Someone just forwarded me this:

Twas The Diet After Christmas

Twas the day after Christmas and all through the house, nothing would fit me,not even a blouse!
The cookies I'd nibbled,the eggnog I would taste at the holiday parties had gone to my waist.

When I got on the scales there arose such a number! When I walked to the store (less a walk than a lumber),
I'd remember the marvelous meals I'd prepared; the gravies and sauces and beef nicely rared,
the wine and the rum balls, the bread and the cheese... And the way I'd never said, "No thank you, please."

As I dressed myself in my husband's old shirt and prepared once again to do battle with dirt.
I said to myself, as I only can"You can't spend a winter disguised as a man!"
So away with the last of the sour cream dip. Get rid of the fruit cake, every cracker and chip!
Every last bit of food that I like must be banished." Till all the additional ounces have vanished.
I won't have a cookie - not even a lick. I'll want only to chew on a long celery stick.
I won't have mulled wine, or mince tarts, or pie, I'll munch on a carrot and quietly cry.

I'm hungry, I'm lonesome, and life is a bore. But isn't that what January is for?
Unable to giggle, no longer a riot. Happy New Year to all and to all a good diet!

At 4pm Saddam Hussein, the Butcher of Baghdad, was executed.

Saddam deserved to die. I do not think anybody believes he was innocent of serious crimes. This dictator murdered and tortured thousands of innocent people including women and children. I have had the misfortune of reading some of the accounts of Saddam's atrocities from firsthand witnesses. Few things have disgusted and sickened me more.

No doubt some groups like Amnesty International will denounce his hanging as unjust. They would prefer a world where innocent unborn children are slaughtered for any reason but where bloody brutal murderers and dictators do not get their just desserts. I do not share their sentiments.

It is true that there are questions about the process of Saddam's trial and legitimate criticisms may be raised. However, Saddam was not an innocent man framed for crimes he did not commit or some innocent third party in the wrong place at the wrong time victimised by a corrupt system. Saddam did commit these crimes and many more and he deserved to die.

The government is planning on introducing a new tax on drivers, a tax on distance travelled. Similar to the road user charges already inflicted on diesel drivers.

This is apparently to help reduce the junk science concept of 'global warming' - please!

Of course National now buys all that crap about "global warming science" thanks to its new leadership.

We are over taxed. We don't need more taxes. Cut our taxes. Global Warming is an historical part of Earth's life, it will cool down for centuries at some point in the future then it will warm up - look at history.

Waterworld was just an 3rd rate movie with actors in it, its not a real prediction of future water levels.

I thought it was one of those urban legends, you know when you keep hearing something that sounds so ridiculous it can't possibly be true.

I am speaking of the reports I have heard about people phoning into talkback shows or strangers overheard making comments to the effect that religious people are trying to take over Christmas, they should stay out of it as God has nothing to do with it.

Now this may well be true for a lot of people but it reeks of historical ignorance, so much so that like I said, I thought it was an urban legend.

Well over at, aptly named it appears, Rob's Blockhead Blog I found this gem "I'm not a fan of the modern Christmas. Once upon a time, it was something purer and simpler. Sheer self-indulgence and bacchanalian feasting. I don't hold with this modern trend of bringing religion into it." [emphasis mine]

Rob goes on to give a brief historical account of Christmas songs of note to him. It seems he does not realise that Away in a Manger, Hark the Herald Angels, Silent Night and Long Time ago in Bethlehem were written before his modern account of secular Christmas songs.

We took the kids to the beach this morning since the sun came out and our 5 year old son had a new red bucket and spade he was eager to make sandcastles with.

We found a spot between the flags as close to the water as we could sit, about 8 m, while still being dry. We set up our shade tent, got the kids sorted and sat back and relaxed.We were sorting out lunch and had just sent the youngest to the water to wash the sand off his hands when suddenly the lifeguards began calling people out the water.

We figured that whatever it was our son, ankle deep, would be fine but we watched him intently to be sure. Then the lifeguard went to him and clearly wanted him out of the water, simultaneously we saw a seal come out the water directly in front of us.

Matt ran to get our son as the lifeguard was not getting through to him about moving quickly and did not seem like she was about to pick him up and move him herself. In the mean time the seal came straight at out sand tent. I gathered up the other kids and ran to the sand dunes.

