He is such a ham.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
In any case, check out Rosemary's News and Ideas.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
Ferdinand, the Hunter |
Lucky, the Explorer |
Boots |
I have always had a firm commitment to the truth, and debunking false rumors is very important to me. As a result, I have collected together some of the more egregious rumors about Obama in hopes of putting them to rest once and for all.
As far as we can determine, none of these rumors are true.
We'll be keeping a close watch on Internet traffic, and if there any more false rumors being spread about Senator Obama, we'll do our best to make sure you hear about them.
Yes, it's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
It was pretty clear during her radio broadcast that she was very happy to be back.
The trial period for her Fox News Channel show-- Just In with Laura Ingraham-- expires this Friday. She continues to improve, although on today's show two of her guests got really angry at each other and the whole thing got very loud. Apparently, having the people with opposing viewpoints on at the same time is still dangerous.
Anyway, she's back, I'm happy, and that's all that really matters.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
The game did not start out well. The high winds made passing difficult, so both teams played a running game. The Demolition would push forward a few yards at a time and the Force would push back, but the Demolition pushed harder. The problem was that the Demolition had learned how to stop ace Force linebacker Melissa Smith. Time and again the Force gave the ball to Smith and gained only one yard or nothing at all. Brandi Srda, who had five touchdowns in the Force's first five games, mostly worked defense. Occasionally the ball was given to Marcie Myers or Bridget Farhner, but the game was mostly Smith taking the ball and getting tackled by six or more Demolition players at a time.
The Force had one advantage over the Demolition in the first half: better kicking. A Force punt would travel across most of the field, while the Demolition punts were generally 10 or 20 yards. For this reason, the action during the first half remained mostly in Force territory until a series of first downs late in the second quarter took the Demolition within striking distance of the goal. With less than a minute remaining in the first half, the Demolition attempted a field goal, but it was no good. The first half was scoreless.
During the half-time break it started to rain. The rain would continue off and on until the game was almost over. The truly weird thing about this was that the Demolition, one of the winningest teams in the league, couldn't play in the rain. As the weather got rougher, the Force started making good progress down the field. Then, with less than 5 minutes left in the third quarter, the Demolition caught a Force punt and ran it all the way into the end zone for a touchdown.
I could tell Bruce was really depressed about this because he stopped taking notes. The kick for the extra point was good, and at the end of the third quarter, the Demolition led 7 to 0.
The Force, however, did not give up. They kept pushing downfield. Under pressure from the fans (or perhaps to break up the monotony) they began doing some passing and using trick plays in which somebody besides Melissa Smith would get the ball. The back-and-forth continued until a fumbled punt by the Demolition gave the ball to the Force 6 yards from the goal.
At this point, Bruce's notes say -&,S,@3$ TD. This means the Force scored a touchdown, but I have no idea how.
Then came the defining moment of the game. The safe thing would be to kick for an extra point, putting both teams at 7; however, as I said a few days ago, you don't win football games by playing it safe. The Force chose to go for a two-point conversion. Fortune favored the bold, and the conversion succeeded, putting us in the lead, 8 points to 7.
Now the Demolition had only two minutes of game time left to put additional points on the board. They began pushing hard, slowing working the ball toward the goal, but they also made mistakes, losing ground to penalties. A penalty put them at 3rd and 15. A hard stop by Force line player Dawn Pederson put them at 4th and 18. They attempted a pass, but it was broken up by veteran Force safety Linda Bache. There were now only 40 seconds left in the 4th quarter and the Force had the ball. For the Demolition, the game was over.
During the first half of yesterday's game, the Force spent most of its time trying to repeat the techniques that had enabled them to defeat the Demolition back in April, and it wasn't working; however, in the second half they began to get back into some of their usual trickiness, and they pulled out. The next round of the playoffs will pit the Force against the Pittsburgh Passion. Unlike the Demolition, the Passion has never played against the Force before (this is their first year in the IWFL), so I have no idea what to expect. There are, however, two former Force players on the Passion-- Jennifer Dulski and Debbie Sanchez, or-- as Bruce likes to call them-- the Human Cannonball and the Divine Wrath. Bruce and Nate are looking forward to seeing them again, but I personally would prefer to see them someplace other than the opposing team in a playoff game.
