They got everything now. Plastic corks for champagne bottles. They appear to work, the Andre (real quality brand that) champagne held pressure. They come off with just fingers. They go back on and the champagne holds its fizz over night in the fridge.
Gone is the loud POP and the flying cork which yielded so much entertainment at Christmas and Thanksgiving dinners.
The price of progress can be heavy.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
Game of Thrones Season 4
Just came in from Netflix. Episode 1, Two Swords. Time Warner cable doesn't carry HBO so I see everything a year later. It's still good. The sets and costumes are elaborate, expensive looking, and convincing. The multiple story arcs (Jon Snow in the Black Watch. Arya on the lam, Sansa Stark married to Tyrion Lannister, Jaime Lannister and Brienne fumbling along, Bran struggling to get beyond the Wall, Theon Grayjoy getting tortured, Joffrey Baratheon/Lannister being obnoxious) can get confusing. It's surprising that we can have so many story arcs after killing off so many likeable major characters (Lord Ned Stark, Rob Stark, Cat Stark) However each surviving story arc still retains its interest.
They have improved the sound track. I could understand everything that was said. Last season they had some really bad episodes where I could not understand a word. One of them with Jaime Lannister and Brienne sharing a hot tub would have been more fun to watch if I could have understood what they were saying to each other.
I liked the scene toward the end where Arya has somehow fallen in with big, old, and ugly Sir Gregor Clegane ("The Hound"). It opens with Clegane and Arya riding double and Arya is chewing out Clegane 'cause she lacks a horse of her own and has to ride double with him. They come upon a tavern, with five bad guys inside it. Arya drags Clegane inside, whereupon the bad guy leader tries to get Clegane to join his gang. The conversation gets frostier and frostier until swords come out and Arya and the Hound wipe up the tavern floor with the bad guys. Arya gets two of them. She has done some growing over four seasons and is bigger and taller than she was in season one. Anyhow we see the unlikely pair riding away from the scene of the carnage, Arya has her own horse now, having slain its previous rider in a hand to hand sword fight. Good scene all the way.
They have improved the sound track. I could understand everything that was said. Last season they had some really bad episodes where I could not understand a word. One of them with Jaime Lannister and Brienne sharing a hot tub would have been more fun to watch if I could have understood what they were saying to each other.
I liked the scene toward the end where Arya has somehow fallen in with big, old, and ugly Sir Gregor Clegane ("The Hound"). It opens with Clegane and Arya riding double and Arya is chewing out Clegane 'cause she lacks a horse of her own and has to ride double with him. They come upon a tavern, with five bad guys inside it. Arya drags Clegane inside, whereupon the bad guy leader tries to get Clegane to join his gang. The conversation gets frostier and frostier until swords come out and Arya and the Hound wipe up the tavern floor with the bad guys. Arya gets two of them. She has done some growing over four seasons and is bigger and taller than she was in season one. Anyhow we see the unlikely pair riding away from the scene of the carnage, Arya has her own horse now, having slain its previous rider in a hand to hand sword fight. Good scene all the way.
Rand Paul is mean to media says WashPost.
My heart bleeds for the poor innocent abused media. Bunch of ignorant, biased, back stabbing trolls.
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
Dried, State of California that is
I heard that Jerry Brown wants to put a limit on the length of showers Californians can take. That oughta be a hoot. First I want to see the official state policy on how long a shower oughta be. Then I want to see the enforcement mechanism. Do they station state troopers in every home with a stop watch? Or just in the homes of Jerry's political enemies?
Not a problem in NH. We are just entering mud season, and will have plenty of water for a long time.
Not a problem in NH. We are just entering mud season, and will have plenty of water for a long time.
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Isolationism and Rand Paul
In America, isolationism grew up in the years between the wars, 1919 to 1939. People who were horrified by the casualties of WWI or dissatisfied with the outcome of the Versailles Treaty began to preach that America should stay at home, build up business, and let the rest of the world sink or swim. A luxury permitted to a continental power with abundant domestic natural resources. Isolationism prevented the US from joining the League of Nations, allowed Hitler to do what he liked, and prevented the US from entering WWII until the Pearl Harbor attack
WWII discredited isolationism, and the Anglosphere, led by America, set up the post war world and has run it ever since. It's been a fairly decent world, far more decent than a world run by the Communists or Islam would be. We have insisted upon the sanctity of international borders, free trade, freedom of the seas, liberating colonies, reasonable stability in international currency exchange, self determination, i.e. no messing around in the internal politics of other states, and human rights. The Pax Americana has been successful, it outlasted the Soviets, avoided WWIII, and has not been unduly expensive for us to maintain. The bulk of the world has been happy with it. They trust the Americans to uphold international order and not take them over.
Counterexamples, Putin in Ukraine, ISIS, and others serve as horrible examples of what could happen without the Americans.
And now we have Rand Paul running for President and preaching a return to isolationism. Let us hope the American voters have a better grasp of modern history than Mr. Paul has.
