Wishing those of you in the northeast that were hit by nasty snow storms and power outages a great day of shoveled sidewalks and booted costumes!
Sometimes the day is full of tricks and you have to find a way to make your own treats!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b5bd3/b5bd3486d54b0250cc9c8aecce8ef8cfa816808c" alt=""
Biological and psychological research aside, is it possible that female voices are used simply because most computer geeks are male and develop products in a sexist manner? Why do you think female voices are used? And is it another example of sexism?
From voice-mail systems to GPS devices to Siri and beyond, why are so many computerized voices female? One answer may lie in biology. Scientific studies have shown that people generally find women's voices more pleasing than men's. "It's much easier to find a female voice that everyone likes than a male voice that everyone likes," said Stanford University Professor Clifford Nass. "It's a well-established phenomenon that the human brain is developed to like female voices."
My crimes against conservatism were much worse. Brent Bozell has accused me of committing the unpardonable sins of saying unflattering things about George W. Bush, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.Many tell me similar things about my independent style of conservatism. Some do not like the idea that I have difficulty with the temperament of so many shock jock squawk radio and TV hosts. Looking back I think that I can say with Joe that what has changed is not my positions but my moderate temperament in walking them out. I am still a conservative.
...
I wrote the book "Rome Wasn't Burnt in a Day" in 2004, and predicted if Mr. Bush and the GOP Congress didn't stop spending money at such a reckless rate, they would lose their majority and wreck the Congress.
Even though I was correct on both counts, I received a firestorm of criticism from Washington conservatives who blog on sites like Newsbusters. Their main complaint seemed to be that I was being too tough on Mr. Bush.
...
As I said at the time to these statist Republicans, my positions on taxes, spending and limited government have not changed one bit since the first day I walked into Congress in 1994 when I was known as a right-wing zealot.
Unfortunately, it was the Republican leadership who became more liberal with Americans' tax dollars and it was large swaths of the Washington conservative establishment who sat silently by because they enjoyed being in power so much that they never bothered to let their principles get in the way of supporting reckless GOP party bosses. Speaking truth to power was not in vogue when Republicans were in charge. That spinelessness led to a Pelosi speakership.
...
To win, conservatives will need instead to follow the wise practice of Ronald Reagan, who won hearts and minds of Middle America by being conservative when it came to ideology but moderate when it came to temperament.
...
I asked Brent to name one issue where I had changed since the first day I entered Congress in 1994. He could not. I then asked how he could no longer consider me a conservative if, in fact, I had remained more consistent over the past 15 years in my views than the entire Republican Party.
Brent sputtered a while and then finally spit my crime against humanity out."You attacked Rush!!!"
Hmm. Very interesting.
As was the case for 8 long years with George W. Bush, too many people on both extremes defend partisan personalities instead of principles. Just as too many on the Left worship Barack Obama without questions, many on the right now focus more on pledging allegiance to media figures or populist personalities. The conservative movement marched in lockstep behind George W. Bush for nearly a decade and he took us over a cliff.
Forgive me if I don't do the same over the next decade.
My positions remain unchanged. I have always fought for smaller government, less federal intrusion into our lives, more personal freedoms and the end of a Wilsonian foreign policy.
If you don't think I am a true conservative because I comment on talk radio personalities when I think their approach is hurting the cause of small government conservatism, that is your right. But I will continue focusing on the issues that really matter. And I hope that my old friend Brent will have his website do the same.
I pray that the Vatican will move swiftly in this case to act righteously and, at least temporarily, remove Bishop Finn from his position. If it does then I think that everyone, especially we in the Kansas City metro area, will understand that the Roman Catholic Church is taking these matters of priestly child abuse seriously.There is some hope at the moment that perhaps the Roman Catholic Church in the United States may learn to appreciate that God may be more interested in the safety of his people than the protection of his abusive priests. For too long the Catholic hierarchy has seemed to value the reputation of the Church over the well-being of the church, a word derived from the Greek meaning “gathering” or “assembly.” Put another way, the people of God precede the institution of religious authority, order, and institutions.
...
Now, at last, there is news that suggests at least one bishop of the church will face a reckoning with responsibility. The Roman Catholic bishop of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Missouri, Robert W. Finn, has been indicted for failing to report suspected child abuse after allowing five months to elapse before informing authorities that child pornography had been discovered on the laptop of a priest with access to children. Finn has thus become the highest-ranking Roman Catholic official to be held criminally liable for appearing to protect his priests.
“This is the most important election in generations. Whether we are able to fix our economy and get our country on the right track will have ramifications for decades. We cannot afford to continue on our current path. Mitt Romney has a life history of coming into struggling organizations and turning them around. Right now, we need someone like him in the White House to fundamentally change our economy and reverse three years of failed policies. Unlike our current president, Mitt Romney understands the economy from the inside out. Fixing the economy will not be easy, but Mitt has shown throughout his life that he has the leadership ability and expertise to lead our country toward a recovery. Republicans should recognize the importance of this election and realize that if they are serious about regaining the White House, Mitt Romney is the only candidate to back.”I concur with the Governor Christie's take on Romney and endorse Mitt too!
I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims.Perhaps in this political season it would be wise to remember these words when we consider the faith traditions of the different candidates? Maybe these words could cause us to value each other and our differences? Reality check: do we really want a theocratic government?
Let’s imagine that someone from the year 1970 miraculously traveled forward in time to today. You could show her one of the iPhones that Steve Jobs helped create, and she’d be thunderstruck. People back then imagined wireless communication (Dick Tracy, Star Trek), but they never imagined you could funnel an entire world’s worth of information through a pocket-sized device.There is something saddening about these thoughts. I remember the days when I believed that cancer and other diseases would be cured in my life time. I recall watching video clips (in my youth) of cars that would not need wheels but would ride on air and I dreamed of a magical 21st century. Mostly I thought of space travel and how we would see people walking on far off planets. Realistically some of these were pretty naive, yet it saddens me that these dreams of a Utopian existence are not talked about at all these days.
The time traveler would be vibrating with excitement. She’d want to know what other technological marvels had been invented in the past 41 years. She’d ask about space colonies on Mars, flying cars, superfast nuclear-powered airplanes, artificial organs. She’d want to know how doctors ended up curing cancer and senility.
You’d have to bring her down gently. We don’t have any of those things. Airplanes are pretty much the same now as they were then; so are cars, energy sources, appliances, houses and neighborhoods. A person born in 1900 began with horse-drawn buggies and died with men walking on the Moon, but the last few decades have seen nothing like that sort of technological advance.
...
If you go back and think about America’s big World’s Fairs or if you read about Bell Labs in its heyday or Silicon Valley in the 1980s or 1990s, you see people in the grip of utopian visions. They imagine absurdly perfect worlds. They feel as though they have the power to begin the world anew. These were delusions, but inspiring delusions.
This utopianism is almost nowhere to be found today.
I guess I had higher expectations when I started to watch this. I was expecting something at least somewhat as engrossing as Seabiscuit. But -to put it bluntly- it wasn't. It was oddly self-indulgent. The movie is a series of scenes: Diane Lane striking poses with the horse, some other character striking a pose with the horse, Diane Lane making some overly-sappy passionate statement about the need to take risks, some other character making an overly-sappy passionate statement about horses and racing.The movie was too long and needed a lot of editing.
When I think about this I remember people who have raised us all up by their examples. Here are a few modern day people who have inspired me and raised me up:You raise me up, so I can stand on mountains;
You raise me up, to walk on stormy seas;
I am strong, when I am on your shoulders;
You raise me up... To more than I can be.