Oh, wow. . .

I think I've figured out my next crochet project!  I can hardly wait to begin!!  

Now, which lucky person on my Christmas gift list is going to get this little gem. . .?  ;o)

Isn't that just incredible?

What were you supposed to do with this "Giant Floor Ball"?  (No, seriously, that's what it's called.  Look closely at the bottom right-hand corner.)  Is it for sitting on?  Decoration only?  Could it be a toy for the children?  Or is it strictly for leaning against, as the model demonstrates?  Don't you just love the look on her face?  There's nowhere she'd rather be than cozied up with her Giant Floor Ball.  It's her favorite place for romantic daydreams.  (Maybe this woman just has odd taste in home decor.  See that figurine on the table behind her?  Well, it's not my taste, at least...)

There are more yarn atrocities from the same source (a book) on this page.  

Privacy in Europe

This story ("Ever-Present Surveillance Rankles the British Public", New York Times) does make RIPA (the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) sound pretty creepy.
I can understand using this level of surveillance in cases of national security (i.e. suspected terrorists), but does a woman suspected of falsifying her address so that her daughter can attend one school over another really merit that kind of scrutiny?

...Under a law enacted in 2000 to regulate surveillance powers, it is legal for localities to follow residents secretly. Local governments regularly use these surveillance powers — which they “self-authorize,” without oversight from judges or law enforcement officers — to investigate malfeasance like illegally dumping industrial waste, loan-sharking and falsely claiming welfare benefits.

But they also use them to investigate reports of noise pollution and people who do not clean up their dogs’ waste. Local governments use them to catch people who fail to recycle, people who put their trash out too early, people who sell fireworks without licenses, people whose dogs bark too loudly and people who illegally operate taxicabs.

. . .

One of the biggest criticisms of the law is that the targets of surveillance are usually unaware that they have been spied on.

. . .

“They promptly ushered us out of the room,” she said. “As I stood outside the door, they said, ‘You go and tell your friends that these are the powers we have.’ ”

Soon afterward, their daughter was admitted to the school. Ms. Paton began pressing local officials on their surveillance tactics.

“I said, ‘I want to come in and talk to you,’ ” she said. “ ‘How many people were in the car? Were they men or women? Did they take any photos? Does this mean I have a criminal record?’”

No one would answer her questions, Ms. Paton said.

And in a related story from the Associated Press ("Lutefisk and loot: Tax records open in Norway"), we read about a different type of invasion of privacy.

In a move that would be unthinkable elsewhere, tax authorities in Norway have issued the "skatteliste," or "tax list," for 2008 to the media under a law designed to uphold the country's tradition of transparency.

The article goes on to share the (non-tax-sheltered) wealth of a few high-profile Norwegians-- but this "tax list" isn't just for the rich and/or famous. Everyone's on it.

Many media outlets use the tax records to produce their own searchable online databases. In the database of national broadcaster NRK, you can type a subject's name, hit search and within moments get information on what that person made last year, what was paid in taxes and total wealth. It also compares those figures with Norway's national averages for men and women, and that person's city of residence.

Defenders of the system say it enhances transparency, deemed essential for an open democracy.

"Isn't this how a social democracy ought to work, with openness, transparency and social equality as ideals?" columnist Jan Omdahl wrote in the tabloid Dagbladet. He acknowledged, however, that many treat the list like "tax porno" — furtively checking the income of neighbors or co-workers.

Critics say the list is actually a threat to society.

"What each Norwegian earns and what you have in wealth is a private matter between the taxpayer and the government," said Jon Stordrange, director of the Norwegian Taxpayer's Association.

Besides providing criminals with a useful tool to find prime targets, he said the list generates playground taunts of my-dad-is-richer-than-your-dad.

"The children of people with low wages are being teased about it in the schools," Stordrange said Thursday. "People with low salaries are being met with comments at the grocery store, 'How can you live on these low wages?'"

The information had been available to media until 2004, when a more conservative government banned the publication of tax records. Three years later, a new, more liberal government reversed the legislation and also made it possible for media to obtain tax information digitally and disseminate it online.

. . .

