Why would you ever buy canned mushrooms.

       I have two brothers.  One has stated he will occasionally fill in here, the other recently said I should do a blog asking why in the hell anyone would ever buy canned mushrooms.  Why not?
       I began with some research.  Which produces better results.  This really does not depend on the application as you might expect.  (For clarity's sake I am talking about the mushrooms not the research, but hey, that applies too.)  I used a standard of sliced mushrooms because they are available in three forms at your local grocer-tech.  The aforementioned canned, the also mentioned fresh, and one I was plainly ignorant as to the existence of, frozen.  Now the benefits of canned are; they are ready to go, and have a longer shelf life.  If that can does go bad though, it will not always swell, and you may be introduced to the hero of our story, botulinum toxin.  The downsides; waterlogged, sodium filled, slimy nastiness.  Frozen mushrooms have the benefit of a long shelf life, and barring any power outages, no risk of botulism.  They produce a better result every time, compared to canned, and suffer only minimal cell breakage from freezing.  that said, mushrooms suffer a lot from very small amounts of cell damage.
       Our good friend fresh mushroom has the benefit of being fresh, they do actually keep quite a long time in a dry crisper drawer, and being fresh, have the nutrient content preserved.  Don't get me wrong I do love me some canned goods, and subsisted many years solely on processed foods.  But that was because I was broke, and herein lies the punchline.
       One cup of canned mushrooms, not that they come that way, but using a measurement standard we all know, consists mostly of water weight, and costs $0.89.  There is no way to compare by weight, as the fresh ones are dry, and the canned quite water-logged.  Frozen comes in at $1.78 per cup.  Fresh comes in at $0.62 per cup for sliced.
       So the frozen mushrooms are the most expensive way to go, with mediocre results.  The canned is the next most expensive, with the worst results, and lowest nutrient content.  The fresh mushrooms are the cheapest, about 30% less than canned, with everything in them that is supposed to be there, nothing that isn't and better taste.
       Also for those of you who do not watch the food network; mushrooms are grown in sterile dirt and are ready to use right out of the container.  Also, the water absorbed by washing them, if you feel some pathological need to, (I do) barely registers on a digital kitchen scale for one whole pound.  So no excuses.  In this case fresh is cheaper and better.  Check:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FruitVegetableCosts/vegetables.htm

If you don't trust me.  Holy crap! a blogger citing a source!

As a footnote, fresh broccoli is $0.63 per cup and frozen is $0.62.  No real difference there unless you eat it raw.  But totally worth the extra penny.

Welcome to Illinois, your vote doesn't count.

       I feel compelled to do some coat tugging about a subject near and dear to me.  The fact that my vote, and the majority vote in my district, means absolutely nothing.  You see, McHenry county has always been a Republican county.  Odd in Illinois.  Especially this close to the Peoples Republic of Chicago (Thanks Gobbie).  Now the election before last, a Democrat was elected because the man filling the seat was... worthless.  (trying not to curse) He was the stereotype of a Republican and worse, didn't show up to his job.  Sadly, the woman voted in to replace him was just as bad.  So last election we found ourselves with a hotly contested race with a dark horse Republican eventually winning.  In fact they won a few seats out here.
       But this being Illinois, the majority party in the state creates the districts, and this is a redistricting year.  They made no pretense about ethnic, or socio-economic shifts.  They flagrantly Gerrymandered the districts to put the freshmen Republicans in other districts, against incumbent Republicans for the next elections.  So no matter who wins the Republicans will lose some seats.  This is Chicago machine politics at its lowest.
       I apologize to any Democrats who may chance upon this as it does not paint a pretty picture of the party.  I do not mean to identify these corrupt toadies with any persons who simply have a politically left ideology.  The Illinois machine is not a fair representation of the Democrats.  It is an analogue of the dark ages in Europe.  People kept intentionally poor, ignorant, and powerless.  Being told it is their lot in life and someone else's fault.  And being victimized by the very people purporting to help them.  But I digress...
       Back to McHenry.  The people have voted.  a narrow majority in one race, and a wide one in many others, chose to have Republicans represent them.  Their votes are being subverted by a corrupt power-brokering machine.  You need not side with the right or left to see that when this happens the people's will is not being acted on.  The people of this county do not have a say in their own affairs.  I would say we should annex to Wisconsin, (I actually have said that before), but given their current climate, I want no truck with that either.  I'm trying to remember; what did people here do the last time an oppressive government subverted their will?

