"ton" is 2204.6 pounds. That is not a ton. 2000 pounds is a ton in the US. 2204.6 is a metric ton. Metric? Since when does the US operate on the metric ton principle? I don't think we do! Oh, wait. Is it that damn "International Airport" designation again?! No, I'm guessing that it's that a metric ton is 204.6 pounds more than a US ton (or short ton) and that benefits them considerably. I noticed that we're not calculating the flight length in kilometers, why is that? Because they don't want to, that is correct.
give any sort of formula as to how they have calculated the amount of CO2 which they are claiming per flight. OK, they give a formula as to how to calculate how much money you can give them, no questions asked. But they don't give you a formula as to what was taken into consideration when determining the CO2 amount. How many people were on this plane? What kind of a plane was it? What direction was it flying? Was there a headwind? A tailwind? A side wind? (Is there a side wind? God, I hope not.) Does the plane use the same amount of fuel regardless as to the number of passengers? Do they take the size of the crew into consideration? (I mean how many crew members there are, not if they need to butter their sides to squeeze themselves down the aisle or not.) Shouldn't flights with more people on them cost you less money to throw away than flights with less people on them? Because with a whole boatload, er, planeload of people, all of the sinning can be split up over all of them, but if you only have two people on the plane, then you're going halfsies with the sin. Not good.
management project located in Mendocino County, California." It goes on to tell us about that particular forest and how it is "...dominated by native Redwood and Douglas Fir trees that are remarkably resilient to pests, fire, and disease." Well if they're do damned resilient, why is it that money is needed for them? They seem to be doing just fine on their own. With me so far? Of the $13.50 per ton of CO2 that they're charging you, $12.00 of it goes to "...covering costs associated with locating, researching, and verifying high quality projects as well as the other general operating costs typically incurred by any organization." Wait a minute. How is it supporting the forest one minute and then going on to support a bunch of locating, researching and verifying? Wouldn't "researching" cover the "locating" and the "verifying"? You might notice it doesn't say that they're doing anything once they're done with all of the "researching". So they're just looking into stuff and you're supposed to pay for it. Sounds fair. Sure. And do tell, what "other general operating costs" might they they speaking of? Who knows?!?!
Done!
Once again, we have the "creation" of a ridiculous food item. Fortunately, this time the item isn't vying for a place in the Guinness Book of World Records. The only food items that should be worthy of a Guinness certified World Record are those that are grown. Not those that are baked, not those that are put together, not those which would set a record that could easily be bested by simply adding an ingredient, none of those should qualify. Under my rules, there would be a World Record available for the World's Largest Pumpkin, but there would not be a World Record available for the World's Largest Pumpkin Pie. What's to stop someone from making a bigger pumpkin pie the next day? Not much, all they'd need is a bigger pie plate. You shouldn't be able to snag a world record simply by going shopping. 
their little way of saying, "Suck it, United States! We can have coronary artery disease just as much as y'all do." (Though I will admit that I highly doubt the Brits have ever said "y'all".) I'm just glad that we won't have to hear from the US folks who always crawl out of their laboratories when news of some lard-laden treat becomes available, just to admonish those of us who eat anything other than dust and Chiclets. 
According to the probably obese folks over there at Fox News, the folks across the pond at a take out restaurant aptly called the Jolly Fryer have created a burger seemingly inspired by one of the greatest eaters in all of cartoon history: Scooby Doo. 
Fryer) Spiros and Andreas Lomvardos and another gent who happens to be an employee, Karl Ford. As the story goes (and by "the story" I mean "the article over there at Fox News"), the three chaps were "...sitting at work on a dead quiet night" and "...saw an ad from a well-known burger chain." According to Spiros, they noticed "The burgers always look big in the ads — but they never look like that in real life." That's when "...we started discussing making our own big burger.” 
bout the softheads in the US who always complain about how unhealthy something like this is because he did say, "“Obviously we wouldn’t recommend for someone to eat this every day. It’s not to be taken too seriously. It’s something that we would encourage on a special occasion for someone who wants to challenge themselves. It’s just a little bit of fun, really.” Brav-o, sir! Brav-o! My favorite part of that statement was the "obviously" because that's what I always think when something like this burbles up to the surface (probably in a vat of hot oil) in the US and the nutritionist Nazis come out in full force saying that if we eat that every day, we'll be dead by next Tuesday. Yes, we know that. Now please pipe down and pass the ketchup. 
disapproving track. According to the article, "If your stomach is strong enough to finish the burger, which comes with a side of traditional British chips, you even get a free Diet Coke to wash it all down with." Um, what? A Diet Coke?! THAT is what you're offering patrons who can eat a burger that measures 6-inches tall, weighs more than 3 pounds and weighs in at 2,645 calories, not to mention God only knows how much fat, sodium and cholesterol?!?! A bloody Diet Coke?!?! What is wrong with you people?! No cheap T-shirt?! No crappy bumper sticker?! No computer generated certificate that says "I finished an entire Super Scooby and all I got was this lousy piece of paper"? A Diet Coke?!?!