WWII discredited isolationism, and the Anglosphere, led by America, set up the post war world and has run it ever since. It's been a fairly decent world, far more decent than a world run by the Communists or Islam would be. We have insisted upon the sanctity of international borders, free trade, freedom of the seas, liberating colonies, reasonable stability in international currency exchange, self determination, i.e. no messing around in the internal politics of other states, and human rights. The Pax Americana has been successful, it outlasted the Soviets, avoided WWIII, and has not been unduly expensive for us to maintain. The bulk of the world has been happy with it. They trust the Americans to uphold international order and not take them over.
Counterexamples, Putin in Ukraine, ISIS, and others serve as horrible examples of what could happen without the Americans.
And now we have Rand Paul running for President and preaching a return to isolationism. Let us hope the American voters have a better grasp of modern history than Mr. Paul has.
Monday, April 6, 2015
More Polarization
In addition to the vast democratic majorities in the "good old days" (50s-60s) the United States faced an existential enemy, a communist, nuclear armed, superpower bent on world domination. "We will bury you" quoth Nikita Khrushchev. Communism is about as left as politics can get. Communism stood for ownership of the means of production (companies) by the state. In practice that meant liquidation of company shareholders, owners, and for good measure anyone else who stood in the way.
This was opposed by all the targeted groups in the US, and by American labor. Coming out of the 1930's, American workers had organized strong unions and collectively bargained some pretty decent contracts. The rank and file figured that they had things under control, and any move toward state ownership of the means of production would break their contracts and leave them worse off. The Democratic party was (and perhaps still is) the party of organized labor, the Republicans were (and still are) the party of businessmen, who were as hostile to communism as the union men were.
Which meant that the lefty impulses in the body politic could not move too far from center if they wanted to win an election. In fact both Democrats and Republicans supported the Cold War, with such effect that the existential enemy suffered political collapse by 1991.
Now, with communism being pretty dead for the last 25 years, it becomes possible for American lefties to say things and do things that would have gotten them tossed out of the party in the old days. "You want to share the wealth don't you," would have branded Obama as a commie back in the day. In short, the fall of Soviet Communism allows the modern US democrats to go way farther to the left than would have been possible during the Cold War, when communist sympathizers were branded as traitors. The Republicans have pretty much stayed in place, ideologically. You don't hear any modern Republican going farther right than good old Barry Goldwater did in 1964.
In short, defeat of Soviet Communism has allowed the lefties out of the box and into the body politic where they attract flak.
This was opposed by all the targeted groups in the US, and by American labor. Coming out of the 1930's, American workers had organized strong unions and collectively bargained some pretty decent contracts. The rank and file figured that they had things under control, and any move toward state ownership of the means of production would break their contracts and leave them worse off. The Democratic party was (and perhaps still is) the party of organized labor, the Republicans were (and still are) the party of businessmen, who were as hostile to communism as the union men were.
Which meant that the lefty impulses in the body politic could not move too far from center if they wanted to win an election. In fact both Democrats and Republicans supported the Cold War, with such effect that the existential enemy suffered political collapse by 1991.
Now, with communism being pretty dead for the last 25 years, it becomes possible for American lefties to say things and do things that would have gotten them tossed out of the party in the old days. "You want to share the wealth don't you," would have branded Obama as a commie back in the day. In short, the fall of Soviet Communism allows the modern US democrats to go way farther to the left than would have been possible during the Cold War, when communist sympathizers were branded as traitors. The Republicans have pretty much stayed in place, ideologically. You don't hear any modern Republican going farther right than good old Barry Goldwater did in 1964.
In short, defeat of Soviet Communism has allowed the lefties out of the box and into the body politic where they attract flak.
Saturday, April 4, 2015
Polarization of US politics.
I've seen countless whines on this subject. No bipartisanship, too much bickering, gridlock, yada yada. Usually by democrats. And, I gotta agree with them. Over my memory span, the Congresscritters have grown meaner and nastier, far more likely to do ad hominem attacks upon the other party.
How come?
Well, back in the good old days (50s,60s) the Democrats had an overwhelming majority just about everywhere, Congress, state houses, city halls. You don't squabble with members of your own party. And if you are a real small Republican minority party you know you have to get along with the majority Democrats if you ever want to get any of your stuff passed. So things ran a bit smoother, and with more politeness under a one and a half party system.
Starting with Newt Gingrich's Contract with America in 1994, the Republicans finally gained enough strength nationwide to draw level with, or even ahead of, the Democrats. When you have the votes to push thru your program, you don't have to be polite to the opposition, you just vote it thru. The opposition hates that, but that's democracy for you.
So, the "polarization" so decried by the democrats is actually a sign of the return of two party politics.
How come?
Well, back in the good old days (50s,60s) the Democrats had an overwhelming majority just about everywhere, Congress, state houses, city halls. You don't squabble with members of your own party. And if you are a real small Republican minority party you know you have to get along with the majority Democrats if you ever want to get any of your stuff passed. So things ran a bit smoother, and with more politeness under a one and a half party system.
Starting with Newt Gingrich's Contract with America in 1994, the Republicans finally gained enough strength nationwide to draw level with, or even ahead of, the Democrats. When you have the votes to push thru your program, you don't have to be polite to the opposition, you just vote it thru. The opposition hates that, but that's democracy for you.
So, the "polarization" so decried by the democrats is actually a sign of the return of two party politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)