America's Ruling Class

       I was sitting in the cafeteria at work the other day talking with two co-workers.  One is an unabashed socialist, the other an eco-nut.  Then there's me.  We were discussing politics, as is our wont, because the three of us feel that thinking people can have a discussion about politics, while firmly disagreeing, and through such discourse reach an agreement, based on common ground.  Which explains why we are a technician, a carpenter, and a painter, and not a Senator, Representative, and a President.  Or talk show hosts.  As we covered many and varied topics we decided that there hasn't really been a good president in our lifetimes.  We all agreed that the both the economic system and the political system were broken, and oddly on several fixes.  The main fix for the economy we decided on is to adopt protectionist trade agreements.  If  we are the only country putting the needs of the world ahead of our own, we are doing it wrong.  Not a ban on imports mind you, but rather a legal framework to put American interests ahead of all others.  Essentially adopt the same policies that have served the European Union and others so well.  Fixing politics would involve setting all primaries on the same day.  Simple enough.
       It was at this point that another co-worker, sitting nearby, chimed in with: "It's good to see that so many people qualified to run the country work here with me."  Without missing a beat I answered with: "We are all qualified, that's how it works in this country.  We are all qualified for the presidency, even you."  But this exchange got me thinking, this person is not the first to utter those words.  Nor will he be the last.
       Aside from the fact that the Painter, Carpenter, and Technician have a higher aggregate I.Q. than the Actor, the Philanderer, the Oil-Baron, and the Man so Bland he has no distinguishing characteristics (Including, sadly political opinion); we are all qualified to run the country just by being citizens.  But the common consensus is that the "common man" is not a fit leader.  That only those born to privilege, or those who own sufficient wealth through their own efforts, are fit to hold political office.   This belief persists despite all evidence to the contrary, and despite our founding fathers having fought a war over just how idiotic the idea of a ruling class is.
       I was saddened for a long time about this, not because one man is so ignorant, not because he is far from being alone, and not because my message didn't seem to sink in.  I was sad because he was choosing to be a subject.  I say choosing because we have the means in this country for anyone to elevate themselves as far as they are willing to spend the effort to go.  We are loosing that quickly though.
       We let Wall Street pick our leaders.  We let our patent system devolve to the point that only companies can acquire them.  We allow government to decide what rights we have, and when.  We divide ourselves along "party" lines when most of us share the middle ground.  And we do not act to fix these things because we aren't "qualified".  I leave you with a question, for I love the Socratic method: What college, trade school, or apprenticeship, offers a degree in "Running the free world"?

The Tea-Party is not Libertarian.

       In nature extremophiles are creatures which live in environments we had assumed were unsuitable for life.  Near a volcanic undersea vent live tube worms who filter their food from the ocean nearby.  In the Arctic ice live polar worms, which also filter their food from the barely liquid water around them.  Both are worms, both cannot exist where other creatures live, both are only dimly aware of their surroundings, and most creatures, including people, are completely unaware of their existence at all.  Not unlike political extremists from both sides.  Volcanic and polar are analogues of reactionary and radical.
       It is from this position, somewhere in the middle, that I have learned about the Tea-Party.  As I am a Libertarian myself I have become very offended that these extremists, who are nothing more than the "Religious Right" reincarnated, are masquerading as Libertarians.  When the infiltrated and began taking over the Republicans I didn't care.  Hell, I thought it was funny.  This is something else.
       You see a Libertarian may believe in a religion, but it will not be the justification for every decision they make.  Read the pamphlets for the Tea-Party.  They base everything on the "word of God", (whom I sincerely hope they meet so he can set them straight on a few things, but that is another post for someone else's blog).  The Tea-Party seeks to impose their way of thinking on the rest of us.  Again this is diametrically opposed to Libertarianism.
       In a quest to be all things to all conservatives they are not only fracturing an already broken party, they are claiming to be something they are not.  President Obama is closer to a Libertarian than the Tea-Party, and that is not to say he is remotely close.  He isn't.  But then at least he isn't claiming to be.  (Note that I disagree politically with President Obama, but still refer to him by his title.  He is still the President.  My dad is a "Mr."  The leader of the free world gets a title, even if you don't like him.  Calling the President "Mr." is disrespectful to the country, not the man.)
       Libertarians seek individual freedom.  Anyone claiming to represent this ideal, and seeking to impose their beliefs on anyone else, is either completely ignorant of the meaning of the word, or purposefully lying.  Personally I think that the Tea-Party is good for the country.  Having bested all of our fascist enemies outside the country, we need a reminder of what we might become from within.  We need them to serve as a shining example of what we must not allow ourselves to become.
       I have tried to stay away from bashing any particular side of the aisle.  I don't feel it serves much purpose to be flagrantly partisan.  In this case though I felt a need to identify the inaccuracies and hypocrisy of this small, if much talked about, group.  When I tell people I am Libertarian I do not want them to think of anything remotely like the Tea-Party.

Watching the wrong hand.