Since it's near the end of September, that can only mean one thing (apparently). That's right! It's time for Christmas shopping! 
Now, I'm not saying that all toys/dolls should be white, OK? And I can't really say that when I was a kid that I didn't notice what color the toys/dolls that I played with were, but that's just because I'm white and the toys/dolls were white also most of the time. (Wait. What was Barbie's friend, Skipper? Was she black? No, that doesn't seem right. Who's the black Barbie? Christie? Then who in the hell is Malibu Stacie?) I mean, I really didn't notice if the dolls were white or black, nor did I care. But was that because I'm white or because I didn't care? I don't know. All I know is that this paragraph is my disclaimer to the whole "I don't like it" thing not being because I'm white and therefore a racist, OK? I'm not a racist. And Barack Obama is not a Muslim. (I always feel the need to throw that in whenever I can, but now I'm all confused. Where was I? Oh, right. The Hispanic dolls.) 
OK, she looks like a miniaturized soccer mom. Does she come with a mini van? An SUV perhaps? Where is her Starbucks cup? Let me guess. Accessories sold separately? But Fisher Price also markets the Little Mommy Sweet as Me Hispanic Doll with Hot Pink Top with Jeans and Brown Shoes. Behold! 
Does she have to be the "Hispanic" Doll? Why can't she just be the Little Mommy Sweet As Me Doll with Hot Pink Top with Jeans and Brown Shoes? How come the other doll isn't Little Mommy Sweet as Me White Honky Doll with Pink Jumpsuit and Brown Hair? (As long as I'm asking questions here, why does the Hispanic doll have that flowered fanny pack on her head?) Is it assumed that those who would purchase the Hispanic doll are really interested in all of the apparel that she comes with, while those who would purchase the white doll just need to know what color hair she has? We like shoes! We loooovvve shoes! But we don't get to know about the white doll's shoes. Sad. 
only one of them has a hair clip and the other one of them has a snazzy headband with a fashionable floral accessory. My point is that they're the damn same! You don't need to go off calling one of them Hispanic and one of them, well, you don't call the other one anything now, do you?! Tell me something about the doll that isn't bilingual. I don't know what phrases they say. I mean, they're supposed to be babies after all, I don't know why they're talking in the first place and if they are talking, shouldn't they also come with a little Oprah set? (You know, because they'd totally be on her show if they were babies and could talk.) Does the doll that is not bilingual say, "I don't speak Spanish."? It should, shouldn't it? Think about it. 
President Barry and his lovely wife, the impeccably stylish Michelle Obama, are a very photogenic couple. That's a good thing for the leader of a country as vain as the United States. We like it when we're represented by a good looking chap (or chapette). I'd imagine other countries do as well. Like it when they are represented by a good looking leader, that is. But I've noticed that President Barry always has the same look when he's taking pictures with foreign leaders. He's like a cardboard cutout every single time and he looks exactly the same every single time! 
e us the perfect opportunity to observe President Barry's cardboard photogenic nature as well as it gives us a chance to see how the leaders and their spouses from other countries interact via photo ops with the Obamas. They seem to fall into three categories. There are the folks that are perfectly fine with having their picture snapped with Mr. and Mrs. Charisma. There are the folks that are seemingly not perfectly fine with the photo op. And then there are those who are OK with the photo op, but only because they seem to think that it gives them an opportunity to show either how chummy they (think they) are with the Obamas, or so they can show how much better than the Obamas they are. But through it all, President Barry? Looks the same, that is correct. 
Please welcome the 
I've only shown you a few of these cardboard cutout photo ops that President Barry has done since the whole G20 thing began on Thursday. There are over 130 photos of the Obamas with Mr. and Mrs. Other Country over at the White House Flickr photo stream. Yes, the White House has a Flickr photo stream. They're hip. They've told us so. Feel free to click the link above and check it out. But if you're hoping to catch President Barry in a different pose or looking like something with a pulse, you're going to be sorely disappointed. 
On occasion, I use this blog as a podium for some personal prenouncements. The ol' PPP. Or P-cubed, if you'd prefer. In case you haven't guessed, this is one of those occasions. 
I find that it's difficult to meet individuals who are actually real, who are actually genuine. People who don't really have anything to hide and are pretty much OK with laying it all out in front of them are hard for me to come by. That's not to say that I don't encounter people like that, but it's to say that it's rare. At least it's rare for me. Then again, I don't get out much. (Such a pain to raise and lower the drawbridge to cross the moat which encircles my walled off compound which protects me from society.)
Anyway, today is her birthday and I have to tell her Happy Birthday, so here goes: 
