvantaged. I did some searching to see if I could find what Teddy Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, or John Kerry have given to charity recently. I didn't find too much. I found an editorial in the Boston Globe from 1996 that said Kerry gave nothing ($0) to charity in 1995 though. So, I'll take the liberal way out and say that if the information is not public, there must be something to hide. Therefore, we can assume that the terrible trio mentioned above must be giving very little because we all know that if the Cheney's or the Bush's did not disclose their donations, the MSM would convict them without proof.

Ontpare

I usually don't discuss work here but today I make an exception. I helped a client today recover from a forgotten admin password problem on an XP machine. When the machine booted up, all you got was the login screen with one user as an option - administrator. She did not know the password. I had a feeling I could work around this so I Allthewebbed and found a nifty little utility that allows one to reset (blank) passwords on an NT/XP machine. I don't want to post the link here but it's easy to find if you know what to use as a search string. Anyway, I RTFM and it worked as advertised. I was able to get back to the XP desktop.

who needz skool?

Well, well, well. It appears that not everything is perfect in San Francisco, that bastion of liberalism. The average difference in wages between whites and non-whites in SF is greater than the national average. [Link]
The article suggests that the less schooling, the less one tends to earn. Now, my question is, why do those have less education? Public school is available to everyone. From that point on, the Cal State colleges offer a very low-cost college education to California residents. From the Cal State Hayward website: "resident students currently pay only 17% of the total cost of their education" and "legal residents of California are not charged tuition, only fees." If I read the page correctly, it looks like a 4-year degree runs around $10,000. What a deal! [Link]

So, why aren't more citizens of SF pursuing this opportunity? Yes, $10K is still a lot of money but cost that out over four years and compared to many other colleges, it's a bargain. "Okay, then where do I get ten grand" someone may ask. Think of this: if one eats out twice a week at a fast food establishment (or five cups of Starbucks coffee a week), that's about $20, that's approximately $1,000 a year. If one has a car and gets rid of that (that's what we're supposed to do anyway, if we listen to most liberals), that will save at least $1250 a year (10000 miles driven, 20mpg, $2.50/gal); not to mention no more car insurance, maintenance, and perhaps the car payment. By eliminating some unnecessary items one can easily come up with around 80% of the yearly cost. If one can't cut costs any further, a wide array of grants and loans are available and the college will waive some fees for students who meet certain criteria. No one can say that in California the powers that be are not trying to give the citizenry as much help as possible in earning a college degree.

The question remains, why does SF have a problem with people failing to obtain an education? It's clear the state makes it affordable and open to every resident. Perhaps opportunity is not always a great motivator.

Opening Day

The Indians and White Sox start the baseball season tonight. I love Opening Day because spring seems official. As for the Phillies: I predict 1st place in the NL East. The Braves finally fall from their roost. Cardinals win the World Series.