Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Recent Comments:
Viral Wedding Video -- Cool or Corny? {Lemondrop}
Jul 28th 2009 2:40AM What's the point of a church ceremony if you're just going to stamp everything "me, me, me" - did they forget, as Catholics, that they're in the presence of the Eucharist? Why not skip the formality of God and have a cotillion....honestly....these things are becoming more like "coming out" parties than actual sacraments. Might not seem like such a big deal to people of other faiths, but there are a growing number of Catholics scratching their heads about why they were ok'd to do this. No one's knocking their enthusiasm - but this was disrespectful. I'm sure they'd have a fit if teenagers were pop-and-locking up to the communion rail at Confirmation to an Usher tune ... or if the parents broke out in show tunes during a Baptism. Where does the line get drawn?
Where did we start affirming that the wedding day was all about indulging the bride's every whim, even the somewhat inappropriate ones?
TLC's 650-Pound Virgin Goes From Fat to Fit {That's Fit}
Jul 14th 2009 1:11AM To anna re: not getting ok for surgical skin removal
There is no "right" or "wrong" way to lose weight. The right way is whatever works within your lifestyle and helps you keep it off. Kudos to you for having found that for yourself.
People who have lost the weight via surgery have the same battle in getting skin removal approved. ANYONE who does not have a medical problem (i.e. rashes, skin deterioration, mobility concerns) due to the excess skin will run into problems getting insurance approval. Don't presume that other people have an easier time of things because they got the weight off differently.
The guy in this story likely had an open-shut case for the skin removal because it caused mobility issues for him eventually, based on what was happening already with his stomach before the weight came off. It can get in the way of walking properly, etc. Doesn't appear that it was an issue of cosmetics for him.
Internet purchases soon to include sales tax {WalletPop}
Apr 21st 2009 12:59AM Wow - how quickly we forget. This internet tax proposal was in the works LONG before Obama's election. Really interesting that these ideas are "suddenly" being blamed on an administration that's less than 4 months old.
Republicans have been behind this just as well as democrats. We have state governors managing unprecedented state deficits - a good number of Repubs - who are thrilled to see this take place - they don't have to cut, they just sit back and wait for the usual flow of online sales to bring in what was previously missing.
So, let's tone down the Obama bash train for a sec and remember where some of these taxes actually got their spark.
And if you want to talk a bit of perspective - we working people just this month got a tax break that shows up in our paychecks. I guarantee that enough of you don't do enough online shopping where you'd be paying MORE in online sales tax than what you're getting returned to you each paycheck via this new break. If you're shopping THAT often, you're not likely concerned so much about your taxes, for good or for bad.
Time to breathe in, exhale, and relax. This isn't the tax apocalypse.
French Politician Back to Work 5 Days After C-section {ParentDish}
Jan 14th 2009 7:48PM What you're all forgetting or not considering here is that you're looking at this through American eyes - we're used to belonging to a culture of "if you can handle it and it's sound, do whatever you want."
France is not that kind of culture. It's not a place where women are often in a position like hers to begin with, which is why this is such a "scandal." It's only just catching up to what women's work lives were here in the 1980's. And it's a culture where parents are, quite frankly, more involved in being parents, on average. They just passed a Paternity Leave act for men to have paid time off from work when a child is born. They don't tend to work excessive overtime. They sit down and eat meals at the family table. They're not shocked that someone would return to work so soon, but that someone would "want" to do that, when no one's pushing her out the door if she wanted to take time to recoup.
Not to mention, even if you "feel" ok - it's not in your better health interests to return to a job within days of major surgery. You're still at risk for infection and suture problems, skin has to have time to heal.
Please Keep Your Stupid Dead People Off Jane Austen's Lawn {Lemondrop}
Dec 4th 2008 9:19AM Casey - you're mistaken. It is illegal to dispose of ashes just "anywhere." It's prohibited on public property, and you have to have permission to do it on private property. If you get caught doing so, you can be fined or charged. The thing is that most people are discreet about how they do it and never get seen or approached about it. But it is illegal. Precisely because there are people like in this article, who would leave them in public view or scatter them somewhere without thinking about where they end up - ingested by animals or seeping into someone's water source, or in the case of the Austen estate - becoming an eyesore.
Dunkin Donuts better than Starbucks: You knew that already {WalletPop}
Oct 21st 2008 9:32AM Re: Jeff thinking people have wimpy taste buds. You couldn't be further from the truth! Starbucks over-roasts as routine. There is a difference between a strong cup of coffee and burning every variety of bean to the point where its qualities are no longer recognizable.
