12 Years On, America Must Come To Terms With A Stranger In The House

It's hard to believe, but on August 6th JonBenét Ramsey would be turning 18. As a sad irony, her parents and brother were finally cleared of her murder by police just a few weeks before. Until the announcement last week that newly developed Touch DNA had cleared her family, they had lived under a crushing cloud of suspicion and innuendo for nearly 12 years. Sadly, Patsy Ramsey died before she was able to reclaim her good name and position as a victim rather than a murder and/or co-conspirator.

It's interesting to note that the DNA discovered by the newly developed Touch DNA process was not new. It matched DNA found in a standard 1998 DNA test on material that was found on JonBenét's underwear and under her fingernails. All of this DNA matched an unknown male, who is all but certainly her killer.

So now, other than starkly factual reports of the DA's proclamation of innocence, there's a deafening silence from the media. Pundits who either open or subtly accused the Ramseys are noticeably silent.

Perhaps the reason why the world was so quick to pass judgment on John and Patsy Ramsey is that the alternative was just too horrible to comprehend: An unknown, faceless predator entering a big, safe home in the middle of the night to carry out unspeakable horrors, staging a kidnapping (while lurking in the house for what was likely hours) then slipping away in the night while the parents slept. Where is he now? How many more victims have there been? Will there be? How much time have we wasted chasing dead-end leads?

I guess we'll have to wait for that horrible truth to fully sink in before we hear any apologies.

How's Your 401(k) Doing?

I love this quote from the Wall Street Journal:

Exactly 10 years ago, the Standard & Poor's 500-stock Index was at 1164; it closed Friday at 1239. That's an annualized average return of 0.63%. At that rate, it will take you 111 more years to double your money in the stock market.

0.63%?? Maybe you would have been better off putting that money into a savings account?

Netflix Just Said Sorry

For giving us the finger last week. We accept. Let's move past this small trouble and get back to the awesomeness that is Netflix. You really should get an account. No, seriously.

"Ostergren's Law " Heads To Federal Court

The Virginia Law that was crafted to prevent Privacy advocate B.J. Ostergren from pointing out the gaping security hole in Virginia's public (i.e. government) websites is now moving to federal court.

Ostergren's lawyers filed a lawsuit to stop the new law before it goes into effect 7/1/2008. The new law will prohibit the dissemination of any SSNs posted on public websites. Ostergren's lawyers claim that if the government disseminates the information in a public forum, they cannot stop it's re-publication by citizens under the First Amendment.

Keep in mind, the SSN's are posted on public websites (usually tax websites, or court websites), because the state is too lazy to redact them. Ostergren is trying to force the state to either redact them or remove them from the web. Instead, in their infinite wisdom, the Virginia Legislature passed a law (now at issue) making it illegal to re-post the SSNs on another website which is what Ostergren had been doing to bring attention to this huge problem.

So rather than fix the problem, the legislature passed a law saying no one can talk about the problem. Brilliant.

Of course, as Virginia law is irrelevant outside the United States, the Russian mafia is still free to pull your SSN from a Virginia website (oh yes, the 'tubes' run all the way to Russia) and engage in massive identity theft. But the Virginia Legislature thinks if we all cover our eyes, nothing bad will happen. And you Virginia residents pay this think tank's salary. Now get back to work.

Cliff Notes for D.C. vs. Heller

Today the Supreme Court issued it's long awaited ruling in the District of Columbia Et Al. Vs. Heller case (pdf). It should finally put to bed (but sadly probably won't) the rediculous argument that the 2nd Amendment some how only protected the right of the federal government to form an army (militia). It also destroyed several other tired myths that gun-control groups have tried to pass off over the last 45 years. For example:

The 2nd Amendment only protects the right to own 18th century firearms only:

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern
forms of search,the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding. (D.C. vs. Heller - pg 8).

The 2nd gives the right to bear arms, but congress can take it away by amendment:

We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed." (D.C. vs. Heller - pg 19).