Nonetheless, the strength of the Force has always been their diversity. They can pass, they can run, and they can kick. The key to winning is doing so in a way the Passion can't predict. By the end of yesterday's game, that's what they were doing to the Demolition, and as a result Bruce and Nate aren't moping around the house they way they were this time last year. That moping thing affects my lifestyle, and because I'm a superior life form, it's important to our entire civilization.
The Eastern Conference championship game between the Force and the Passion will be on July 12 (a week from next Saturday) at 3pm in our very own Holmgren Field. It is a known fact that lots of cheering fans are good for a team, and it only costs $10 per person. In order to make it really easy to find the stadium, I've set up a direct link to the Mapquest map of the stadium here.
Please make an effort to attend. We're talking about something I care about. It's that important.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
UPDATE: I previously reported that the tackle prior to the Force touchdown was made by Kimberly Marks (#85). In fact, it was made by Dawn Pederson (#86). Bruce will be punished severely for typing the wrong number in his notes about the game.
]]>In situations like this, humans have an overpowering desire to predict how the game is going to end. In politics, this prediction process is accomplished by public opinion polls. Tragically, even the most scientific cross section of the American public is not going to give us any information about how tomorrow's game is going to go, and a cat's psychic powers only predict the past, not the future. As a result, I have to rely on a far darker and more mysterious procedure: statistical analysis.
The Force has two strengths: a large roster (61 players) and a tricky offensive style.
Sixty-one players is a big deal. Most teams field a roster in the low forties. Of the eight teams participating in the playoffs, only the Pittsburgh Passion is larger, with 71 players. Not coincidentally, the Passion is also the only other undefeated team in the Eastern Conference.
Size isn't everything. Yes, the Force has a lot of players, but it also has a lot of good ones. Pam Schaffrath averages 6 tackles per game, and most of the time they're on the far side of the line of scrimmage. Sam Grisafe throws an average of 55 yards per game. In 7 games, she threw 8 touchdown passes. On the running side, Bridget Farhner averages 27 yards per game, Esther Henigan averages 45 yards per game, and Melissa Smith averages 85 yards per game. This is serious stuff.
The other aspect of the Force's winning strategy is trickiness. It is not surprising that when the Force has the ball, Bruce has a difficult time figuring out where the stupid thing is, but even Nate-- who has no major learning disorders-- has trouble following the action. In the home opener against the Detroit Demolition, Sam Grisafe's throwing arm was having an off day and Esther Henigan was injured, so the Force kept giving the ball to Melissa Smith so she could run with it. All the Demolition had to do was throw every player they had at Smith, but they couldn't find her. She ran for 121 yards that day,
In a running game, there are two basic approaches: speed players like Henigan switch directions rapidly so that the defenders are always in the wrong place. Strength players like Smith and Farhner go for the shortest path to the end zone, relying on brute force to keep going. Force rookie Brandi Srda brings a third type of play to the game: she is so small that she can actually squeeze between the defensive players on her way to the goal posts. At least, this is Bruce's theory. In actual fact, all he can be sure of is that she can run toward a line of opposing players and somehow end up on the other side.
So, this is the good news. The bad news is that while the Force has a diverse roster of good players and smart coaching, the Demolition looks like it has been produced by a copy machine that specializes in large, hulking women who all know the same moves. Before the game last April, Nate was coming up with all sorts of theories about why This Time It Will Be Different (e.g. it was our first ever night game at home), but Bruce watched the warm up and felt his heart sink: the Force was trying passing moves and running moves in small groups, while the Demolition stood in a perfect grid pattern going through what looked like some sort of football-based martial arts drill. Still, the Force won, and it did not take a superior life form to understand why.