I've had coffee in Europe and I've had coffee at Starbucks and another national chain, never tried Dunkin, but I don't live in a Dunkin region. You don't have to burn a dark roast to have it taste like a bold coffee. Starbucks coffees have no subtlety or nuance whatsoever. It's not where people who truly like coffee go to experience good coffee. Starbucks is where people go to get the blended drinks. When you're adding sugar syrup and creams and what-have-ya, you don't have to taste the coffee so much. And Starbuck's sales reflect this - they sell more blended drinks than they do of their brewed coffee. Period.
Suze Orman's got milk and other sponsorships in her pocket thanks to the financial crisis {WalletPop}
Oct 20th 2008 9:27AM There are two things that irritate me about Orman and the first is that, among the good basic advice, she's started promoting specific "branded" things like the "Save Yourself" money market account that goes along with her women's program. Money market accounts aren't a bad idea, but what is more special about her sponsored account vs.others, other than that she's receiving ad dollars from it?
And her answer to all savings questions seems to be the Roth IRA. That's the bent of her "Young, fabulous, and broke" program. Roths are great - but saving for retirement isn't the only thing people have to juggle, yet she spends 50-70% of her time focusing on that. No practical advice on setting up a budget, which is where most people need the greatest help.
Most people understand by now that you have to put money back for retirement, and you have to avoid credit debt or pay off what you've already acquired in debt. It's the everyday things like comparing unit cost on grocery shopping trips, having several different kinds of savings goals beyond an emergency and retirement fund, etc, that lead to being able to have the money to invest in the things she discusses. She doesn't spend enough time doing that, imho.
I understand everyone has a need to earn their living, but I'm wary of her going down the road of endorsing specific bank's products.
Sam's Club offers $1-a-week membership {WalletPop}
Oct 17th 2008 9:35AM Anyone can shop at a Sam's at any time without a membership, but you're paying a 10% mark-up for being a non-member.
A $10 fee is reasonable, actually, when you consider that 10% may end up costing more if you buy $200 worth of groceries. If you'd only ever spend $100 or less, not worth paying the fee to do it.
For 10 weeks - it's worth it if you make a point of buying the items that are true bargains for you, stock up on them, and then let it go. I'm not interested in getting a full membership, but this deal may be worth looking at. But then, I'm not looking to go there as my primary grocery/store habit - I'd be getting the few select items that cost me more elsewhere such as pet food, some frozen meats and sundries, possibly winter clothing if the quality is reasonable. But I wouldn't be going there to stock up on electronics, furniture, or their other items that aren't really any different than anywhere else.
Flashy "Bible" seeks to inspire the ADHD generation {WalletPop}
Oct 11th 2008 6:52PM First of all - adding things and applying "modern" context is precisely why we have wars and debates over which version of the bible is true or not. It's not a benign thing that these people are doing with this new version. King James version was "modern" for it's day - but it is not the truest to form, there are some significant contextual meanings that are either missing or get glossed over in the middle of the Thees and Thous.
Second - the new testament was originally written in Greek, and after the 4 Gospels, it is a collection of sermons/seminars by different apostles. The New Testament is actually more "provable" in origin than the Old Testament because of its age and the fact that people were more diligent about recording these things, more transparent in the process. We're talking about the heyday of Greece and Rome - the people who brought literacy to the world. The article's author's friend wasn't reading the New Testament in original Hebrew.
The ultimate question is - if the words and images have to be manipulated to fit an otherwise uninterested person's point of view - is their faith true? Or are they just seeking to reaffirm their own personal take on things?
I'm of the camp that believes we need to keep the scriptures as close to the original as we can. The time to modernize faith is in your daily practice - take what you learn and make it practical for your life and circumstances - don't tweak the rulebook so it makes it easier for you to accept. The acceptance has to come from you, not vice versa.
Tucson international airport, international no more {Gadling}
Oct 11th 2008 6:32PM I don't think the article ever said they were taking the title "International" away from the airport's designation. It's about the irony of there no longer being any international passenger service. They may still process international cargo flights - which would mean they'd still need customs service. Businesses might have an interest in seeing if they'd be willing to offer better gate lease terms now that they've lost the last passenger flight. Could be cheaper than going through Sky Harbor or John Wayne and would keep Tuscon viable until the economic dust settles. We have to fight to keep choice alive, or we'll see a 5-hub nation eventually. No one will be able to get where they're going without starting or laying over at a hub city. Prices will be astronomical because we won't be able to take our ticket fares elsewhere.
