Random bits
Oct. 11th, 2005 08:30 amThe Yankees lost. I tried not to care. I tried not to watch. I really am not that fond of the Angels. But, in that last inning, when Alex Rodriguez was at bat and then the last out, I felt pure 'neener, neener, neener.' I am a resentful, grudge bearing bitch. There's no way around it.
The down side is that I had already decided that if the Yankees won, I was totally freed from any more post season game watching. Now, I'm sucked right back in. Here's the new deal. If EITHER the Astros OR the White Sox get eliminated THEN I am totally freed from any more post season game watching. People, I my TiVos are getting crammed. Netflix is just before sending someone to my house to check up on me. I can't be wasting the fall on baseball.
The down side is that I had already decided that if the Yankees won, I was totally freed from any more post season game watching. Now, I'm sucked right back in. Here's the new deal. If EITHER the Astros OR the White Sox get eliminated THEN I am totally freed from any more post season game watching. People, I my TiVos are getting crammed. Netflix is just before sending someone to my house to check up on me. I can't be wasting the fall on baseball.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 04:00 pm (UTC)Yeah, if it ends up being a Cardinals-Angels series it's going to be very hard to care.
As for TV: since House is off during the playoffs, we decided to give Commander-in-Chief a try and, somewhat to our dismay, we kind of liked it. If we still like it next month we're going to have a problem.
¹There's no really apt English equivalent for this, but it more or less means "delight in the misfortune of others".
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 04:10 pm (UTC)I'm totally with you on Commander-in-Chief. I knew it was going to suck and watched it only to prove my point. And then watched the second episode to make sure the first one was a fluke. I may even give up the excuses and just enjoy the next episode.
Now you see why one TiVo isn't enough.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 05:42 pm (UTC)Yeah, it looks like we're going to have to break out the VCR.
We are not alone
Date: 2005-10-11 08:33 pm (UTC)http://www.seattlest.com/archives/2005/10/11/sweet_sweet_schadenfreude.php
Re: We are not alone
Date: 2005-10-12 03:35 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 04:53 pm (UTC)There is. Enable POP access and download it.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 05:00 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 05:12 pm (UTC)In other words, they're taking advantage of the charity of others to save a few bucks and make a killing. Yeah, that's definitely a black eye. The problem isn't with the workers so much as with their employers who are doing this. But they're not the ones that are so easy to catch. The migrants staying in the shelters are easier to catch and therefore expell.
Also, there's a big ole uproar about how the contractors are bringing in illegal and migrant out of state workers instead of hiring New Orleanians to do the work. Here's something we have to be reminded of every day as Americans: there are people who are poorer than we are who have less than we do who want better things and are therefore willing to do the shit jobs that we feel like we are too good to do. So there will be thousands of New Orleanians who are going to sit and wait for the government to somehow pay them for being victims instead of doing honest, albeit it difficult, clean up work and getting paid for it. This is a bigger black eye than most, I think. But then it could just be me.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 05:27 pm (UTC)Gathering up people and dumping them is wrong even without huge profits but making profits off of those trying to help is unconscionable.
Thank you so much for the insight. I'm so glad I mentioned it so that I got the straight poop. Thanks.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 06:26 pm (UTC)But the contractors using Red Cross shelters as free corporate housing? They have a special circle of hell reserved for them, I think.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 06:45 pm (UTC)It's possible that the contractors in question are using the RC facilities as corporate housing just so make a little extra money, but it's equally possible that the only reason they got the job is because they planned to do this from the beginning and that's one way they managed to come in as the lowest bidder.
It's interesting to see how often government contracts go to the lowest bidder even if that bidder is quoting a price that just can't be achieved through legal/legitimate means.
So, the bottom line is that while what these contractors is doing is slimey, it's possible that it's symptomatic of larger problems in the government's methods for awarding contracts (then again seeing how often Haliburton is awarded no-bid contracts would tend to make me think the same thing) and it's not automatically just a case of evil contractors scamming people.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-11 06:54 pm (UTC)While this vigilant can be valuable, I think often they look so hard that sometimes their imaginations (or hopes for a great story) kick in. And there's nothing more juicy than looting and rebuilding scams right now.
It's so hard to know the real story. But, your point about low bidding is an excellent one... The process seems, in many ways, to encourage problems - and no bidding, seems to invent them! Man, I'm glad no one is looking to me for the answers!