The seal was fascinated with out sand tent and spent the next 45 minutes next to it, in it, travelling around it, biting it, throwing Matt's sandal around, putting the red sand castle bucket on its nose and biting Matt's wetsuit. It would wander off and sniff at the flags and at one point tried to bite the surf rescue boat but it kept coming back to our spot. If anyone went near it it would turn, show its teeth and charge - especially whenever a dog came near, but also when a lifeguard drove up on a 4 wheel bike - he had to jump off and get away.

After 45 mins heaps of people began getting as close as they dared with their cameras so it came towards them and as they backed away it followed them up the beach and ultimately over the dunes to the road!We took this opportunity to gather our stuff and take a different path off the beach to the car - though it was by then rather close to our car!

So that's our adventure for the day! Don't think we will be going to the beach again any time soon.

The Herald has run a story with the no-brainer title "Patient dies after machine unplugged".

According to the article an italian doctor turned off a patient's life support system (did the title of the article give you a clue?) at his request. The article went on to suggest that this might be illegal euthanasia, outlined the penalty for such an offence and states that the Vatican is opposed to euthanasia.

This is deceptive reporting. As the Vatican defines euthanasia, this case is clearly not euthanasia.

The Catholic Church distinguishes between failing to save a patient and actively killing a patient. It holds that there is an absolute duty to not kill an innocent human being. However, it does not hold that one must keep a patient alive at all costs and it certainly does not hold that a patient should be subjected to invasive treatment against his or her consent.

Any manual on Catholic moral theology would have spelt this out to the reporter had he or she bothered to read it. Under Catholic teaching one cannot subject a competent patient to life saving medical treatment against his or her consent. Further, any patient can lawfully choose to forgo treatment if it is excessively burdensome and unlikely to have proportionate benefit.

What this shows us is how the NZ media distort and caricature the theological positions of others to paint them in a negative light, a light easy to dismiss because it is a strawman.

In the past few days I have gotten myself hooked on a simple, online game called The Outlaw Life.

Its a rather basic RPG game where you register and become a character in the Wild West. You find gold ingots and nuggets, attack other members and gain experience points and money, you train and get promoted at your job, you do courses, you race cars, buy houses, trade on the item market, join gangs, have wars, buy weapons, etc which all helps you to go up levels and earn new rewards and access to new areas.

If you want to check it out it is really simple to sign on to, just use this link and when it asks for a promo code type in pardner.

If you can't pay for your traffic fines you will soon be able to drive at speeds like those that Helen travels at when she is late for rugby games with no fear for your wallet.

Yep folks the government's latest socialist policy is that those who cannot afford to pay their traffic fines should not have to.

This is apparently supposed to help those on low incomes who commit traffic offenses. Why should anyone get help with breaking the law? Don't want a $200 speeding ticket? Don't speed. Don't cry I'm poor, I should be allowed to speed for free...

Apparently its because a $200 fine is nothing to a rich person but to a poor person its your whole family's grocery bill for a week. Well on that rationale lets take a look at the cost of groceries - for a poor person the family grocery bill takes most of their paycheck/benefit but for a rich person its nothing... I guess the goverment should pass a law making all supermarkets inflate their prices for rich people and reduce them for the poor....

I get so frustrated whether it is in the company of others, on email lists or participating in blog and debate board debates when I see someone present their case, their reasons for holding the position they do, how they think their position defeats objections and then they throw in "its just my opinion."

Its just my opinion often means I don't want you to think I am saying I am right or that my position is better than yours, it is seen as polite to do this and arrogant not to think these things.

Its frustrating to me because its a load of rubbish.

If you hold a position that you can articulate and explain and point out how it defeats other's objections then you do think that you are right, that your position is the better one and they those with contrary views are wrong.

No one with a thought out position holds to the one they think is second rate, not as good as others or plain wrong. We all hold to our reasoned positions because after considering them we conclude that this is the correct, right and best position to adopt.

So what is the shame in admitting this then? How is it arrogant to state here is my position, here is why I hold it, here is why and how I think deals with objections and as such it is the right, better and correct position and yours is wrong?

As long as you maintain an open mind and hold to your positions on the merits of the arguments for them, their robustness under critique there is nothing wrong with saying I am right and you are wrong - there is no need to apologise for having the better argument.

Saddam will be executed 25 Jan 2007.

While I will not celebrate his execution I am pleased that it is happening.