Last year, when the Force met the Demolition, they weren't playing to win. They were playing not to lose. They played as if doing everything correctly and avoiding mistakes could break their losing streak against this one team they had never been able to solve. But tackle football is not about being careful. There are many pursuits in life where you wear a helmet to protect your head against a worst-case scenario, but in tackle football you wear the helmet because you know you are going to be doing things that are completely insane. You are going to try to drag yourself forward while four people are holding onto your legs. You are going to be running into unknown territory while looking backward. You are going to throw your entire body into the air in the hopes you will be able to stop another person who is doing the craziest thing of all: trying to get past a bunch of athletes who don't care if they get hurt. Part of the reason America has tackle football instead of soccer is that we can afford the more expensive fields and equipment, but the biggest reason is that doing crazy things is what America is all about. After all, no sane group of people would have staged a revolution against the most powerful empire in history and then compounded the error by setting up a whole new form of government.
So, tomorrow the Force goes up against the Demolition, and if we play to win, I think we have a good chance of beating our arch-enemies a second time and moving on to the next round. If that happens, it will be a victory for the American approach to life.
Otherwise, watch out, because I'm going to be very depressed.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
About a month ago, I discussed how this related to the recent furore over oil profits. During the first half of 2008, our gasoline inventories dropped by almost 50%. This drop in inventories caused a huge spike in oil company profits, even though the price charged at the pump has kept pace with the price of oil. In other words, the profits were not a result of price gouging, they were the result of accounting methods.
The thing you have to remember about inventory profits, however, is that they are not real. Consider, for example, a situation where a barrel of oil costs $100 on the current market and the net price of the gasoline from that barrel is $130. Because I'm unable to keep up with demand, I end up selling old barrels I originally purchased for $50 at the $130 price, giving me an incredible profit of $80. But, when it comes time to replace that barrel of oil, I'm paying $100, not $50. So the cash I have left at the end of the day is $30, even though my income statement shows a profit of $80. (If you're having trouble following all these numbers, check out the Flash video below the fold.)
The thing is, I have to have enough cash to pay the taxes on the $80. If I use my cash on hand to replace the oil so that I can keep up with customer demand, I'll end up tax-rich and cash-poor. So, I end up letting my inventories continue to drop, exacerbating the shortage.
Okay, so here's the pop quiz: what's the worst possible thing you can do in this environment? We have a shortage of marketable oil products, and oil companies can't replenish their inventories without unpleasant tax consequences.
If you answered windfall profits tax, then you win the prize. You have just demonstrated that you have a better understanding of economics than every single U.S. Senator listed in the table below. (Hat tip Human Events.)
| Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Conrad (D-ND) Dodd (D-CT) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) | Feinstein (D-CA) Harkin (D-IA) Inouye (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kerry (D-MA) Klobuchar (D-MN) Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (ID-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) | Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Sanders (I-VT) Schumer (D-NY) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Webb (D-VA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR) |
This list of Senators who don't understand economics was brought to you by the letter D. Remember that in November.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
Marketing Systems supports ethical email marketing. To remove yourself from future mailings, please click here to use our automated removal system, or simply reply to this email with "No Email" in the subject line. You will be removed from our mailing database within seven (7) days.
It just seemed to me that there was something marvelously symbolic about a combination of voodoo and ethical spamming.
Anyway, the 2012 doomsday theory has a long history, so I thought I should spend a little time debunking this particular myth. Apparently, the ancient Mayans had multiple calendars-- some religious and some secular-- and by combining these using a technique called the calendar round they could pinpoint dates anywhere within a 5000-year period.
Every 52 years there was a five-day gap required to synchronize with the sun. The Mayans believed these intercalary days were unlucky. The end of the full-blown 5000-year calendar round was considered to be super-unlucky, and many people believe that this will be the end of the world.
This is, of course, a huge exaggeration. It is true that in 2012 we will be wrapping up four years with either John McCain or Barack Obama in the White House, and to many of you this may seem like an open invitation for the world to end, but there's something important you have to understand: the United States Constitution was specifically designed to protect us from the government. The whole conservative movement is about insuring that the United States, and the people who live in it, can endure and even thrive with incompetents at the helm. As long as we hold to that principle, as long as we fight to defend and protect that Constitution, the world will not end.