That the last 'big' 2nd Amendment case, United States v.Miller, 307 U. S. 174, 179 (1939), confirmed that the 2nd Amendment didn't apply to ordinary citizens:

Miller did not hold that (that the 2nd amendment was only for state sponsored militia members -subleum) and cannot possibly be read to have held that. The judgment in the case upheld against a Second Amendment challenge two men’s federal convictions for transporting an unregistered short-barreled shotgun in interstate commerce, in violation of the National Firearms Act, 48 Stat. 1236. It is entirely clear that the Court’s basis for saying that the Second Amendment did not apply was not that the defendants were “bear[ing] arms” not “for . . . military purposes” but for “nonmilitary use,” post, at 2. Rather, it was that the type of weapon at issue was not eligible for Second Amendment protection." (D.C. vs. Heller - pg 49).

That the Second Amendment is about hunting (and no one really hunts anymore):

Third, when the able-bodied men of a nation are trained in arms and organized, they are better able to resist tyranny. (D.C. vs. Heller - pg 24).

All-in-all, the majority delivered a through and well founded opinion, laying out why the Second Amendment is just as important and individual a right as the 1st and 4th. Interestingly, the court did not touch on the issue of gun licensing/registration, primarily because the petitioner (Heller) only asked that the District process his license request. Scalia noted:

Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. (D.C. vs. Heller - pg 3).

That of course leaves open the question of whether or not the government is allowed to require a license in order for a citizen to exercise a right enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

Can the government require a citizen to obtain a permit before exercising his Second Amendment right to own a firearm? Clearly, given D.C.'s post-decision statements, that exactly what they plan on doing. Given that the majority spent 64 pages explaining how the right to keep and bear arms was a right on the same level as the First and Fourth Amendments, it would seem contradictory that they would then claim "oh, but you need a permit from the government to exercise this one" unless the government is also able to require permits prior to speaking, publishing a newspaper or in order to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Or the more extreme example, a permit needed to exercise your right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures. Alas, this is another area that will have to be ironed out over the coming years.

For it's part, D.C. is guaranteed to do everything in it's power to minimally comply. The District's Attorney General, Peter Nickles provided a glimpse of their strategy:

We are going to strictly regulate the registration of handguns. There will be no authorization of automatic or semi-automatics.

Which to me seems like a very questionable legal strategy. Primarily because the SCOTUS opinion clearly says handguns are protected because they are common and popular self-defense weapons.

Whatever the reason, handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid. (D.C. vs. Heller - pg 58).

And semi-automatics are the most popular type of handgun. Sadly, this is not unexpected from the AG that declared that D.C. roadblocks were clearly constitutional. And oh, and he was on the wrong side of the Heller case as well.

Original Fluoride City Considers A Re-examination Of Its Safety

Grand Rapids Michigan was the first city in the world to fluoridate it's water. They even have a monument dedicated to it. Now the city in pondering whether or not it was a good idea. Some 63 years later, Grand Rapids is considering dropping fluoride from it's water due to concerns surrounding unanswered questions raised by recent studies that link fluoride to bone cancer and thyroid problems.

In the past, it has been common to stereotype the anti-fluoride movement as a group of nuts in tinfoil hats. It's getting harder and harder to do that, especially when the lead researcher of the US Government's own 2006 National Academy of Sciences report (who had been tasked with reviewing Fluoride's safety at 4ppm) noted that:

We were not able to rule out a carcinogenic effect of fluoride. We reported that fluoride exposure is plausibly associated with a number of other health effects, including neurotoxicity, gastrointestinal problems, and endocrine problems, and that even though these effects are not necessarily specific to fluoride exposure, the associations cannot be ruled out and need further study. (PDF Link)

Think about that statement, along with the fact that the government never safety tested fluoride before adding it to drinking water. The NRC report noted that the current FDA limits for water fluoridation were clearly not safe and were likely leading to an increase in bone fractures, a particular problem among the elderly. Overall, there was consensus among the committee that there is scientific evidence that under certain conditions fluoride can weaken bone and increase the risk of fractures (PDF Link).

