Crushers, Feeders, Conveyors, and More

Magazines.com, Inc.


Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Cars, Immigrants, and, Damnit, Why Don’t I Have a New Job Yet?

  1. I’m not quite an open borders advocate, but I’ve always been of the mind that a liberal immigration policy would be a good thing. But let’s get something straight: no other country sets our immigration policy.

    Some foreign diplomats suffer under the delusion that they should be allowed to set our policies.

    Diplomats from Mexico and Central America on Monday demanded guest worker programs and the legalization of undocumented migrants in the United States, while criticizing a U.S. proposal for tougher border enforcement.
    “Migrants, regardless of their migratory status, should not be treated like criminals,” they said.

    Of course, the fact that a migrant crossed a border illegally absolutely does make them criminals and subject to treatment as such. It’s laughable to suggest otherwise. It’s also good business, as the article goes on to note, since “Mexicans working in the United States are a huge source of revenue for Mexico, sending home more than $16 billion in remittances in 2004, Mexico’s second largest source of foreign currency after oil exports according to the country’s central bank.”

    Mexico’s economic desires do not dictate American policy needs, though, and what is good for Mexico (and the other nations represented) is not necessarily good for America.

    “There has to be an integrated reform that includes a temporary worker program, but also the regularization of those people who are already living in receptor countries,” Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said.

    That is not a decision to be made by diplomats outside of the United States. The necessity of a temporary work program and an amnesty program of some kind is debatable. While the Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary is welcome to share his views, he won’t be setting American policy any time soon.

    Read the rest. (From that Drudge guy.)

  2. Dodge Challenger. Sexy. Perhaps too perfectly an object of the seventies, but boys of a certain age will be instantly captivated.
  3. Chevy Camaro. Not so sexy. I can’t put my finger on why the Camaro fails to move me. Is the front end too blocky? Is it that the lines trailing to the rear of the car are disjointed? Is it that squinty look to the headlights? I’m not sure what it is, but it doesn’t quite work.
  4. Ford Shelby Cobra GT500 Ever since loudly driving a new Mustang through Florida (on my most recent vacation), I’ve been in love with Ford’s cheap little muscle car. A pretty face, a fun car to drive, and easy power go a long way in an inexpensive package. And this is the ultimate Mustang. Gimme.
  5. Ford Reflex (on the same page as the GT500). This car intrigues me. The various pictures that I’ve seen show it to be tremendously impractical. The rear view must be horrible and the body looks like it would be expensive to produce. But something about the squat little thing looks like it would be fun to drive. Even more, that line that extends, mid-body, from the front quarter panel all the way to the back of the car and then switches back to make a trip all the way to the leading edge is just gorgeous. The way it echoes in the lines around it, always in harmony and always flowing, is the kind of design that I love.

    I wouldn’t call it a pretty car, but I would call it an extremely well finished design.

    So, yeah, I want to look closer at this one.

  6. And while we’re talking about it, why the hell don’t I have a job yet? Hmm? I mean, seriously, I’ve been unemployed for two freakin’ days. I’m getting tired of this.

Comments & Trackbacks
The trackback URL for this entry is:

The Camaro looks like a cross between Speed Buggy and a <a href="http://www.arach.net.au/~flyspec/images/cylon centurion.jpg">Cylon</a>.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 11:13 AM

Replace the space between cylon and centurion with and that link will work.

I’d say the Reflex is very pretty. As far as rear view, it doesn’t look that disimilar from my former Celica. The Celica had crappy rear visibility but was so tiny it didn’t really matter.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 11:22 AM

Err, it turned the entity into a space (duh). Replace the space with (percent sign)20. Or maybe DaF already tried that and EE is defeating our attempts to defeat its re-encoding?

on Jan 10 2006 @ 11:26 AM

I took out the space to make sure that the problem was with that (it was) and put in the percent 20 bit and it still didn’t work.

Darned thing. EE abhors extra spaces.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 01:19 PM

Yeah, tried that initially.  After the first preview the preview button disappears.  I took a chance but it didn’t work.  I think we’ve all learned a valuable life lesson.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 01:49 PM

It wasn’t the lesson about carrots and unnatural sexual acts, was it?

Because I don’t like that lesson so much.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 01:56 PM

Yes, we learned that Berners-Lee was correct when, in RFC1738, he declared the space an “unsafe” character.

Try &#032; rather than percent20.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 01:57 PM

Hey, it worked.

Miraculous and carrot-free.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 02:05 PM

It’s not miraculous… my HTML-fu is unstoppable.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 03:03 PM

The Mustang is is a considerable improvement over its prototype, the ugliest Mustang ever. The Camaro is Chevy saying Ford did it, we should too. Chevy pulled it off with the HRR; they didn’t this time. Chrysler has the right to do it, but I’m waiting for the Plymouth Satellite version.

on Jan 10 2006 @ 11:43 PM

the GT 500 looks superb.

Bound to me a modern day “Classic”

on Feb 07 2008 @ 12:09 PM
Post a Comment
© 2005 by the authors of ResurrectionSong. All rights reserved.
Powered by ExpressionEngine