Forget the comedy, this has security implications:
An Air Canada pilot who left the flight deck to visit the washroom found himself locked out of the cockpit when he tried to return—forcing the crew to remove the door from its hinges.
For approximately 10 minutes, passengers described seeing the pilot bang on the door and communicating with the cockpit through an internal telephone, but being unable to open the cabin door.
Eventually, the crew forced the door open by taking the door off its hinges completely...
Gosh, that's nice to know. Comforting.
I suppose if the pilots noticed someone trying to take the door off the hinges, they could take corrective action easily, like inverting the plane or diving (which pretty much stops all movement in the cabin). But still, that seems like a little security issue, doesn't it? Sort of like having a debug mode on a login prompt?
As little Parker (Cutest. Puppy. Ever.) alternates between chewing his rawhide stick, a vegan snack my mom found, my laptop power cord, and my toes, I'm loading up on carbs for today's ride and reading the news. The Washington Post had a heartwarming story that made me almost as happy as Parker's second accident-free night with us:
Facing the most difficult political environment since they took control of Congress in 1994, Republicans begin the final two months of the midterm campaign in growing danger of losing the House while fighting to preserve at best a slim majority in the Senate, according to strategists and officials in both parties.
Over the summer, the political battlefield has expanded well beyond the roughly 20 GOP House seats originally thought to be vulnerable. Now some Republicans concede there may be almost twice as many districts from which Democrats could wrest the 15 additional seats they need to take control.
If you're at all unhappy with the war, the imminent collapse of the housing market, the enormous differences between how the rich are getting richer while everyone else isn't, or how the government is listening to your phone calls, and you happen to live in a Republican district, you can do something to change it when polls open in 64 days and 15 hours.
The WASP blog is morphing into something else. I felt there was no alternative than to create a Parker category. Here's why:
And then there's this:
Perhaps the "P" stands for Politics and Puppy Parker?
Everyone with a phone will get a tax refund this year:
Individuals will be eligible for a refund of the long-distance tax billed for any phone service—cell, fax, computer or land-line—in the 41-month period from Feb. 28, 2003, through July 31, 2006. Taxpayers can claim a maximum refund of $60 with no questions asked, meaning they don't have to produce copies of phone bills to get money back.
For the 2006 return, a person filing a return with one exemption can claim $30; two exemptions, $40; three exemptions, $50; and four or more exemptions, $60. The agency cited this example: A married couple filing a joint return with two dependent children, for a total of four exemptions, would be eligible for the maximum amount of $60. A line for the refund will appear in the 2006 federal tax return.
Apparently, the government has collected this tax since 1898. The Spanish-American War, for which this tax was imposed, has been paid for already.
Anne and I have arranged a blind date with Parker tomorrow:
We may even take him home. He's a beagle-rat terrier-German shepherd mix from a farm in downstate Illinois. We think he'll take to urban living like a duck to water.
Anne found these guys on PetFinder.com:
First, I just put a major project to bed. It was my first time out doing litigation support, meaning I wrote software to crunch a whole bunch (= about a billion) of numbers for a law firm who represent a large (= about 350,000) class of plaintiffs. They got the results just now, so unless the defendant chooses not to settle and I get subpoenaed, I believe I'm done.
Second, at least one petty little man on the South Shore Line apparently doesn't "get" the whole idea of bikes on a train:
A day trip to South Bend ended up costing a Lincoln Park man $150 in cab fare after a South Shore Line crew member told him he would have to get his bicycle off the train.
What startled Alan Forester, 34, was that he had taken the South Shore Line to South Bend earlier in the day Sunday and no one said anything to him about his bike. Even more puzzling, he said he had followed the bicycle policy that he read on the railroad's Web site.
I had a similar problem about two years ago, when, after bonking on a very long ride, I attempted to board a Union Pacific North Line train at Highland Park, and got turned away by a conductor who thought my bungee cord was too short. (I think I may have told him at least I had a bungee cord, but we won't go there right now.)
The CTA largely gets it right. All CTA buses have bike racks. This means people can get out of their cars and save the environment by biking without worrying they'll be stranded because of weather or traffic. Why is Metra so opposed to the idea?
Yesterday I posted that even a bad ride on my new bike is better than a good ride on my old bike. Today I had a good ride on the new bike, and boy, it's a very good thing.
As you can see from my biking stats (at least as of this writing), I set eight personal records today, including one that stood for more than 21 years. There's a stretch of Sheridan Road that has a 14 m (45 ft) drop and a nice, straight, stopsign-free flat after it, where today I got my bike up to 53.4 km/h (33.2 mph), breaking my old record of 52.0 km/h (32.3 mph) set (probably on the same hill) in May 1985.
Yes, I live in a place where a 14-meter drop is the biggest hill around.
Anyway, I'm very pleased with today's ride, and I'm excited about doing 120 km (75 mi) on the Katy Trail next weekend, and then 161 km (100 mi) on the North Shore Century in three weeks. And I promise to have bike photos tomorrow or Tuesday.
Letter to the Chicago Tribune:
The August 24th editorial on the Chicago City Council implies that the Council's
recent actions, including its enacting a ban on the sale of foie gras,
are paternalistic: the Council is "meddlin'," a "bossy governess," a
bunch of "scolds"; its decisions are "petty intrusions in people's
lives."
All of those words and phrases describe paternalistic actions; that
is, actions whose purpose is to save people from themselves. The foie
gras ban is intended to save geese from people. The distinction is
clear as day, yet opponents of the ban keep missing it.
—Guest blogger Anne