Netflix Just Gave Their Customers The Finger

So this is what happens when you destroy all of your competitors and become the only game in town? Netflix today announced that they would be discontinuing subscriber's ability to divide their movie queue into multiple 'profiles' (so called Netflix Profiles). If you don't have Netflix, what this means is that your wife, husband, child, etc, used to be able to have their own queue and as they send back their movies, a new movie ships from their queue. Now, Netflix subscribers will be limited to just one profile, just one queue. That means that there will be a lot of figuring out who get's the next movie in your house, and moving that to top of the queue. It also means you're going to get recommendations based on your rental history of Disney films and seasons 1 & 2 of Blue's Clues.

Why did Netflix do this? No one knows. They're keeping their cards close to the vest on this one. They did tell us that "While it may be disappointing to see Profiles go away, this change will help us continue to improve the Netflix website for all our customers."

Huh? Did profiles prevent you from improving the website for 'all' your customers? What about all the ratings that were linked to a profile that will be deleted? Does that improve the website?

I've been a Netflix customer for over 3 years. One of the amazing things about them is how their service got better and better over time. Now, with this 'final decision' they have taken a huge step back. I can only think of one reason why they would do this: MONEY. Yes...everyone's favorite reason to screw people over.

If Netflix does away with the queues, they're hoping that customers who lose their queue will open their own account. Thus an unlimited, 3-at a time plan goes from $16.99/month to $18.98 (for 1 and a 2 at a time unlimited account). So for that $2.00 pricing change, Netflix just gave all their customers the finger. What brilliant fresh-out-of-college MBA came up with this idea? The Hacking Netflix Website posted this story (in shock like the rest of us) at around 9pm. Over the last two hours, there have been over 100 comments posted. That's probably more than any other story they've ever posted.

Here's an idea, in protest, every Netflix member should downgrade their account to one of the cheaper plans.

Did they cover customer backlash in your MBA course?

GM lost $39 Billion in 2007

It's a good thing they canceled that electric car program back in 2003. Who on Earth would ever want to buy an electric car?

Two Very Good Reasons To Take Care Of Your Teeth And Gums

This week, two studies were released that demonstrated the importance of taking care of your teeth. In one study (Lancet Oncology. 2008;9:550-558) periodontal disease (gum disease) was associated with a small yet significant increase in cancer risk. An earlier study (1/2007) found a link between periodontal disease and pancreatic cancer.

The second study showed that when type 2 diabetics took care of their gums, they were able to control their diabetes much more effectively.

It's important to note that that gum disease is virtually symptomless until the later stages when it's too late to do much about it. If you don't floss you're teeth and see gum bleeding or visit the dentist often, it's very likely you wouldn't notice a problem until your teeth began to loosen in their sockets.

Keep in mind, that when you get old, you don't have to have false teeth! If you take care of your teeth now, they can last you a lifetime. Remember to floss daily and get yourself a good electric toothbrush. They're cheap now (under $20) so that if you're reading this, you can afford to get one.

The Baltimore Sun Lives Up To Their Abbreviation

The "BS" shows you can never stoop too low in an effort to sell newspapers.

An eye-catching headline like this is bound to sell some papers:

Illicit guns flow into Maryland: In '07 crimes, 44% of firearms were imported

What difference does it make if that's a completely unsubstantiated claim?

The article, claims that 44% of the guns used in Maryland crimes were from other states, and then continues on to quote various Maryland officials who pat themselves on the back and take credit for the high percentage. Why? Because it clearly shows that Maryland's gun laws are so tough, criminals are going outside the state to buy their guns. Of course they don't take credit for the fact that the majority of guns are still purchased in Maryland. Only politicians have spines so flexible.

But what about that percentage? Turns out, if you actually look at the study(PDF) their story was based on, the facts are oh so different.

The study is based on gun serial number traces. It shows that in Maryland there were 7,517 gun traces (usually by law enforcement) in 2007. Of those, in only 4,397 traces were the ATF able to tell where the gun was originally purchased. Of those, 44% came from a state other than Maryland.