Most other Europeans, including residents of Britain, Italy and the Netherlands, have very different attitudes toward transparency and privacy and would be horrified at such a setup. Last week, the Spanish government for the first time released information on how much each Cabinet member is worth, but data on ordinary citizens is still private.

In neighboring Sweden, anyone can order a printed edition of the Taxation Calendar, which lists the earnings of people in mid- to upper-income brackets. The information is also available online, although Swedes whose financial information has been searched are notified by mail of who checked their details.

Christine Ingebritsen, a professor at the University of Washington, said the Norwegian tax list exemplifies a time-tested, distinctly Scandinavian custom of egalitarianism.

"This is how you make sure that you're being legitimate in the eyes of the community — you show that the wealth of a CEO isn't off the charts," she said, adding that unlike the U.S., Norway "places the wealth and health of all as a priority above the individual success stories."

Still, there are plenty of opponents of the list in Norway. A 2007 survey by research group Synovate revealed that only 32 percent of the Norwegian public wanted the tax list published, and 46 percent were against it.

Georg Apnes, director of Norway's Data Inspectorate and a member of the Conservative Party, called publishing and combing through the tax list "repulsive" and "disgusting."

"It reflects very poorly on our culture and on our society," he said on an NRK morning news program.

So, any bets on how long it'll be before the U.S. has its own versions of RIPA and the "Tax List"?

To Anyone Considering an Eskie for an Indoor Pet

The Eskie.

As a puppy, adorable. . .

As a grown dog, beautiful. . .

A (mostly) loyal and (sometimes) obedient companion. . .

Energetic. . .  Intelligent. . . Athletic. . .

And a constant source of amusement and company. . .

They are also little fur-shedding machines.

If you have an indoor Eskie, you can expect long, frizzledy white hairs on the sofa, rugs/carpet, and your clothes*.  Dog-hair "tumbleweeds" will mysteriously appear in corners (particularly in hard-floored rooms).  Your belongings will seem to generate not only a layer of dust, but also of dog hair.  And your vacuum cleaner will fill up faster than you ever thought possible.

(A word of warning:  If you're squeamish about hair and/or fur, it may be best if you just skip the next photo. . .)

This is our vacuum cleaner's canister after I vacuumed one room.  (I know because I emptied it before I started.)   

Admittedly it is a decent-sized room-- the room we use most-- the room Trixie spends 95% of her time in-- and a carpeted room.  But still.  I think you'll agree that this is. . . impressive (?)-- especially considering that it's been only a week since the last time I vacuumed this room-- and this time I didn't bother to hook up the attachments to vacuum the sofa and all the little nooks and crannies.

I guess I can't blame it all on Trixie, but she's responsible for the majority of it.  It's just part of what you have to expect when you keep this kind of dog inside the house.

And yes, she's worth it.

*When dressing to go out, you have a few options.  Don't wear dark colors, change at the last minute-- and don't you dare sit down or handle the dog after changing-- or have someone de-fur you on your way out the door.  Well, there's one other option-- decide that you don't care if people know that you have a sheddy dog at home.  Wear your dog-hair-covered clothes with pride!

"Whatever you do, don't look down!"

I've switched over to Blogger's new editing whatever-you-call-it. . . (Interface?)  Anyway, everything looks different!  (Surprise, surprise.)  Most of the icons are different, and there's this handy-dandy "strikethrough" button so that now I no longer have to type in the html code.  This may might could possibly will definitely lead to overuse (as if I didn't already have my hands full with parentheses and dashes!).  I'm not sure whether or not I like this new system. . .  Guess I'll give it a few posts before reverting to the old one.

So, on to the real reason for this post. . .

It's a really important subject, of course.  Otherwise, I wouldn't even be writing about it, because I only ever write about big, important, deep subjects.  Like the weather, and puppy dog pictures, and-- oh, ok, it's just a puppy dog picture.  But it's not Trixie this time, so it's a palate-cleansing photo, for those of you who were getting a wee bit tired of Eskie photos.  (Seriously, though, if you don't like Eskie photos, you're not welcome here.  Go now, and never return.  We don't want your kind 'round these parts.)

