Friday Calf Blog

So I had someone a couple of weeks ago ask about Friday calf blogging. Yesterday half, yes half of my readers were here for a Friday Calf blog.
I thinks to myself….man, I’d better Friday calf blog.

I don’t have any recent photos, but the internets are full of them. So I go to google images, type in calves and here is the screen shot.

Third row, 4th calf over is one of my earlier shots of a calf. Happy Friday!

Filed Under “People are Awful”

We sure do like our free stuff eh?

From Coyote Blog on problems with workmen’s compensation and unemployment.

All states do a terrible job policing permanent disability claims. I hire a lot of older workers. I can’t tell you how many people show up at my door trying to be paid under the table because they don’t want to endanger their permanent disability by having a record of getting paid for doing very physical outdoor work for us. They assure me they are 100% capable to do heavy physical labor. Since I don’t pay anyone off the books, they end up finding work elsewhere. Many of you may not believe such people exist, but I have met a number of folks who consider getting a permanent disability, or at least something a doctor will testify is a permanent disability, the equivalent of hitting the lotto. I have even been sued by a woman for submitting testimony to the social security administration that might have harmed her chances of getting a permanent disability ruling. The lawsuit stated that if she was denied the disability payment after I testified that I had seen no evidence of any limitations in what she could do on the job, that I should be liable for paying her the lifetime amount she would have gotten. So I wimped out and withdrew my testimony and let the taxpayers pay her rather than farting around with a lawsuit.

The bleeding heart leads to the above lifestyle because it makes it possible.

A Shout out to Mrs. Romney

She has some serious class. (see the bold)

“My career choice was to be a mother,” she added. “We need to respect choices that women make. Other women make other choices to have a career and raise a family, which I think Hilary Rosen has actually done herself. I respect that. That’s wonderful.” She also gave a shout-out to “dads at home raising kids.”

And I’d just like to call bullish*^ on the President for suggesting that they didn’t have the “luxury” of Michelle staying at home to raise 2 girls while he was making close to 100 grand.
Here is Obama:

And something that, could be very difficult on her, because I was gone a lot. Once I was in the state legislature, I was teaching, I was practicing law, I’d be traveling. And we didn’t have the luxury for her not to work.

Dude – you’re in the state legislature, you’re a professor at a University, you’re practicing law. You definitely made the choice for Michelle to work. It wasn’t a no choice situation. The choice was fine, but you HAD the choice.

Friday Fun

In the latest “study” on income inequality we find that scientists are off by 34% so that income inequality can be a bfd politically speaking when in reality, not so much.

But never fear because there is another “study” on fracking that causes all the media scientific experts to suggest that coincidence=causation. Here’s the headline:

Fracking Tied to Unusual Rise in Earthquakes in U.S.

Here is the abstract:

While the seismicity rate changes described here are almost certainly manmade, it remains to be determined how they are related to either changes in extraction methodologies or the rate of oil and gas production.

And they wonder why conservatives don’t trust “science”. Maybe it has to do with science being so convenient to agendas.
This from the abstract of that study.

Relating to the second pattern, when examining a series of public attitudes toward science, conservatives’ unfa- vorable attitudes are most acute in relation to government funding of science and the use of scientific knowledge to influence social pol- icy (see Gauchat 2010). Conservatives thus appear especially averse to regulatory sci- ence, defined here as the mutual dependence of organized science and government policy.