The front page of the study clearly states the following two very important facts the Baltimore Sun doesn't want you to know:

1. Law enforcement agencies may request firearms traces for any reason, and those reasons are not necessarily reported to the Federal Government. Not all firearms used in crime are traced and not all firearms traced are used in crime.
2. The firearms selected do not constitute a random sample and should not be considered representative of the larger universe of all firearms used by criminals or any subset of that universe.
   

So how does the BS determine that 44% of guns used in Maryland crimes came from other states when we don't know if any of those guns were used in crimes? And even if they were, the study's own authors (ATF) state that they are in no way, shape or form representative of all firearms used in crimes in Maryland.

So what does that mean about the BS' statement of "In '07 crimes, 44% of firearms were imported"?

The Baltimore Sun completely made that up. Why? The only answer I can come up with is that it supports an agenda either the Baltimore Sun and/or reported Annie Linskey has. There can be no other explanation.

Remember that the next time some 'news' source quotes some statistic. In this case, the BS story was absent any details (or even a link to the source). That should always tell you there's something really wrong with what they're telling you and their only option is to hide the truth from you.

Peon Pulpit Paranoia #2

Clear Channel Communications, the largest owner of radio stations in the United States (1,200 stations according to Wikipedia) is also a major investor in XM Satellite Radio. Maybe that explains why radio sucks so bad. Could it be that Clear Channel programs crappy 'terrestrial' radio stations so that you will think to yourself, "Man, this radio station sucks! I really should just get that XM" ?

Thus, Clear Channel could convert non-paying customers (like you) into paying subscribers. Think about it.

Peon Pulpit Paranoia #1

If the government wanted to spy on your computer, wouldn't your anti-virus software make a really good cover for it? It watches everything that happens on your computer then 'phones home' at least once a day. If you wanted to motivate people to buy and install the software, you would just periodically write a couple of nasty viruses that would wreck any system without anti-virus software. Think about it....

Who Thought Schapelle Corby's Excuse Was BS?

If you think Schapelle Corby's excuse of "Those are not my drugs!" was unbelievable, perhaps you should take a look at this story. A Japanese police officer stuck 1/3 of a lb of pot into some unsuspecting passenger's suitcase at Tokyo Airport in order to test out his drug dog. The dog failed to find the pot, and the cop couldn't remember which bag he put it in.

Oops. Now someone is traveling around with 142 grams of pot in their suitcase. I hope they're not on their way to Indonesia.

Peon Pulpit's Best Shows On Television

With all the crap on television we sometimes forget there are a few good shows out there. Here they are:

The Peon Pulpit's Best Shows On Television (2008)

1. Best Reality Series - The First 48 (A&E)
2. Best Educational Series - How It's Made (Science Channel/Discovery Channel/Ztele)
3. Best Drama Series - Lost (ABC)
4. Best Documentary Series - Frontline (PBS) Runner Up: VH1 Behind the Music (VH-1)
   
5. Best Comedy Series - The Office (NBC)
6. Best News Show - The Daily Show (Comedy Central)
7. Best Political Show - Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) Runner Up: The McLachlan group (TMG)

Updated 5/21/2008

Seafood Is Added To The MMHOD

The seafood crisis keeps popping up on the radar...enough so that it's been inducted into the MMHOD.

Fox News Story On Shaving Your Pubes

Yeah, that does sound like a joke, doesn't it? But it's not. Another example of why Fox News is a complete joke.

It's True: Hollywood Secretly Hates The Environment

In a reprise of my earlier post Peon Pulpit Tips To Save The Environment I thought it might be good to see what the movie industry has done to curb their oil burning, tree cutting behavior in pursuit of the almighty dollar. As I noted in my earlier post, the DVD industry produced approximately 214,289,319 lbs of plastic in 2005. We now have new numbers for 2007. In 2007, Hollywood produced 431,114,394 lbs of plastic! Hollywood has increased their plastic dumping by more than 100% in just TWO YEARS!!! That's 195, 550 metric tons. An average car weighs about 1 metric ton, so imagine the weight of 195,550 cars and you have an idea of how much plastic Hollywood produces. So much for the love.