       One of the things most people don't know about me is that I can change shape.  It's true.  A few weeks ago I Changed into an eagle and flew to Washington D.C.  Once there I changed into a fly.  (you have to do these things in stages.)  I found myself in a room with some prominent politicians.  Would you like to know what I overheard?  Of course you do.  I will use false names to protect their identity.
     
       (clever disguises, no?)

Bainer:  Are you sure he told you he was coming?
Reede:  Trust me he wouldn't miss this historic occasion.
Bainer:  Wow, you said "trust me" without even blinking.  I'm impressed.
Reede:  Practice man.  Years of practice.
Bainer:  Here he comes.
             Door opens silently, gliding on the lubrication provided by years of politicians being greased in        
             this room.
O'banna:  Did you gentlemen have something you wanted to share with me?  Something productive this
                time.  I'll throw your asses under the bus again on national TV.
Reede:  Yes mister President.  You see we have finally reached an agreement on the debt ceiling thingy.
O'Banna:  Thingy?
Bainer:  Yes, you see in the course of our debate one thing began to become abundantly clear.
O'Banna:  and that is...
Reede:  Well you see sir, both parties had been backed into a corner where we had to back up all the    
              B.S. we had been piling up on our constituents.
O'banna:  You two need to talk faster, I promised the old lady we'd fly to Alaska for some king crab,
                 then over to New York for a play, then Chicago for Cheesecake and coffee.
Bainer:  Well sir, both sides were looking pretty bad, so we agreed on a solution we feel you can get
              Behind.
O'Banna:  And that would be...?
Reede:  We will put off actually making a real decision until after the next election.
O'Banna:  That's a long way off.  Won't the American people notice?  They're not stupid.
Reede and Bainer:  (laughing)  You are new at this aren't you?

At that point I flew away.  I was stunned by the audacity of the people running this country.  I could not believe, they felt so sure no one would see right through their half-baked plan.  Surely our ever-vigilant watchdog media would call them out.  Weeks passed.  No one seemed to mention it.  We have all moved on to other things.  But I can't let it go.  I know what I saw, as a fly on the wall.

Gasoline as a Utility?

       I am just going to jump right into this.  Pros first.  1.  Gasoline companies are clearly in collusion and fix prices, creating massive windfall profits, year upon year.  (This is obviously just my opinion.  I have no proof, but the profits and price adjustments are factual regardless.)  2.  We all require gasoline to get to work, school, and stores.  This is also true for those of you on public transportation.  Why do you think that costs so much?  3.  We already have natural gas as a regulated utility.  Natural gas and petroleum come from the same wells, and go to the same people, eventually.  4.  Other countries are buying gasoline before it is even pumped out of the ground, in massive quantities, to insure a low price for their people.  This is yet another example of the failure of the U.S. government to look out for the interests of its people.  5.  This should have been addressed long before health care.  Well or sick, we all have to get to work.  Sad is someone who can't afford healthcare.  Tragic is that same person unable to afford transportation to get to work, to enable them to feed their family, and pay for healthcare.

       Now for the cons.  1.  Our utilities are also a sick joke.  We are the ones it is being played on, and the punchline is prices being raised anyway.  2.  Who will regulate this new utility?  the same money-grubbing, ass-chasing, alcoholics who currently could only agree to shove of the debt ceiling problem until after the next election?  (They at least had the common courtesy to pretend they were holding out for principles.  One of them must have gotten their hands on a dictionary first though; to see what the word meant.)  3.  The payment structure would need to be worked out.  4.  Gas stations could no longer sell cigarettes and other sundries.  (Like Com-ed, and Nicor don't sell you things like appliance insurance and...  oh wait.)  Although that would be more of a pro, since then we would need more convenience stores, and fast food places.  It would create jobs, opportunity, and growth.  Hell that alone should be enough to carry this argument. 

If there are any members of congress who see this I apologize.  To call all of you "money-grubbing, ass-chasing, alcoholics", is a broad generalization, and it is quite unfair.  After all, some of you are women.

Introduction

Hello,

My name is Jerimy Elliott and I will be contributing to this blog. Instead of fiery rhetoric about sweeping changes to the way government does business you will see that my post will be more in line with the way I think society should do things.

I have decided to make my posts thematic. The theme of these missives will be... "Don't be that guy..." (Insert situation here). The idea behind the theme is that you want to avoid being "That Guy" in any given situation.

For example, the first of my posts (after this brief intro) will be entitled "Don't Be That Guy in Traffic: Jerimy's guide to not being an idiot behind the wheel". The second will be "Don't be that guy on the internet: A guide to being a normal person online."

I'm honestly not sure why anyone would care to read blogs but Sam assures me that doing this is cathartic so I'll do it.

In summary...

Fiery Political Rhetoric= Sam Elliott

Acerbic Social Commentary = Jerimy Elliott