Mainly I'm writing because I wanted something else at the top of my blog instead of that "Illegal Alien" costume.  So here it is-- something else!

It's a photo of a calendar we have in the kitchen.  The photo for October is this brown puppy sitting on a pile of (what appear to be) chocolate bars. 

I get the "joke"-- it's a "chocolate" (chocolate-colored... brown) cocker spaniel sitting on chocolate bars.  (I'll wait a moment while you finish laughing merrily at the cleverness of it all. ;o))  Maybe I'm just being difficult, but it seems like an odd set-up for a canine portrait, considering that chocolate is poisonous to dogs-- even potentially deadly.  It's kind of like if Anne Geddes were to pose an infant amidst an arrangement of bottles marked with skulls and crossbones-- or delicately nestled into a big ol' pile of cyanide pills.  (Kind of, but not quite.)  It's just weird.

. . .Well, that's it, I guess.

I thought about regaling you all with an amusing anecdote about how, as a child, I thought that little decorative pieces-- you know, ceramic figurines, trinket boxes and the like-- were called "white nots" (or maybe "white knots"-- I wasn't completely clear on the spelling).  Mom must've told me they were "what-nots", but I misunderstood. . .

Yeah, I thought about sharing that story, but then I realized that it wasn't actually a story, per se, and that bringing it up would be pointless (though only marginally less interesting than a photo of a puppy sitting on candy bars).  And that being the case, it's time to bring this entry to a close.  (g)

(Yes, I'm in that goofy mood again.  It comes, from time to time.)

Mustn't Offend the Illegals!

The headline reads "Immigrants Not Amused by 'Illegal Alien' Halloween Costume".

And here's the costume that's supposedly in such bad taste:

"He didn't just cross a border, he crossed a galaxy!" according to the costume's description. "He's got his green card, but it's from another planet! Sure to get some laughs, the Illegal Alien Adult Costume includes an orange prison-style jumpsuit with 'Illegal Alien' printed on the front, an alien mask and a 'green card.'"

Apparently, Target is removing the costume from its website after receiving "several" complaints. How many "several" is in this case, I don't know. The important thing is that they've snatched it off the site, and furthermore, the spokesman ingratiatingly claims that they never intended to sell it at all. It was on the website by mistake! (How mysterious! Must be part of an Evil Right-Wing Plot.)

Now the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles will probably be "target"-ing the other retailers that still sell the costume online. (If you're looking for one to wear this year ;o) try walgreens.com, toysrus.com, amazon.com, meijer.com, and buycostumes.com-- but you'd better hurry, before they, too, realize the "mistake" that's been made and yank them down.)

If they're trying to say that immigrants (in general) are "not amused", then I don't believe them. I'm pretty sure my husband-- an immigrant-- wouldn't have a problem with this. But then again, he's here legally. (And at least when he was first living here, he was still termed an "alien"-- a legal alien, but an alien all the same. Anyone living in a country where s/he does not claim citizenship is an alien. I always thought it was kind of fun being able to say-- not that I ever actually said it, but you get the point ;o)-- that I was married to an alien. (g))

What they actually mean is that (some) illegal immigrants are offended-- or, even more likely, some Americans are offended-- those who for whatever reason feel that we should throw open (even more widely) our borders and put down a welcome mat. They're the same ones who feel that it's worth hushing-up the masses the avoid offending the few. Free speech can go to. . . well, you know where.

Some years ago, maybe we should have looked into changing certain regulations regarding temporary work visas, etc.-- but at this point, a lot of us are fed up with the situation. Not the least of that is anger with the inaction of our own government to act upon laws already in place. Act with humanity, yes, but still act! Don't just sit on your hands-- or worse yet, bind the hands of even local law enforcement officials-- and act as though nothing's out of the ordinary. People are sick of feeling that if anyone dares speak up for existing laws (or see the logic behind them), s/he will be accused of racism, bigotry, and every other mean and petty thing.

If people can get a laugh out of this silly Halloween costume, I say let them have it. I don't see what all the fuss is about. It's not that original an idea-- not that "edgy", is it? As for anyone offended by the costume, I recommend cultivating a sense of humor. It really does make life more pleasant.