PRODUCTION OF PLASTIC FOR DVD'S
Year	# Of DVDs with Cases Produced	Weight Of Plastic (grams)	Weight (LBS)	Gallons Of Water Used (2.4 gal/lb)	% Change
2005	1,200,000,000	97,200,000,000	214,289,319	514,294,365
2007	2,414,200,000	195,550,200,000	431,114,394	1,034,674,546	101.18%

Shaving Tips For Newbs

Shaving for the most part is pretty harsh on your face. Dragging a steel blade across your face every (or nearly) morning doesn't really sound all that gentle, does it? To avoid having problems with ingrown hair, try out the suggestions below and let me know what you think. I guarantee you will have fewer problems.

Understanding the problem

• Hair grows out of your face typically in a downward direction. This is called the ‘grain’ of your face, much like the grain of a piece of wood. Shaving ‘with the grain’ means to shave in the direction that the hair is growing out of your face (for most people, this is downward, from cheeks to chin). However, your face may be different, and your neck almost certainly is. Take a good look at your face and figure out your unique ‘grain’ pattern. You will need to know this.
• Hair tends to retract into the follicle when it is pulled. Anyone who’s ever tried to tweeze out a hair has probably seen this. If you pull a hair almost all the way out, but loose your grip on it, it will frequently retract below the skin. This same effect is present when you shave, and is one of the primary causes of ingrown hair. Once the hair is under the skin, it is likely that it will grow into the surrounding skin, causing the hair to become ingrown. The primary focus in minimizing ingrown hair is to prevent this retraction from happening, or to minimize it’s effect. The curlier your hair is, the more likely it is that a retracted hair will become ingrown.
  

Minimizing the Damage

1. Shave with a standard razor. Ditch the electric. Electrics have problems with the way they cut as to make them a bad choice for people with ingrown hair problems. For example, most electrics require you to shave against the grain (any foil electric does). This makes the hair as short as it can possibly be, and with the associated pulling/tugging on the hair as it is cut, is guaranteed to make it retract below the skin. And electrics pull the hair much more than a sharp razor.
2. Don’t go for a razor that will give you the cleanest shave of your life. The closer the top of that final hair is to the skin line, the greater the risk for ingrown hair. I would recommend using a 2 bladed razor like the Sensor Excel rather than a Mach3 for that reason, but if you have the Mach3, it's probably fine.
3. Shave in the shower. This is critical. You need to make the hair as soft and as easy to cut as possible. When you get in the shower, gently wash your face to remove the oils from your beard. Oils on the hair will prevent them from soaking up the water, and you want them to be waterlogged. Make shaving the last thing you do, to maximize this soaking process.
4. Before shaving, try to get the hair to retract into the skin. The best way to do this is to try to ‘pull’ the hair. I've found a Buff Puff (yeah, I know..just get your girlfriend/wife to buy it for you) works very well for this as it will grab the hair as you run it across your face (against the grain). Remember, the effect you're after is to cause the hair to retract as much as possible before shaving so it won’t retract any further when the razor pulls/cuts it.
5. Shave with the grain of your face. Never shave against the grain. Make as few passes as you can, and unless your beard is super heavy, this means you will make (1) pass for each 1 ½ “ strip of your face. Touch up if you must, but remember, it’s better to have 5 o’clock shadow than a bunch of ingrown hair.
6. You'll find that in the shower, it's not that necessary to rinse your blade frequently. Rinsing your blade should be done as little as possible to avoid wearing out the lubricating strip on the top of the blades. The truth is, you can probably shave your whole face without rinsing at all.Use your razor for at most (7) shaves. You can modify this if you want, but I use mine for only (6) shaves before I replace it. The duller the blade, the more it will pull the hair before cutting it.
7. Try to shave at the same time every day. For some reason this seems to help, but it’s not critical. I take one day off of shaving a week (Sunday) and I don’t have any problems. But even if you take a day off shaving, don't take a day off of the Buff Puff.
8. Don't bother with the after shave. All it really does is hurt. If your skin is dry, you might put some moisturizer on your face while it's still damp from the shower. Apart from that, just pat your face dry and be done with it
   

That's pretty much it. Please let me know if you've found something that works that's not listed here. I'd be interested to hear what everyone else is doing.

shaving tips ingrown hair

What Happens When You Hand Your Car Keys Over To A Complete Stranger?