Trust me on this. We cats have been around a lot longer than the Mayans.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
The problem is, it's economic nonsense.
If I come up with a less expensive way to generate energy, then the people who use my new service will have new funds to spend on other things or invest in new businesses. This increases economic activity, which increases employment and the general standard of living. On the other hand, if I come up with a more expensive way to do something essential, the money is pulled away from other sources of economic activity and the general standard of living drops.
Green jobs fall in the latter category, because they are inserted into the supply chain by force. Bruce is not going to use ethanol because it's cheaper, he's going to use it because it's the law, and the funds he must divert to pay for it will ultimately force the local Pizza Hut to lay off one of their delivery drivers. You can disguise the chain of consequences by creating a network of subsidies and government initiatives, but whether Bruce's money is consumed by higher taxes, higher food prices, or higher fuel prices, the Pizza Hut delivery guy is still out of a job.
It's a basic law of economics, and the most audacious hope in the world can't change the laws of economics.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
Now, I go to YouTube.
This video shows Laura having some fun with her office nameplate and joking on the phone with a staffer's father. The interesting part, however, is her recap of an argument she had with an Obama staffer during the show. On radio, you have time to go back over things that have been discussed earlier. This is in fact the key contribution made by the audience callers. On television, everything is planned in advance. Once you've moved on from a topic, it's not going to come back. Hence, the after-the-show YouTube videos.
We'll be skipping today's edition of Just In with Laura Ingraham because Bruce needs to work, but if anybody finds out what the heck the This or That segment is about, please let me know.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
Check out, however, the opening videos of the Al Gore / Barack Obama love-fest.
Like so many Democrats (and voters), Al and Barack talk about renewable, carbon-neutral fuels. Such fuels all require magic, because the renewable fuels currently under consideration are still hydrocarbons that operate by oxidizing hydrogen and carbon into greenhouse gases. If we choose to ignore the climate effects of water vapor, then hydrogen is a real possibility. It seems renewable because we can make it by cracking water or ethanol; however, both those processes require more energy than is released by burning the hydrogen, so it's only renewable if you have an unlimited supply of fossil fuels or nuclear energy to use to make the hydrogen.
Therefore, the only technology that exists now to reduce greenhouse emissions is to use nuclear energy to make hydrogen fuel cells. Obama says that drilling in ANWR is pointless because it won't produce immediate results; however, his renewable, greenhouse-safe new energy source is still in the laboratory. Why can't we do what's best for the people of America right now while we wait for the future solution to work its way out into the real world?
For too long, American energy policy has been based on a network of slogans and pipe dreams, but things are changing. President Bush and Candidate McCain have both started to see the light on this subject. Laura has promised she won't let it go. You can rest assured that we won't, either.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
Obama says that the answer to high oil prices is to reduce consumption. This has been the goal of every U.S. President since Richard Nixon. Obama also says we need to find alternatives to fossil fuels. This part of his policy is identical to the one proposed in 2006 by a man named George W. Bush.
What drives conservatives crazy about Barack Obama is that on domestic policy, he represents the same free-spending ideology that has driven this country since Bush took over in 2001. For example, on Father's Day Obama delivered a speech about the need for fathers to take responsibility for children, and while most pundits gushed about the enormity of this astounding idea, the actual policy solutions inside the speech contained a slew of new government programs. The answer is always spending.
Obama is correct that if we drill now, it won't immediately bring prices down, but research on alternative fuels is going to take even longer, since we're looking for a technology that doesn't yet exist. While waiting for this miracle alternative fuel to appear, maybe we can use the oil we have right now to limit the pain. This limited pain will provide the economic growth we desperately need so we can fund Barack's program to pay black men to live with the mothers of their children. I'm a superior life form, so I have to think of these things.
Anyway, the good news here is that John McCain has learned that he can distance himself from both George W. Bush and Barack Obama at the same time by moving to the right on domestic policy issues. This means that by the time November arrives, we could actually have a presidential candidate worth supporting. It's huge.
And unlike anything Barack Obama has ever thought in his entire life, it would be a real change.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