Your car gets stolen. Imagine that. Another 'win' for valet parking.

The 57-year-old Port Charlotte resident told deputies that when she returned to the parking lot after visiting her sick husband on Tuesday afternoon, a man approached her and identified himself as a valet parking employee. He said there was a problem with the valet parking service and requested she give him her valet receipt for inspection

That's what happens when you are conditioned to believe it's ok to give your (probably) most valuable possession to a stranger....

Polycarbonate Pandæmonium

Well, my world got a little bit more complicated last week. It happened when I read that Health Canada, the Canadian version of the Centers For Disease Control, announced that Bisphenol-A would be declared a 'dangerous substance' as a result of an in-depth study of the chemical.

Bisphenol-A (AKA: BPA) is a chemical used in the production of polycarbonate plastic. Polycarbonate is a hard, clear plastic that is very popular in the consumer realm. It's most known for being the plastic that is used for those cool Nalgene bottles hikers (or psudo-hikers) carry around their water in.

Opps. That was probably a 'not-so-great' idea. As it turns out, several studies have shown that Bisphenol-A leaches out of polycarbonate and into whatever it contains, even at room temperature. That wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that BPA is an endocrine disruptor that mimics the hormone estrogen in humans. It has been linked to the following effects in mice:

• Permanent changes to genital tract
• Changes in breast tissue that predispose cells to hormones and carcinogens
• Prostate cells become more sensitive to hormones and cancer
• Lower bodyweight
• Early onset of puberty (this recent phenomenon has been puzzling scientists for a some time)
  
• Decline in testicular testosterone
• Insulin resistance
• Decreased maternal behaviors
• Damage to eggs and chromosomes
• Reversed the normal sex differences in brain structure and behavior

And the list goes on. Some of these effects were known as early as 1993. Finally, Health Canada stood up and said, "Um..hey guys, this stuff looks pretty bad, eh?" (something neither the CDC nor the FDA has yet to find the balls to do).

Immediately, a slew of retailers said they'd pull polycarbonate baby bottles off the shelf (Wal-Mart will only take a year to do it). Nalgene said they're abandoning the stuff (declared on the front page of their website).

So, you say, your babies drink from Pyrex bottles and you've never been hiking. So what do you care? Well it also turns out that polycarbonate film is in just about every canned good you can think of, from chicken soup to sodas. Even more disturbing is the sheer number of products I use every day which are either clearly polycarbonate, or are suspiciously like polycarbonate (which is usually designated with the recycling code [7], but not all #7's are polycarbonate. The hard, clear plastic is the dead giveaway). For example:

• My Brita pitchers. Are they polycarbonate? They sure look like it but this site says they DO NOT contain BPA. They're made from the safe-sounding "styrene copolymer methylmethacrylate" I'll keep using them until I hear otherwise I guess.
  
• My Turvis Tumblers that I drink hot tea from every night. On the website, they're proudly listed as being polycarbonate.
• Those super-cool Rubbermaid Premier food containers....Polycarbonate (to Rubbermaid's credit, they're very upfront about the issue).
  
• Compact discs and DVDs
• Plastic dinnerware
• Composite dental fillings (ironic...everyone went to these fearing the mercury in amalgam)
• Some of the aluminum water bottles are lined with polycarbonate (just when you thought you got away...)
  

Basically, the stuff is everywhere. On the upside, we may be close to figuring out what's caused the big increase in breast cancer. On the downside, how are we going to get rid of all of it?